| וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח יַעֲקֹ֤ב מַלְאָכִים֙ לְפָנָ֔יו אֶל־עֵשָׂ֖ו אָחִ֑יו אַ֥רְצָה שֵׂעִ֖יר שְׂדֵ֥ה אֱדֽוֹם׃ | 4 J | Jacob sent messengers ahead to his brother Esau in the land of Seir, the country of Edom, |
Genesis 29,11. “Yaakov gave Rachel a kiss, etc;” [note that the Torah does not refer to Rachel’s physical appearance until verse 17 after Yaakov had already worked for him for over a month. Ed.] Genesis 29,17. “and Rachel was shapely and beautiful.” At first glance it is surprising that the Torah appears to link Yaakov’s falling in love with Rachel in verse 18, ויאהב יעקב את רחל, “Yaakov loved Rachel,” to the description of her physical assets in verse 17. Is it possible that Yaakov, the most highly admired of our patriarchs, was attracted by Rachel’s physical features, and that this is why the Torah reports matters in this sequence? Our sages called our attention to Yaakov’s message to his brother Esau in Genesis 32,4 where he told him עם לבן גרתי, ”I have remained a stranger while with Lavan, etc.” The numerical value of the letters in the word גרתי, equals 613, the number of commandments in the Torah. Yaakov reminded his brother that during the entire period that he spent in Charan he had observed the Torah, and therefore had little to fear. A man who could make such a statement certainly did not marry Rachel because he was smitten by lust to possess her shapely body. Anyone who observes the 613 commandments is well aware of the statement by Solomon in Proverbs 31,30 that שקר החן והבך היופי, that external attributes such as physical beauty or even a graceful walk, etc., are deceptive and offer no clue to the owner’s character. We must look further for the reason why the Torah made a point of mentioning Rachel’s physical attributes. I have heard from my revered teacher the Maggid of Mezeritch Dov Baer, of sainted memory, that we must understand this as follows. We know that the principal attribute used by Yaakov in serving the Lord is the attribute known as תפארת, harmony, located in the center of diagrams of the 10 emanations, ספירות. Any physical matter on earth, containing a “spark” from this emanation, is spiritually elevated by the presence of this spark, regardless of how secular it is by nature. Through this spark of the attribute of תפארת, its host is brought closer to its roots in the celestial regions, and engages in some degree of service to the Lord. We must look further for the reason why the Torah made a point of mentioning Rachel’s physical attributes. I have heard from my revered teacher the Maggid of Mezeritch Dov Baer, of sainted memory, that we must understand this as follows. We know that the principal attribute used by Yaakov in serving the Lord is the attribute known as תפארת, harmony, located in the center of diagrams of the 10 emanations, ספירות. Any physical matter on earth, containing a “spark” from this emanation, is spiritually elevated by the presence of this spark, regardless of how secular it is by nature. Through this spark of the attribute of תפארת, its host is brought closer to its roots in the celestial regions, and engages in some degree of service to the Lord. When the Torah (Genesis 39,13) reports that Joseph וינס ויצא החוצה, “fled and went “outside,” to escape the efforts of Potiphar’s wife to seduce him, he did so because he realized that that woman had used her mode of dress to lure him into a sinful relationship (Yuma 35). She had employed whatever holy spark she possessed in a reverse manner, instead of a means to come closer to her Creator. When Joseph escaped from her presence he took with him this “holy spark” thereby serving his Creator and paving the way for this “spark” that had escaped from the Shechinah to find its way back to its roots. It is known that Joseph, though, of course also serving the Lord, did not do so by using principally the attribute of harmony as his father was in the habit of doing. However, at this critical juncture, in his fateful seclusion with the wife of his master Potiphar, he resorted to the attribute of תפארת as the means to avoid sinning. It is also known that every tzaddik who serves the Lord, regardless of which of the attributes in the diagram of the emanations he uses as his primary model, will be granted a vision of the tzaddik who had made that attribute his primary role model in serving the Lord. When the Talmud Sotah 36 relates that at the critical moment before the seduction, Joseph had a vision of his father, it is a vision of the emanation of תפארת that the Talmud refers to as having been seen by Joseph.
Genesis 32,4. “I have remained a stranger at Lavan’s” (all the time); my late father of blessed memory, commented on Rashi’s interpretation of Yaakov having chosen the word גרתי, that he referred to the numerical value of the letters in this word being 613, a symbol of the 613 commandments of the Torah that Yaakov observed even while in Padan Aram. He supposedly emphasized to Esau that in spite of his having acquired considerable wealth, none of it had been at the expense of Esau, as his father’s blessing which was: “may the Lord give you from the dew of heaven and the fat parts of the earth” (Genesis 27,28) had not been fulfilled. Should Esau counter that the reason Yitzchok’s blessing had not been fulfilled was that he, Yaakov, had not observed the commandments, this was not so. Esau knew that his father’s blessings were conditional on a certain mode of conduct by Yaakov, and that is why he had told him (Genesis 27,40) והיה כאשר תריד ופרקת עול מעל צוארך, (according to Rashi) “if the Israelites will fail to observe the commandment, you will be able to shake off his yoke from your neck.” Yaakov hints to his brother that in spite of having observed the commandments he does not own any land, so that his father’s blessings could not have been fulfilled. Yaakov reassures Esau that he has no reason to revenge himself for Yaakov having obtained this blessing.
(1) And Yaakov sent messengers ahead of him (Gen. 32:4) - this is explained in the way of hint [remez]. Behold the work of the tzadik is to be clinging to the Blessed and Elevated One, to cling his soul under the Throne of Glory, the place of his root, and the tzadik purifies and cleanses himself from all external desires - and then his cleansed body too clings to the Blessed One. And this is the expression "tefilah" [prayer], that is, clinging, like "the wrestlings [naftulei] of Elokim etc" (Gen. 30:8) [meaning] that the tzadik clings to the Blessed One through the clear and lucid prayers from/in pure thoughts. And this is "and he sent", an expression of accompanying [levayah] as in "Pharaoh commanded men and they accompanied him" (Gen. 12:20), and the Targum: "they led him" [v'a'l'viy'u] (Targum Jonathan on Genesis 12:20), meaning that the tzadik accompanies the messengers that go before him, that is, the words that come out of the mouth of the tzadik create angels from themselves, and the same happens with his clean body which helps his angels to go upward, "ahead of him to Esav his brother"- meaning, through this he causes Esac to become his brother. "Towards the land of Seir" - meaning, that he becomes his brother on below, this is the hint of "field of Edom", the angel-deputy of Edom also becomes his brother.
“And Yaakov sent messengers before him” (Genesis 32:4). The question arises: why did Yaakov send messengers ahead, potentially provoking Eisav by displaying his wealth? The answer is that Yaakov intended to draw Eisav out of Eretz Yisrael so that upon Yaakov's arrival, he would be complete, as stated, “And Yaakov arrived whole” (Genesis 33:18). Yaakov himself was not afraid, for upon entering Eretz Yisrael, he reached a high spiritual level, making Eisav powerless against him. However, Yaakov did this for the benefit of future generations, paving the way by confronting Eisav head-on and dealing with him through appeasement, gifts, and battle. This explains why he felt fear, as noted in the Zohar, because he was entering a dangerous situation for the sake of his descendants. To reassure himself, Yaakov recalled Hashem's promise, “I will surely do good to you and make your descendants as numerous as the sand of the sea.” When Yaakov says, “I have become small from all the kindnesses,” he acknowledges that all the salvations, goodness, and truth bestowed upon others come through him, though he felt unworthy. He acted according to Hashem's will because he understood that the world depended on him. By confronting these dangers, Yaakov prepared the path for future generations, ensuring their ability to cope with similar challenges.
Genesis 32:4: "Yaakov sent angels"-- Rashi explains that the word "angel" [in context] means just that: an angel [whereas other commentaries could interpret the word as "messenger"). It's known from the Zohar that every mitzvah creates an angel. The main antagonism to the angelic minister of Eisav is saying the prayer of Shema. This is the meaning of the verse: "the house of Yaakov is fire, the house of Eisav is straw" (Ovadia 1:18) -- "straw" is an acronym is for "kriat shema" [the prayer of Shema]. The Shema directly opposes Eisav. As it says Megaleh Amukot, "so shall say you to my master Esiav" -- "so" refers to recital of Shema. The word "mamish" [used by Rashi in his commentary] stands for "mekabalet malchus shamayim" (accepting the yoke of heaven), referring to the angels emerging from the intent of our Shema. This is the main antagonism to subjugate the angelic minister of Eisav. Eisav also includes the seed of Amalek, and the Torah says that Hashem's name is not complete until Amalek is eradicated. On that day, when the saviors go to the mountain of Zion to judge the mountain of Eisav, dominion will belong to G-d, and on that day Hashem will be one and His Name will be one.
וישלח יעקב מלאכים, “Yaakov sent out messengers;” the meaning of the word: malachim here is, as understood by both translators into Aramaic, izgedin, runners, messengers; [human beings. Ed.]
ארצה שעיר, “towards the land of Seir.” This land had originally belonged to “Seir,” but when Esau married Oholivamah, daughter of Ana, he inherited this land courtesy of his wife whose maternal links had been Ana, a daughter of Tzivon as stated in Genesis 36,2. Esau had moved there from the land of Canaan to spend more time with his wives to whom he felt greatly attached. Eventually this land was named after him, i.e. “field of Edom.” This term reminds everyone of Esau’s primary vocation as hunter in the field.
AND JACOB SENT. This verse teaches us that the land of Edom lies between Haran and the land of Israel. This disproves Saadiah Gaon’s contention that Sinai, Seir and Paran are next to each other. (Since Jacob was on the way to the land of Israel from Haran, why did he send messengers to Edom? We must assume that Edom is between Syria (Haran) and Israel, and Jacob thus had to reconcile his brother before he passed through his territory. This disproves Saadiah’s contention that Seir (Edom) is near Sinai, for Sinai is located southwest of Israel while Haran lies northeast of the land of Israel. The problem with I.E.’s note is that Edom was located southeast of Israel, while Haran, as just noted, lies northeast. This is another example of I.E.’s lack of knowledge concerning the geography of the Holy Land and its environs.) [MESSENGERS.] From among his servants. (I.E. takes issue with the Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 75:3 and Rashi who interpret malakhim to mean angels rather than human messengers.)
וישלח, He sent, etc. Why did the Torah say: לפניו, ahead of him, a word which appears to be superfluous? The word אחיו also needs justification. Who did not know that Esau was Jacob's brother? Even the words ארצה שעיר שדה אדום, "to the land of Se-ir the field of Edom," need an explanation. What difference would it make to the angels where Esau was located? Furthermore, why did the Torah use the expression ארצה instead of לארץ? Although Yevamot 13 states that wherever the letter ל is required at the beginning it can be substituted for by the letter ה at the end, this does not explain when the Torah chooses one method rather than another.
The verse wants to justify the expression "he sent angels." Why did Jacob employ heavenly beings without a pressing need? He could have accomplished the same thing by employing human messengers! The Torah says לפניו, to tell us that since Jacob had already met with these angels and they had obviously come to help him, he was permitted to use them as messengers for a task that human messengers might prove inadequate for. Jacob reasoned that seeing that these messengers would meet an important man such as Esau, he might not consider messengers of a lower order as appropriate to his stature (compare Bereshit Rabbah 75). Esau might not have responded to any other messengers at all. It is also possible that Esau would immediately pounce on Jacob's human messengers as the eagle does when he swoops out of the skies, thus not giving him any warning before attacking him. For all these reasons Jacob was justified in employing celestial beings to act as his messengers. Perhaps he also hoped that when Esau became aware that he, Jacob, had celestial beings do his bidding he would desist from his planned attack on Jacob altogether. The Midrash we quoted above refers to those angels as being garbed in "fiery garments, riding horses of fire, etc."
The reason the Torah mentions the word "his brother," is to emphasize that Jacob despatched the messengers in a spirit of brotherliness and that he accorded Esau the honour due to an older brother. He was afraid of engaging Esau in warfare in case the latter should invoke his father's merits.
Another approach is also possible. The Torah emphasizes: אל עשו in order to tell us that on the one hand Esau hated him; on the other hand, the Torah wrote אל אחיו, to tell us that he did not hate him, that he was his brother. The messengers should be guided in their approach to Esau according to the frame of mind they would find him in. Since only celestial beings could divine Esau's frame of mind with any certainty, Jacob had to send celestial messengers to accomplish this task.
Still another possibility is that Jacob's strategy was to send messengers to Esau before Esau had a chance to hear about his approach from another source. This is in line with the various Midrashim in which Jacob is criticised severely for not letting sleeping dogs lie, for demeaning himself by repeating so many times "your servant Jacob," etc. He chose to send angels who would not have to exert themselves by excessive travel. To the angels the whole universe appeared no greater than four cubits do to us mortal human beings. When the Torah reports that Jacob sent messengers ahead of him to Esau, the word לפניו, before him, is an allusion that the angels were still literally in his presence although they performed their mission to Esau who was quite a distance away. The reason that the Torah wrote ארצה שעיר instead of לארץ שעיר, is to emphasize that the angels did not actually have to go anywhere. All they had to do was to face in a different direction. The reason that the field is called "Edom" is that they would arrive at Esau's, i.e. the field of Edom, before the latter had a chance to even to get under way towards Jacob.
This verse may also be understood as alluding to three different historical periods during each of which Esau's conduct would be different. One period finds Jacob and Esau in a brotherly relationship. This is alluded to by the words: "to Esau his brother." This period would extend until the destruction of the Holy Temple. Even though there were times prior to that when the Edomites were subjugated by Israel, such periods were relatively brief. During a different period in history, after the destruction of the Holy Temple until the end of the present era (before the advent of the Messiah), Esau would occupy a lofty position on earth and Israel would not even be considered by it as of any importance at all. This is the period which is alluded to here by the words ארצה שעיר, with the vowel patach under the letter א. This vowel underlines the superior position of Esau. The third period is the one we are hoping for when Edom will become an inheritance (for the Jewish people). This period is alluded to by the words שדה אדום, i.e. that Edom will be ploughed over as predicted by the prophet.
מעין נרפש ומקור משחת צדיק מט לפני רשע אכול דבש הרבות לא-טוב וחקר כבודם כבוד “A righteous man who falters in front of the wicked, is like a murky well and a polluted fountain. It is no good to eat too much honey, nor is it honorable to seek personal glory.”(Proverbs 25, 26-27)
The sages of the Midrash in Bereshit Rabbah 75,2 take a different view. They describe Yaakov as taking hold of the ears of a dog by getting involved in a struggle which was not his. The last we had heard of Esau was that he pursued his own interests and married another wife to mollify his parents (28,9). According to Bereshit Rabbah 75,5 Yaakov acted very precipitously by sending messengers to Esau and reminding him of his existence, almost provoking him into a confrontation. This is how they interpret the verse in Proverbs we started out with, i.e. that Yaakov unnecessarily muddied the waters. They ascribe an overly obsequious letter from Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi to the governor of Palestine Antoninus as reflecting this lack of backbone displayed here by his ancestor Yaakov. Antoninus reputedly replied to this letter by questioning Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi: “are you then my servant? I wish I would become your servant in the hereafter.” Rabbi Yehudah replied “I am not greater than my ancestor Yaakov; and you are not smaller than your ancestor Esau.” After all, my ancestor Yaakov sent a message to your ancestor Esau in which he addressed him as ‘your servant Yaakov.’” According to an opinion in that Midrash, we learn from here that Royalty must be addressed deferentially.
According to Bereshit Rabbah 75,2, Solomon taught us something here about the true measure of a righteous person. When you observe such a person falter in the face of the superior might of a wicked person, such a weakness is only momentary; it does not represent a capitulation of the righteous in face of evil. He will recover from such weakness (with the help of G’d.) This is why Solomon already wrote in Proverbs 24, 16: “For the righteous will rise even if he falls seven times.” In the end he will regain his composure and his honour and dignity. The whole matter can be compared to a well of spring water which someone steps into and momentarily causes the waters in that well to become murky. After a short while of leaving those waters to themselves they will become clear again. Similarly, the righteous will regain his composure and hence his dignity. The wicked is unable to permanently suppress the superior qualities of the righteous. Why did Solomon, or the sages who interpreted these verses of Proverbs, choose this comparison between a murky well and a polluted fountain? It is a well known fact that a river is fed by a fountain whereas the fountain draws on an original source of water. Both are recipients of their respective waters. The reason why the fountain is called מעין, i.e. something derived from עין, and we have the expression עין המים, (Genesis 24,13 where Eliezer met Rivkah) is that the eye, i.e. עין receives its water from the דמעה, the tear. Tears originate in the brain. When someone indulges in too much weeping he causes his brain to dry out. The מקור, “the source,” does not rely on outside sources for its input. It is a “self-starter.” Its waters keep increasing and never stop flowing. This is why the name מקור is an apt name applied to G’d, seeing that He is the fountainhead of everything, and seeing that because of this there is no danger that this source will ever fail. This is reflected in Jeremiah 17,13 מקור מים חיים את ה', that “the source of (life-giving) spring water is G’d Himself.” We also have Psalms 36,10 where the psalmist describes the source of such water as being with G’d, i.e. כי עמך מקור חיים, “with You is the fountain of life.” These considerations prompted Solomon to describe a righteous person who falters in the presence of a wicked person as comparable to murky waters and a polluted fountain. Both of these defects are temporary in nature and the force of the clear water is bound to reassert itself in time. Having told us that it is impossible to permanently sully and debase the reputation of a righteous person, just as it is impossible to permanently pollute such waters as he had described, Solomon goes on to say that one must investigate, i.e. seek out and praise the good qualities of the righteous. He describes the moral/ethical value of discovering these good qualities of the righteous by a conscious effort to find these qualities as something better than eating a lot of honey. Whereas the consumption of too much honey is not beneficial, spending a lot of effort in finding the good character qualities of the righteous is a very worthwhile discipline and trains a person to think along the right lines. There can be no question that praising the character of a righteous person is the result of a good nature, one that seeks out the good in a person rather than the negative qualities he may have. This is why Solomon describes the time spent extolling the righteous, the virtuous, as better than the time spent eating honey. The reverse is true of someone who praises good qualities he has found in a wicked person. This reflects bad characteristics of the person doing so and if persisted in will lead to the one who thought he had discovered “goodness” in the wicked person praising him altogether, not just a particular good characteristic he had discovered in such a person. It is a psychological truth that a person is apt to extol the virtues of people whose general characteristics he shares, i.e. when you hear who praises whom you know that they are “birds of a feather.” In chapter 28,45 of his Book Proverbs, Solomon is on record as עזבי תורה יהללו רשע, that “praising a wicked person is typical of someone who has abandoned the path of Torah.” The reason is simply that people have a habit of praising those with whom they have the most in common, or מין במינו, in the parlance of our sages. King David already made the same point in Psalms 15,4 when he said: ואת-יראי ה' יכבד, “but who honors those who fear the Lord;” [He had previously spoken about that same person saying that if he considers himself a הולך תמים, living without blame, he would have to display his disdain for the wicked. Ed.] Our sages in Makkot 24 understood this verse to apply to Yehoshaphat, King of Yehudah, who used to rise from his chair when he saw a Torah scholar and who would embrace him and kiss him and call him “my teacher.”
There is something puzzling in all this. Why did the sages of the Talmud describe this particular characteristic of King Yehoshapat as something remarkable, when it is something which is incumbent upon every single Jew? Why was Yehoshaphat so special that if he complied with a virtue practiced by many, his complying with it should deserve special mention? Did not our sages comment on Ezekiel 4,14 נבלה וטרפה לא אכלתי, “I have not eaten that which died by itself or that which was torn,” (the prophet speaking) that they could not see what news the prophet told us that we had not known before? Had we then expected the prophet to have been guilty of eating such things? The sages explained that the prophet spoke about that which was permitted to him legally but which he had refrained from as there was a question if such animal had been rendered unfit as a sacrifice due to some concealed defect which had come to light too late for the sacrifice to have qualified for consumption. In the case of Yehoshaphat we could have assumed that the fact that he was King and as such not only not obligated but maybe even not allowed to waive his honour in favour of Torah scholars, he would have refrained from paying them such honour. If, nonetheless, he did honor them it was worth noting as it demonstrated an exceptional virtue. Coming back to our verse and the Midrash’s interpretation of it, we must remember that when Yaakov displayed a demeaning attitude when bowing repeatedly to Esau the wicked and addressing him as “my master,” as well as when sending gifts to him, this was all part of Yaakov’s momentary weakness though in the end he roused himself and assumed the posture fitting to a man of his stature.
וישלח יעקב מלאכים לפניו אל עשו אחיו ארצה שעיר שדה אדום “Yaakov sent messengers ahead of him to his brother Esau to the Mountain of Se-ir the land of Edom.” The word מלאכים includes both messengers dispatched by human beings and messengers dispatched by G’d. Seeing that at the time Yaakov had been forced to flee to Padan Aram due to his fear of his brother Esau, he now made an attempt to assuage Esau’s hurt feelings and to ask his goodwill by sending messengers, i.e. servants, members of his household. These messengers were accompanied by the messengers (angels) who had met him at Machanayim as we had read in the previous paragraph. In this matter he acted just as had his grandfather Avraham when he had sent Eliezer on an errand to secure a wife for Yitzchak when he had prayed to G’d and had assured Eliezer that a celestial messenger would assist him in his quest (compare Genesis 24,7 “He will send His angel ahead of you.”) I already explained in that connection that the angel preceded Eliezer at the well. Something similar happened here in that the angels G’d had sent to meet Yaakov and who went with the messengers whom Yaakov sent out with the gifts preceded the gifts and thus prevented Esau his brother from harming Yaakov. All of this is based on the fact that the word מלאכים can have either of the two meanings we mentioned earlier. If we need to look for proof that celestial messengers were involved here also, all we need to look at are the words: וישובו המלאכים אל יעקב לאמור, “the messengers returned to Yaakov saying, etc.” If these returning messengers had been human beings, the Torah should have reported: “the angels came to Esau and told him such and such; subsequently they returned to Yaakov reporting that they had carried out their instructions.” The Torah does not mention any of this. This proves that the messengers in question were celestial creatures and the words (verse 7) in which the Torah reports a reply by the messengers telling him that Esau approaches with 400 armed men indicate that they answered Yaakov (וישובו) without having bothered to first go there. They had been there and they knew that Esau approached with hostile intentions. When the Torah continues in that same verse with the words באנו אל אחיך, “we have come to your brother,” this refers to human messengers; this is why the Torah had to report things in a sequential manner, i.e. that the messengers returned and told Yaakov they had completed their mission. When analysing the more mystical aspect of the matter, it is possible to view these messengers as fulfilling a dual role, i.e. both as Yaakov’s messengers and as G’d’s messengers, similarly to Eliezer functioning both as a celestial messenger when the Torah described him as האיש, and as an ordinary human being, servant of Avraham, when the Torah referred to him as העבד, “the servant.” This would account for the fact that the Torah described the messengers as מלאכים, although they were creatures of flesh and blood. Both approaches correspond to the truth. It is simply a matter of emphasis, i.e. whether we concentrate on the external aspects of what occurred, i.e. that which was visible to the physical eye, or whether we concentrate on the more fundamental aspects of the matter, something not visible to the naked eye. It appears that the opinion of Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra is based on his commentary on Parshat Balak (Numbers 22,28), where he writes ”the correct interpretation is that the she-ass actually spoke,” [i.e. that this was one of the ten miracles mentioned in the Mishnah in Avot 5,6 and Pessachim 54, involving a radical departure from the laws of nature]. If one understands the mystical aspect of the mission of the angels who came to visit Avraham, one can similarly understand the mystical aspect of the mission of the messengers described in our verse.” Thus far Ibn Ezra. It is well known (based on Nachmanides) that Yitzchak, Yaakov’s father, resided in the southern part of Eretz Yisrael at this time, so that Yaakov would have had to pass through the land of Edom on his return from Padan Aram in order to rejoin his father. This is why he was so scared of Esau, as he feared Esau would come out to block his way. This is why he sent the messengers to head off any hostile confrontation.
וישלח יעקב מלאכים, even though G’d had assured him of His support twice, he was still afraid of his brother. The reason was that at the time Yaakov had left home Esau had been very angry at him. He was now afraid that due to some sin he might have committed and that he had remained unaware of, he might forfeit G’d’s support. We elaborated on this concept already. In order to find out how Esau felt about him now, he sent some of his mean as emissaries. They were supposed to soften him up if that was necessary.
ארצה שעיר, he had heard that Esau was there at the time although he had not settled there with his family. At this time he still lived in the land of Canaan. We know from 36,6-9 that Esau migrated to the land of Seir only at that time, after the meeting with Yaakov.
שדה אדום, a synonym for “the land of Edom.” We have the same synonym also being used for the land of Moav in Ruth 1,1 when Elimelech left the land of Israel to settle in שדה מואב, meaning in ארץ מואב.
TO ESAU HIS BROTHER UNTO THE LAND SE’IR. Since the southern part of the Land of Israel adjoins Edom, and Jacob’s father dwelt in the land of the South, (Above, 24:62.) he had to pass through Edom or near there. Therefore, he feared lest Esau hear of it, and he took the initiative by sending messengers to him in his country. But the Sages have already taken him to task for this, saying in Bereshith Rabbah: (75:2.) “Like one that taketh a dog by the ears is he that passeth by, and meddleth with a strife not his own. (Proverbs 26:17.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob, ‘Esau was going his way, and you send him messengers, and say to him, Thus saith thy servant Jacob!“ (Verse 5 here.) In my opinion this too hints at the fact that we instigated our falling into the hand of Edom [Rome] for the Hasmonean kings during the period of the Second Temple entered into a covenant with the Romans, (In Maccabees, I, 8, it is related how Judah Maccabee sent a delegation to Rome to establish a political alliance with the Romans.) and some of them even went to Rome to seek an alliance. This was the cause of their falling into the hands of the Romans. This is mentioned in the words of our Rabbis, (Abodah Zarah 8b.) and is well publicized in books. (Ramban is undoubtedly referring to the history book of Josippon, or Joseph ben Gorion, a medieval work regarded as the Hebrew version of Josephus Flavius. It was a popular work with the people of the Middle Ages. See also Ramban on Leviticus 26:16.)
To Eisav his brother in the land of Edom: Since southern Israel is near Edom, and his father (Yitzchok) was living in the south, he (Yaakov) would need to pass through Edom, or close by. Therefore he was afraid the Eisav would hear (that Yaakov was there), and he preemptively sent messengers to his land. Our Rabbis take him to task for this, as it says in (the medrash) Bereishis Rabba, "'He who holds the ears of a dog...' Hashem said to him (Yaakov), 'He was going on his way, and you sent messengers to him saying, so said your servant Yaakov?'" In my opinion, this also hints for us, that we began our downfall into the hands of Edom (when) the kings of the Second Temple Era entered into a covenant with Rome, and some even went to Rome. This was the reason for their downfall.
וישלח יעקב מלאכים AND JACOB SENT MESSENGERS (Heb. מלאכים angels) — actually angels (Genesis Rabbah 75:4).
ארצה שעיר means TO THE LAND OF SEIR — A word that requires a ל as prefix has a ה placed as a suffix (Yevamot 13b).
וישלח יעקב מלאכים, in order to find out Esau’s state of mind concerning him.
ארצה שעיר שדה אדום, to the region of Seir where he lived. At that time he had not yet conquered the whole Chori, the inhabitants of that land. (compare 36,8)
Actual angels. Otherwise, why does it need to say לפניו? The verse is saying that Yaakov sent the messengers [i.e., the angels] who were לפניו. In other words, he sent the ones mentioned before: “And the angels of Elohim met him” (v. 2). (Re’m) Much more has been said regarding this. See Gur Aryeh, R. Noson and Nachalas Yaakov.
He commanded them, saying: So shall you say to my lord, to Esau: So says your servant Jacob: I have resided with Laban, and tarried until now. Since Jacob wanted the messengers to understand the complexity of his relationship with Esau, he described himself as a servant addressing his master.
וישלח יעקב מלאכים לפניו, “Yaakov sent messengers ahead of him.” Their assignment was to walk in front of him. Alternatively, their assignment was to investigate the “face” of Esau, i.e. his attitude toward Yaakov at this time. Although G’d had given Yaakov all kinds of assurances, (some time earlier) he did not rely on his righteousness alone to save him from Esau, but took every prudent precaution to minimize the risk to his family and to himself. Yaakov’s conduct is to serve as a model for his children and future descendants to teach them how to deal with the descendants of Esau. Just as he prayed, offered bribes, and was prepared for battle, so his descendants should employ these three means of insuring their survival also.
ארצה שעיר, שדה אדום, “the land Seir, the field of Edom.” Anyone traveling from Charan to the land of Israel travels through the land of Seir. Even though Esau spent most of his time in the land of Canaan, as is clear from Genesis 36,6: “Esau took his wives and went to “a (another) land,” on account of his brother Yaakov,” Yaakov had reason to believe that he would encounter him near his wives, who had come from the land of Seir. Our sages have criticized Yaakov, comparing his conduct to the proverbial “he who grabs the ears of a dog must not be surprised if he gets bitten.” Yaakov’s sending gifts ahead to Esau alerted him to the fact that he was about to approach him. Yaakov’s mistake was repeated during the latter days of the second Jewish commonwealth, when the Romans were invited by a Jewish king Aristobul, descendant of the Maccabees, to conclude an alliance with him. This was the beginning of the collapse of the Jewish commonwealth and of the second Temple, followed by total loss of Jewish independence, such as it had been.
“Jacob sent messengers” [32:4]. Jacob sent angels from heaven, that they should go to his brother Esau. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:4.) Bahya writes. They were real angels, since it is written in the Torah portion, “the messengers returned” [32:7]. This means, the angels returned to Jacob and it is not written that they went, since they were real angels. They flew to Esau immediately and returned to Jacob immediately. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:4.) Rabbi Isserl writes. They were real angels, since the verse said, “thus shall you say to my lord Esau” [32:5]. This means, you should say to my lord Esau. Why does he honor him by calling him lord? The explanation is that the angel of Esau was also among the angels. Therefore, Jacob honored Esau and called him lord. That is, Jacob wanted to humble himself before the angel of Esau, so that the angel would do no harm. (Be’ure Maharai, Genesis, 32:4.)
We have already stated above that the angels are incorporeal. This agrees with the opinion of Aristotle: there is only this difference in the names employed—he uses the term “Intelligences,” and we say instead “angels.” His theory is that the Intelligences are intermediate beings between the Prime Cause and existing things, and that they effect the motion of the spheres, on which motion the existence of all things depends. This is also the view we meet with in all parts of Scripture: every act of God is described as being performed by angels. But “angel” means “messenger”; hence every one that is intrusted with a certain mission is an angel. Even the movements of the brute creation are sometimes due to the action of an angel, when such movements serve the purpose of the Creator, who endowed it with the power of performing that movement; e.g., “God hath sent His angel, and hath shut the lions’ mouths that they have not hurt me” (Dan. 6:22). Another instance may be seen in the movements of Balaam’s ass, described as caused by an angel. The elements are also called angels. Comp. “Who maketh winds His angels, flaming fire His ministers” (Ps. 104:4). There is no doubt that the word “angel” is used of a messenger sent by man; e.g., “And Jacob sent angels” (Gen. 32:4); of a prophet, e.g., “And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim” (Judges 2:1); “And He sent an angel, and hath brought us forth out of Egypt” (Num. 20:16). It is also used of ideals, perceived by prophets in prophetic visions, and of man’s animal powers, as will be explained in another place.
Chapter (54) 55: Torah [1] And Jacob sent messengers (Genesis 32:4). He sent angelic soldiers, but see what is written above: "angels of God met him, and Jacob said when he saw them" (Genesis 32:2-3). And Jacob sent messengers. This is the meaning of "You shall be surrounded by eyes" (Isaiah 60:4). From the day Jacob came out of his mother's womb, God foresaw that Esau would seek to kill him, and therefore God assigned angels to guard him. Similarly, David said, "He who dwells in the secret place of the Most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty" (Psalm 91:1), for He will command His angels concerning you. (Psalms 91:11). And the ministering angels guarded him all the days that he was in the land of Israel. When he left to go to Laban, those ministering angels left him and others were appointed to guard him. This is why the angels who serve in the land of Israel do not serve outside of it. Jacob saw these angels when he left his father's home, as it is said, "and he dreamed, and behold, a ladder was set up on the earth... and behold, angels of God were ascending and descending on it" (Genesis 28:12). It should have said "descending and then ascending," but their way is always to descend from above and then to ascend. So those angels who were guarding him in the land of Israel, when they saw him leaving for outside of the land, left him and other angels descended and served him outside of the land. When he returned to his father's home, God said to the first group of ministering angels who had guarded him in the land of Israel, "you do not go to accompany him to his destination." This is similar to the kings of Rome who left their spear men and soldiers behind and went to the barbarians, and his father entrusted him to many gentile rulers to serve him. After some time, when he returned from the barbarians, the king said to his soldiers, "we do not go to meet the barbarians, for he is coming." The son was afraid to come, but when he lifted his eyes and saw his father and all the soldiers, as he came back to his father, the Lord said to the first angels who were guarding him in the land of Israel, "You shall not go to the threshold of my sons, a parable to a king's son who left his Rome and San'kalitine*, and came to his father-in-law and his father gave him many servants to serve him. After some time, when he returned from his father-in-law, the king said to his San'kalitine, 'We shall not go to the threshold of my son, for he is coming.' The son was afraid to come, but when he raised his eyes and saw his father and all his San'kalitine who went out to meet him, he began to rejoice. Similarly, Jacob, when he returned to his father, the Lord said to the first angels, 'Let us go to the threshold of Jacob.' When Jacob heard that they were coming, he became afraid. The Lord said to him, 'Raise your eyes and see who is coming to your threshold.' As it is written, 'Lift up your eyes and look around you' (Isaiah 60:4). Immediately Jacob said, 'This is God's camp' (Genesis 32:3), as it is written, 'They called to one another' (Isaiah 6:3). And he said to them, 'Since you have come to meet me, go on my behalf.' And to Jacob [God] sent an angels, and David cried out and said, 'The angel of the Lord encamps around those who fear him' (Psalm 34:8). [* סנקליטיקוס- senator, councilor, counselor]
“Esau came from the field” – Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Aivu, Rabbi Pinḥas in the name of Rabbi Levi, and the Rabbis in the name of Rabbi Simon: You find that Abraham lived one hundred and seventy-five years, and Isaac one hundred and eighty. Those five years that the Holy One blessed be He withheld from his life, it is because Esau violated two transgressions: He consorted with a betrothed young woman, as it is stated: “For he found her in the field” (This verse refers to a betrothed woman who was raped.) (Deuteronomy 22:27); “and he was weary” – he killed a person, just as it says: “For my soul is wearied by the killers” (Jeremiah 4:31). Rabbi said: He stole as well, just as it says: “If thieves came for you, if plunderers of the night…” (Obadiah 1:5). The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘This is what I promised to Abraham, and said to him: “You shall go to your fathers in peace; [you shall be buried at a good old age]” (Genesis 15:15) – is this “a good old age,” that he sees his grandson engaging in idol worship, engaging in forbidden sexual relations, and shedding blood? It is preferable that he leave the world [without seeing it].’ That is what is written: “For Your kindness is better than life” (Psalms 63:4). “Esau said to Jacob: Feed me now from that red, red [haadom haadom] dish, as I am weary. Therefore, his name is called Edom” (Genesis 25:30). “Esau said to Jacob: Feed me [haliteni] now from that red” – Rabbi Ze’eira said: That wicked one opened his mouth wide like a camel. He said to him: ‘I will open my mouth and you continuously pour,’ like what we learned: One may not forcibly overfeed a camel and one may not force feed it. However, one may place food into its mouth [malitin]. (Shabbat 155b.) “From that red, red [ha’adom ha’adom]” – Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: From him and from his Patron. (God is the Patron of Jacob. Esau sought to consume the stew, and the Temples of Jacob’s God.) Reish Lakish said: From him, and from those like him [hadomin lo]. (His righteous descendants, who are similar to him.) He is red, his cooked food is red, his land is red, his warriors are red, his garments are red, One who is red exacts retribution against him, in red garments. (See Isaiah 63:1–2.) He is red – “the first emerged ruddy” (Genesis 25:25). His cooked food is red – “feed me now from [that] red.” His land is red – “to the land of Se’ir, to the field of Edom" (Genesis 32:4). His mighty ones are red –“his warriors’ shields are reddened” (Nahum 2:4). His garments are red – “his soldiers are colored scarlet” (Nahum 2:4). One who is red exacts retribution against him – “my beloved is clear and ruddy” (Song of Songs 5:10). In red attire – “why is there red in Your attire?” (Isaiah 63:2).
“Now, please take your gear, your quiver and your bow, and go out to the field, and hunt game for me” (Genesis 27:3). “Now, please take your gear” – sharpen your hunting tools, so you will not feed me unslaughtered carcasses or mauled animals. Take your hunting tools, so you will not feed me stolen or forcibly-taken items. “Your quiver [telyekha]” – he said to him: ‘The blessings are pending [teluyot]. The one who is worthy to be blessed, he will be blessed.’ Another matter, “please take your gear [kelekha],” this is Babylon – “and he brought the vessels to the treasure house of his god” (Daniel 1:2). “Your quiver [telyekha],” this is Media – “they hanged [vayitlu] Haman on the gibbet” (Esther 7:10). “Your bow,” this is Greece [Yavan] – “for I bend Judah for Me as a bow […on your children Yavan]” (Zechariah 9:13). “And go out to the field,” this is Edom – “to the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” (Genesis 32:4). “Prepare for me delicacies, as I like, and bring it to me, and I will eat; so that my soul will bless you before I die” (Genesis 27:4). “Prepare for me delicacies” – Rabbi Eliezer said in the name of Rabbi Yosei bar Zimra: Three matters were stated regarding the tree from which Adam, the first man, ate: Good for eating, beautiful to the eyes, and adds wisdom. The three of them were stated in one verse: “The woman saw that the tree was good for eating” (Genesis 3:6) – from here [we learn] that it is good for eating; “and that it was enticing to the eyes” (Genesis 3:6) – from here [we learn] that it was beautiful to the eyes; “a source of wisdom [lehaskil]” (Genesis 3:6) – from here [we learn] that it adds wisdom, just as it says: “A contemplation [maskil] by Eitan” (Psalms 89:1). Likewise, Isaac said: “Prepare for me delicacies [matamim].” He said to him: ‘Initially, I would enjoy the sight, but now I enjoy only the taste [hataam].’ Likewise, Solomon said: “With the increase of goodness, its eaters increase; [and what use is it to its owner other than the sight of his eyes?]” (Ecclesiastes 5:10) (When someone is wealthy, his household is large and his food expenditures are great. He enjoys only the sight of the food.) – from here [we learn] that the blind are not sated. One who sees an empty basket and is hungry is unlike one who sees a full basket and is sated. (Somebody who sees an empty basket feels hungry, while somebody who sees a full basket does not feel hungry, since he knows that there will be food when he is hungry.) “Rebecca heard as Isaac spoke to Esau his son. Esau went to the field to hunt game to bring” (Genesis 27:5). “Esau went to the field to hunt game to bring” – if he finds, excellent, but if not, “to bring” – from stolen or forcibly-taken items.
“Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God encountered him” (Genesis 32:2). “Jacob said when he saw them: This is the camp of God. He called the name of that place Maḥanayim” (Genesis 32:3). “Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God encountered him” – how many angels were dancing and prancing before our patriarch Jacob upon his entry into the Land? Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Aivu: Six hundred thousand angels were dancing before Jacob our patriarch upon his entry into the Land. That is what is written: “Jacob said when he saw them: This is the camp [maḥaneh] of God,” and the Divine Presence does not rest on fewer than six hundred thousand. The Rabbis say: One million two hundred thousand – “He called the name of that place Maḥanayim.” Maḥaneh is six hundred thousand. Maḥanayim (Two camps.) is one million two hundred thousand. Rabbi Yudan said: He took from these and took from those and sent messengers ahead of him. That is what is written: “Jacob sent messengers ahead of him” (Genesis 32:4).
“Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother, to the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” (Genesis 32:4). “Jacob sent messengers before him” – Rabbi Pinḥas in the name of Rabbi Reuven began: “Arise, Lord, confront him and subdue him. Rescue me from the wicked with Your sword” (Psalms 17:13) – Rabbi Pinḥas said: Five times in the book of Psalms, David calls for the Holy One blessed be He to arise: “Arise, Lord; save me, my God” (Psalms 3:8); “Arise, Lord, in Your anger” (Psalms 7:7); “Arise, Lord God, raise Your hand. Do not forget” (Psalms 10:12); “Arise, Lord; let man not be arrogant” (Psalms 9:20); “Arise, Lord, confront him” (Psalms 17:13). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘David, my son, even if you call for Me to rise many times, I will not rise. When will I rise? It is when the poor are robbed and the indigent are groaning.’ That is what is written: “Because of the robbery of the poor and the groans of the indigent [now I will arise]” (Psalms 12:6). Rabbi Yona said: “Now I will arise” (Psalms 12:6) – as long as it is wallowing in the ashes, as it were…. (The Holy One blessed be He is, as it were, also wallowing in the ashes.) Rather, when [comes] the day in whose regard it is written: “Shake the dust from you, arise and sit, Jerusalem” (Isaiah 52:2), at that moment: “Be silent, all flesh, before the Lord” (Zechariah 2:17). Why? “For He is roused from His abode of sanctity” (Zechariah 2:17). Rabbi Aḥa said: Like this rooster that moves itself from the ashes. “Confront him [kadma panav]” (Psalms 17:13) – give the wicked early, before he comes to greet You. (Give him his reward in this world, and repay him for his evil before he comes before You to repent.) “Subdue him [hakhri’ehu]” (Psalms 17:13) – tip the scales to condemn him [hakhriḥehu] and break him, just as it says: “They dropped to their knees [kare’u] and fell…” (Psalms 20:9). “Deliver me from the wicked with Your sword” (Psalms 17:13) – deliver my soul from that wicked one (Esau.) who comes by the power of that sword, as it is stated: “By your sword you shall live” (Genesis 27:40). Alternatively, deliver my soul from that wicked one, (Rome, descendants of Esau.) who is Your sword through whom You subjugate the world. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Deliver my soul from that wicked one who is destined to fall by your sword. That is what is written: “For My sword is sated in Heaven; [behold, it will descend upon Edom]” (Isaiah 34:5) – the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘He was going on his way, and then you are sending to him and saying: “So said your servant, Jacob”’ (Genesis 32:5). (Had you not sent to him, Esau would have continued on his way to Edom.)
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – come and see what is written before this matter: “Jacob said, when he saw them: [This is the camp of God]” (Genesis 32:3). How many were in a camp of God? Two thousand myriads of ministering angels, as it is stated: “The chariots of God are myriad, thousands upon thousands of companies. My Lord is among them, at Sinai, in holiness” (Psalms 68:18). “He called the name of that place Maḥanayim” (Genesis 32:3). Why were there two camps? It teaches that they gave Jacob four thousand myriads of ministering angels and they appeared to him like a king’s armies, some of whom were clad in iron, some of whom were on horseback, and some of whom were sitting in chariots. He [Esau] encountered those clad in iron. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those on horseback. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those in chariots. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob,’ as it is stated: “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” (Genesis 33:8). Jacob, too, would mention to Esau the name of the Holy One blessed be He, to scare him and to frighten him, as it is stated: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). To what is this matter analogous? It is to one who invited another to a meal, and he (The guest.) ascertained that he sought to kill him. He [the guest] said: ‘The taste of this dish is like the taste of a dish that I tasted in the king’s palace.’ He said: ‘He knows the king?’ He was afraid and did not kill him. The same is true of Jacob. When he said to Esau: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” wicked Esau said: ‘The Holy One blessed be He brought him to all this glory? I will no longer be able to overcome him.’
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – why did he send messengers to him? Rather, this is what he said: ‘I will send him messengers; maybe he will repent.’ He said to them: ‘Say to him: Do not say Jacob remains as he was when he departed from his father’s house, as it is stated: “For with my staff I crossed…” (Genesis 32:11), “He commanded him, saying” (Genesis 32:5) – say to him: Do not say that when he departed from you he took anything from the household property. Rather, [tell him that] I acquired all these as my wages, through my effort,’ as it is stated: “And now I have become two camps” (Genesis 32:11). At the moment that Jacob called Esau “my lord,” the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You abased yourself and called him “my lord” eight times. As you live, I will establish eight kings from his descendants before your descendants,’ as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned [in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31). He [Jacob] said to them [the messengers]: ‘Say to him: If you are prepared for peace, I am with you, and if for war, I am with you. I have warriors, courageous and strong, who say something before the Holy One blessed be He, and He performs their will on their behalf,’ as it is stated: “He performs the will of those who fear him” (Psalms 145:19). That is why David came to give praise and acclaim before the Holy One blessed be He, who helped him when he fled from Saul, as it is stated: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow” (Psalms 11:2). What is written thereafter? “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous man do?” (Psalms 11:3). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, if You had distanced and forsook Jacob, who is the pillar and foundation of the world, as it is stated: “The righteous man is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25), “what can the righteous man do?”’ Regarding that moment, it is stated: “Some on chariots and some on horses, but we invoke the name of the Lord our God” (Psalms 20:8).
“Jacob sent messengers before him” – Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon began: “Like a muddied spring and a ruined fount, [so is a righteous man who falls before the wicked]” (Proverbs 25:26). Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: Just as it is impossible for a spring to be muddied and for a fount to be ruined, (Because the water is flowing, any mud will ultimately be swept away.) so it is impossible for a righteous man to fall before the wicked. And like a muddied spring and a ruined fount, (They can be muddied and ruined for a limited time.) so is a righteous man who causes himself to fall before the wicked. He was going on his way, and then you are sending to him and saying: “So said your servant, Jacob.”
“Jacob sent” – Rav Huna began: “Like one who grasps the ears of a dog, so is a passerby who is angered over a quarrel not his” (Proverbs 26:17). Shmuel bar Naḥman said: This is analogous to the head of the robbers, who was sleeping at a crossroads. One person passed and began waking him. He said to him: ‘Wake up, because evil is rampant here.’ He woke up and began beating him. He said: ‘Evil has awakened.’ He said to him: ‘I was asleep and you woke me.’ So, the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘He was going on his way, and then you are sending to him and saying to him submissively: “So said your servant, Jacob.”’ Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon began: “What will you say when He will reckon with you, and you trained them as chieftains and heads over you?” (Jeremiah 13:21). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘He was going on his way, and then you are sending to him and saying: “So said your servant, Jacob.”’
“Messengers [malakhim]” – these were flesh and blood messengers. The Rabbis say: Actual angels. Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: Hagar was Sarah’s maidservant and five angels happened upon her, (See Genesis 16:7–12.) this one who is the beloved of the household, all the more so. If several angels escorted Eliezer, (See Genesis 24:7 and Bereshit Rabba 59:10.) who was a slave of the household, this one, who was the beloved of the household, all the more so. Rabbi Yosei said: Joseph was the youngest of the tribes and three angels escorted him; that is what is written: “A man found him” (Since the “man” is unidentified and appears by chance, and also plays a crucial role in the story, the midrash understands that the mysterious man was, in fact, an angel.) (Genesis 37:15), “the man asked him” (Genesis 37:15), “the man said to him” (Genesis 37:17); this one, who was the father of them all, all the more so. “Before him” – before the one whose time to assume kingship was before his. (See Genesis 36:31.) Rabbi Yehoshua said: He removed his royal purple garment and cast it before him. He said to him: ‘Two starlings cannot sleep on one board.’ (Our kingdoms cannot overlap.) “To Esau his brother” – although he is Esau, he is his brother. “To the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” – he is ruddy, his cooked food is red, his land is red, his mighty are red, his garment is red, and a red one will exact retribution from him in red garments. He is ruddy – “the first emerged ruddy” (Genesis 25:25); “his cooked food is red” – “feed me please from that red, red dish” (Genesis 25:30); “his land is red” – “to the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” (Red, adom, is similar to Edom. See Genesis 25:30.) ; “his mighty are red” – “mighty ones are colored scarlet…” (Nahum 2:4); and a red [adom] one will exact retribution from him – “my beloved is clear and ruddy [adom]” (Song of Songs 5:10); in red garments – “why is there red on your garments?” (Isaiah 63:2).
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – this is what was said with divine spirit by Solomon king of Israel: “Blessings upon the head of the righteous, and villainy will cover the mouth of the wicked” (Proverbs 10:6). Corresponding to whom did Solomon state this verse? He said it corresponding only to Jacob and Esau. “Blessings upon the head of the righteous” – this is Jacob. “And villainy will cover the mouth of the wicked” – this is the wicked Esau. Happy are the righteous who are blessed on earth and are blessed in Heaven, and this is appropriate, as it is stated: “So that one who blesses himself in the land will bless himself by the God of faithfulness” (Isaiah 65:16) – to inform you that all the blessings that Isaac blessed Jacob, corresponding to those, the Holy One blessed be He blessed him from on High. Isaac said to him: “God will give you from the dew of the heavens…” (Genesis 27:28), and the Holy One blessed be He blessed him with dew and rain, as it is stated: “The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of many peoples like dew [from the Lord, like raindrops]” (Micah 5:6). Isaac said to him: “and from the fats of the earth” (Genesis 27:28), and the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “He will give rain for your seeds with which you will sow the ground” (Isaiah 30:23). Isaac said: “Peoples will serve you” (Genesis 27:29), and the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Kings will be your caregivers, and their princesses, your wet nurses” (Isaiah 49:23). Isaac said: “You will be a lord to your brethren” (Genesis 27:29), and the Holy One blessed be He said to him through Moses: “To place you uppermost over all the nations” (Deuteronomy 26:19). You learned that all the blessings that Isaac blessed Jacob from below, corresponding to that, the Holy One blessed be He blessed him from on High. His mother Rebecca, too, blessed him corresponding to them, as it is stated: “He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High” (Psalms 91:1). So she said to him: “For He will charge His angels on your behalf [to guard you in all your ways]” (Psalms 91:11). When she said that to him in that language, the Divine Spirit blessed Him: “When he calls upon Me, I will answer him…” (Psalms 91:15). Once the Holy One blessed be He blessed him, why did his father bless him again, as it is stated: “Isaac summoned Jacob, and he blessed him”? (Genesis 28:1). It is, rather, that Isaac saw through the divine spirit that his descendants were destined to be exiled among the nations. He said to him: ‘Come and I will bless you blessings of exile, so that the Holy One blessed be He will return to you and gather you from the midst of the exiles.’ What are the blessings? “In six troubles He will deliver you, and in seven, no harm will touch you. …From the scourge of the tongue you will be hidden, and you will not fear pillage when it comes. At pillage and hunger you will laugh, and from the beasts of the earth, do not fear” (Job 5:19, 21–22). That is why it is stated: “Blessings upon the head of the righteous.”
Another matter, “Jacob sent” (Genesis 32: 4) – “Lord, do not grant the desires of the wicked. Do not bring their scheme to fruition [zemamo al tafek]; may they depart, Selah” (Psalms 140:9). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, do not realize for wicked Esau the thoughts of his heart.’ What is “zemamo al tafek”? He said before him: ‘Master of the universe: Place a muzzle for wicked Esau so that his satisfaction will not be complete.’ What muzzle did the Holy One blessed be He make for wicked Esau? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: ‘These are the residents of Barbary and the residents of Germany, whom the Edomites (This refers to Rome, which was being attacked by Germanic tribes.) fear.’ Another matter, “do not grant the desires of the wicked” – he said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, just as it was Laban’s intent to harm me, but you did not allow him to do so, so, too, regarding the thoughts of my brother Esau who is thinking to kill me, thwart his evil.’ He was one of three people who thought [to do] evil, but they were unsuccessful – Esau, Yerovam, and Haman. Esau, as it is stated: “Esau said in his heart” (Genesis 27:41). Regarding Yerovam it is written: “Yerovam said in his heart” (I Kings 12:26). Regarding Haman it is written: “Haman said in his heart” (Esther 6:6). What is “Esau said in his heart”? He said: ‘Cain killed his brother, and the Omnipresent did nothing to him. Ultimately, he [Adam] begot additional sons, and they inherited the world with him. But I, I will kill Isaac my father first, and then I will kill Jacob my brother, and I will inherit the world alone,’ as it is stated: “Let the days of mourning for my father approach” (Genesis 27:41) – he said: ‘First, I will hasten the mourning for Father, and then: “I will kill my brother Jacob”’ (Genesis 27:41). But the Holy One blessed be He did not enable him to do so. That is why it is stated: “Do not grant the desires of the wicked.”
(Gen. 27:3:) NOW THEN, PLEASE TAKE YOUR IMPLEMENTS, < YOUR QUIVER AND YOUR BOW, AND GO OUT TO THE FIELD >. R. Isaac the Smith said: [YOUR IMPLEMENTS] alludes to the Kingdom of Babylon. (Gen. R. 63:13.) Thus it is stated (in Dan. 1:2): THEN THE LORD GAVE KING JEHOIAKIM OF JUDAH INTO HIS HAND, WITH SOME OF THE IMPLEMENTS FROM THE HOUSE OF GOD. YOUR QUIVER (teli) alludes to [the kingdom of] Media. Thus it is stated (in Esth. 9:25): SO THEY (the Medes and the Persians) HANGED (talu) HIM (Haman) AND HIS SONS ON THE TREE. AND YOUR BOW alludes to Greece. (Gk.: iones.) Thus it is stated (in Zech. 9:13): FOR I WILL BEND JUDAH TO ME; A BOW < I WILL FILL WITH EPHRAIM; I WILL STIR UP YOUR CHILDREN, O ZION, AGAINST THE CHILDREN OF GREECE >. AND GO OUT TO THE FIELD alludes to Edom. (Edom had become a common code word for Rome.) Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:4 [3]): TO THE LAND OF SEIR, THE FIELD OF EDOM.
[(Gen. 32:4 [3]:) THEN JACOB SENT MESSENGERS. (The bracketed portion extends through the first words of the next section.) This text is related (to Prov. 25:26): A MUDDY SPRING, A POLLUTED SOURCE, IS A RIGHTEOUS PERSON WHO WAVERS BEFORE SOMEONE WICKED. (Tanh., Gen. 1:3; Gen. R. 75:2.) R. Judah b. R. Simon said: Just like a muddy spring and a polluted source, so it is when a righteous person wavers before someone wicked. Another interpretation: < Just as > it is possible for a spring to be muddy and a source to be polluted; < so > it is possible for a righteous person to waver before someone wicked. And who was this < waverer >? This was Jacob when he came from Paddan-aram. What does he < do > ? He sends out and says to Esau (according to Gen. 32:5 [4]): THUS YOU SHALL SAY TO MY LORD ESAU…. Ergo (in vs. 3): THEN JACOB SENT MESSENGERS.
(Gen. 32:4:) THEN JACOB SENT….] This text is related (to Prov. 26:17): A PASSER-BY WHO MEDDLES IN A QUARREL NOT HIS OWN IS LIKE ONE WHO SEIZES A DOG BY THE EARS. (Cf. Gen. R. 78:3.) Who is this person? This is Jacob. When he had set out from his father's house, what is written (in Gen. 28:20)? THEN JACOB VOWED A VOW. What did he say (ibid., cont.]:)? IF GOD IS WITH ME < … > Thus did the Holy One respond to him (in vs. 15): SEE I AM WITH YOU. (Gen. R. 70:4 reports a discussion between R. Ayyevu and R. Jonathan over whether vss. 15 and 20 are disarranged or whether the Holy One simply anticipated Jacob’s vow.) Our masters have said: He responded to him on every < point > except for sustenance. (Gk.: pronoos (“thinking beforehand”). Gen. R. 69:6.) R. Osha'ya said: He also responded to him for sustenance, since it is stated (in Gen. 28:15): FOR I WILL NOT LEAVE YOU UNTIL ('D 'ShR) I HAVE DONE WHAT ('ShR) I PROMISED YOU. Why did he say two times: ('ShR 'ShR)? He spoke, as it were, something difficult. R. Osha'ya said: The Holy One said to him: Blessed (rt.: 'ShR) am I and blessed (rt.: 'ShR) are you when I do this thing for you. Again he demanded < as a condition > (in Gen. 28:21): AND IF I RETURN SAFELY. He said to him (in vs. 15): AND I WILL BRING YOU BACK < UNTO THIS LAND >. R. Hanina b. R. Isaac said: Blessed (rt.: 'ShR) is one born of woman who has heard this from his Creator. See, whatever he demanded from his Creator he promised him. Then, with these promises, he sends and says (in Gen. 32:5 [4]): THUS YOU SHALL SAY TO MY LORD ESAU. Ergo, it is well stated (in Prov. 25:26): < A PASSER-BY WHO MEDDLES IN A QUARREL NOT HIS OWN IS > LIKE ONE WHO SEIZES A DOG BY THE EARS. (The text from Proverbs seems to assume a situation like this: Jacob’s welfare was a matter between himself and his Creator; so why should he get involved with Esau.)
(Gen. 32:4:) THEN JACOB SENT ANGELS. (In Hebrew the same word may be translated either as “angels” or as “messengers.”) This text is related (to Ps. 91:11): FOR HE WILL CHARGE HIS ANGELS TO PROTECT YOU IN ALL YOUR WAYS. (Cf. Matthew 4:6.) When? When one is in the land of Israel, angels who are in the land of Israel protect him. (So below, 9:2.) And from whom do you learn this? From Jacob; for, when he desired to go abroad, what is written (in Gen. 28:12)? THEN HE DREAMED THAT HERE WAS A LADDER…. AND BEHOLD, THE ANGELS OF GOD WERE ASCENDING AND DESCENDING ON IT. < The verse > should not have said < this > but "descending and ascending." After one descends, he ascends. Yet < here > it says: ASCENDING AND DESCENDING! It said to him: Those angels who had been protecting him in the land of Israel had ascended while others descended to protect him while abroad. He did not stay. So, when he came from Paddan-aram, those angels who had protected him in the land of Israel descended. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:3 [2]): WHEN JACOB SAW THEM (i.e., the angels), HE SAID: < THIS IS THE CAMP (mahaneh) OF GOD >, AND CALLED THE NAME OF THAT PLACE MAHANAIM (i.e., two camps). "Mahaneh" (i.e., "camp" in the singular) is not written here but MAHANAIM, < a dual form which means > "two camps," the former < which had kept him when abroad > and the latter < to protect him in the land of Israel >. What did Jacob do? When he wanted to send < messengers > to Esau, he took < them > from the one < camp > and from the other, and sent < them >, as stated (in vs. 4 [3]): THEN JACOB SENT ANGELS. And do not be surprised; for behold, the youngest of his house spoke with the angel. Who was this? This was Joseph; for, when he said to him (in Gen. 37:14): PLEASE GO AND SEE < HOW YOUR BROTHERS ARE FARING >…. < Then > what is written (in vs. 15): THEN A MAN FOUND HIM…. (Cf. Gen. R. 84:14.) What did he say to him (in vs. 17)? THEN THE MAN SAID: THEY HAVE MOVED ON FROM HERE; < FOR I HEARD THEM SAYING: LET US GO TO DOTHAN >. What is the meaning of DOTHAN (DTYNH)? That he was the same angel who protects the religion (DT) of the Lord (YH). So neither be surprised about Jacob sending angels nor about Joseph. Yes, even Hagar had the angels speak with her. What is written (in Gen. 21:17)? AND AN ANGEL OF {THE LORD} [GOD] CALLED UNTO HAGAR. How many angels spoke with her? R. Levi said: < Five >, (The figure comes from Codex Vaticanus Ebr. 34.) but our masters have said three. (Cf. Gen. R. 45:7.) Now surely, if the slave woman talks with the angels, do not be surprised at Jacob having sent out angels. It is therefore written (in Gen. 32:4 [3]): THEN JACOB SENT ANGELS.
[(Gen. 32:4 [3]:) < THEN JACOB SENT ANGELS > BEFORE HIM UNTO HIS BROTHER ESAU.] What is the meaning of BEFORE HIM? < That > he (Esau) receives (The translation has emended the text from nophel (“falls”) to notel (“receives”).) the kingdom BEFORE HIM because in this world the kingdom is his, but you are receiving it ultimately. (Ibid.:) UNTO HIS BROTHER ESAU. And the Holy Spirit says: Jacob is sending away unto Esau. (Two manuscripts read, “Alas, Jacob is sending away to Esau.”)
(Ibid., cont.:) TO THE LAND OF SEIR IN THE FIELDS OF EDOM. [What is the meaning of TO THE LAND OF SEIR (rt.: S'R)?] That he makes one's hair (rt.: S'R) stand on end. TO THE FIELDS OF EDOM (rt.: 'DM). (Gen. R. 63:12; 75:4.) He is red (rt.: 'DM), his food is red, his warriors are red, his attire is red, his shields are red, his land is red, the one who stands up to him is red, and the one who exacts retribution from him is red in red attire. He is red (according to Gen. 25:25): THE FIRST (i.e., Esau) CAME FORTH RUDDY. His food is red (according to Gen. 25:30): < PLEASE LET ME GULP DOWN > SOME OF THIS RED RED STUFF. His warriors are red (according to Nahum 2:4): HIS WARRIORS' SHIELDS ARE RED. His attire is red (according to ibid., cont.): AND HIS SOLDIERS ARE CLOTHED IN CRIMSON. His shields are red (according to ibid.): HIS WARRIORS' SHIELDS ARE RED. His land is red (rt.: 'DM) (according to Gen. 32:4 [3]): TO THE LAND OF SEIR IN THE FIELDS OF EDOM (rt.: 'DM). The one who stands up to him is red. This is David (according to I Sam. 16:12): SO HE SENT AND BROUGHT HIM. NOW HE WAS RUDDY. And what < else > is written about him (in II Sam. 8:14)? HE PUT GARRISONS IN EDOM. And the < the Holy One >, who exacts retribution from him, is red (according to Cant. 5:10): MY BELOVED IS BRIGHT AND RUDDY. (Is. 63:1:) WHO IS THIS COMING FROM EDOM (rt.: 'DM)? < He comes > in red attire (according to vs. 2): WHY IS YOUR CLOTHING SO RED … ?
They said that He is merciful, but He is more than merely merciful, For the Lord thy God is a merciful God (Deut. 4:31); the Lord is full of compassion and gracious (Ps. 103:8); The Lord is good to all (ibid. 145:9); To the Lord our God belong compassion and forgiveness (Dan. 9:9). They said that He is a true judge (but He is more than a judge), for the Judgment is God’s (Deut. 1:17); God standeth in the congregation of God; in the midst of the judges He judgeth (Ps. 82:1). It says also: The Rock, His work is perfect; for all His ways are justice (ibid. 32:4). They said: He is faithful, yet He is more than simply faithful: The faithful God (ibid. 7:9); A God of faithfulness (ibid. 32:4). They said He is praiseworthy, but He is more than merely praiseworthy, as it is said: For who in the skies can be compared unto the Lord? (Ps. 89:7). It also says: A God dreaded in the council of the holy ones (Ps. 98:8); O Lord God of hosts, who is a mighty one like unto thee, O Lord? (ibid., v. 9); O Lord God of hosts, who is like unto thee among the gods, O Lord? (ibid. 86:8). It says likewise: My beloved is white and ruddy, His head is as the most fine gold. His hands are as rods of gold. His legs are as pillars of marble (Song 5:15).
And Jacob sent messengers (Gen. 32:4). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: And the Lord uttereth His voice before His army; for his camp is very great, for He is mighty that executeth His word; for great is the day of the Lord and very terrible; and who can abide it? (Joel 2:11). This verse alludes to the giving of the Torah. When the Holy One, blessed be He, descended to give the Torah to Israel, myriads of chariots accompanied Him, as it is said: The chariots of God are myriads, even thousands upon thousands (Ps. 68:18).
Jacob took all the tithe of his possessions and sent it by the hand of his servants, and gave it to Esau, saying to them: Say ye || to him, "Thus saith thy servant Jacob" (Gen. 32:4). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! That which was holy hast thou made profane? He replied to Him: Sovereign of all worlds ! I flatter the wicked, so that he should not slay me. Hence the (wise men) say, we may flatter the wicked in this world for the sake of the ways of peace. Esau said to him: O my brother, I have enough; as it is said, "And Esau said, I have enough" (Gen. 33:9). And because he gave honour to Jacob, therefore the sons of Jacob paid honour to the sons of Esau with the same expression; as it is said, "Ye have compassed this mountain long enough" (Deut. 2:8). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! Is it not enough for thee that thou hast made profane that which is holy? Nay, but I have said, "And the elder shall serve the younger" (Gen. 25:23); and yet thou hast said, "Thy servant Jacob" (Gen. 32:4). By thy life ! it shall be according to thy words; he shall rule over thee in this world, and thou shalt rule over him in the world to come. Therefore Jacob said to him (Esau): "Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servant" (Gen. 33:14). Hence thou mayest learn that the sons of Esau will not fall until a remnant from Jacob shall come, and cut off the feet of the children of Esau from Mount Seir, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will descend. "And there shall not be any remaining to the house of Esau; for the Lord hath spoken it" (Obad. 18).
On (32, 4): וישלח יעקב מלאכים לפניו אל עשו אחיו ארצה שעיר שדה אדום,"Jacob sent angels (resp. human messengers) ahead of him to his brother Esau to the land of Se'ir," Rashi comments that these were "real" angels. If that were so, it is difficult to understand Jacob making use of holy beings for a secular, totally private mission. He could just as well have sent human messengers! We have an explicit ruling that even nowadays, when the כהן cannot perform sacred duties due to the absence of the Temple, one must not employ a כהן to perform mundane tasks. How then could Jacob employ angels for such a purpose? (gloss of the Mordechai on Gittin).
Let me now pursue my own path in explaining all the unusual phrasings in the text as listed earlier. According to the author of Bereshit Rabbah 74,4 the מלאכים sent ahead by Jacob were of the flesh and blood variety; unnamed other scholars claim that they were angels. Remember that the struggle between Jacob and his adversary occurred on two levels, the physical and the spiritual, with Esau in this world and with Samael in the Celestial Regions. The latter had an excuse to challenge Jacob's moral integrity for Jacob had married two sisters, as explained. We have mentioned that though Jacob had a legal excuse for what he did, it was not considered appropriate for a man of his stature, whose features were engraved on G–d's throne, to avail himself of such an excuse. Jacob's name on G–d's throne made a profound impression in the Celestial Regions. We know from the description in Chulin 91 that in Jacob's dream the two angels ascending and the two angels descending compared the features engraved on the throne of G–d with the features of Jacob on earth. They threatened Jacob's life because they found discrepancies between the respective features. As a result, G–d quickly intervened and placed Himself on top of the ladder in order to protect Jacob.
The words ארצה שעיר, שדה אדום, allude to both the physical and the spiritual domain. ארצה שעיר is an allusion to Samael, whose share in the world is the שעיר, the goat or scape-goat, which is offered to him "as a bribe" on the Day of Atonement, as will be explained in due course. Another reason he is called Se'ir is that Samael is identical with Satan, or the evil urge; to his people [those who are held in his sway, Ed.] he appears like a שער, as thin and insignificant as a hair. The message is that for צדיקים Mount Se-ir, i.e. the threat of the evil urge, looms large as a mountain, whereas for the sinners it appears as insignificant as a hair. To carry this hyperbole a little further: When the Torah described Esau-Edom-Se'ir as completely covered with hair, (25,25) this is an allusion to his being as full of sins as a fur coat is full of hair. When the Torah also described the destination of Jacob's emissaries as שדה אדום, it merely described Esau=Edom their destination on earth.
We have now explained this פרשה inasmuch as it refers to Jacob personally. We must remember that Jacob is also a symbol of his descendants. All the experiences of the patriarchs are viewed as forerunners of the experiences of the Jewish people as a whole. Nachmanides has demonstrated this in great detail. Bereshit Rabbah 75,3, describing the gifts Jacob sent to Esau, quotes Proverbs 26, 17: "He who passes by and meddles in a quarrel not his own is like someone who takes a dog by his ears." G–d is quoted as saying to Jacob: "Esau was pursuing his own personal designs and you had to send him gifts describing yourself as his servant!" During the second Temple the rulers of the Jewish people voluntarily entered into a political alliance with Rome, only to eventually be devoured by the Romans. This alliance was the beginning of the decline of Jewish independence. All the struggles between Jacob and Esau mirror what was going to happen later on a national scale. Bereshit Rabbah goes on to comment on 32, 9: "If Esau comes to the one camp and smites it, then the remaining camp will escape." It is our experience in exile that when Jews are persecuted in the South, that they find relief in another part of the globe. The "thigh joint" of Jacob that the angel "touched," is also understood as referring to Jacob's descendants.
Thus, in the case of Jacob, I admit that the entire narrative of “and Jacob sent messengers” (4. Gen. 32:4 ff.) occurred as something seen in a dream. Nonetheless, in my opinion Jacob carried this out when he awoke, as happened in many such cases. (5. Maimonides, in the Guide II:42, asserts that the entire section occurred in a vision, including the preparations for the meeting with Esau (vv. 14-24) and the wrestling with the angel (vv. 25-32). Kaspi, both here and in the Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 22), asserts that the intermediary passage, where Jacob prepared to meet Esau, did occur outside of the prophetic vision.) As for the wrestling with the angel, (6. Gen. 32:25-32.) this never occurred other than in a dream. The touching of the hollow of his thigh (and the passage following) until “the sinew of the thigh vein” (7. Gen. 32:26, 33. This comment is intended to answer the following problem: If indeed the wrestling with the angel was but a mental occurrence, how and why did Jacob limp in the morning (v. 32)?) was intended as an allusion to evil events that would befall Jacob in respect of women, for nasheh (“thigh vein”) is equivocal, (8. The Hebrew term could also be taken as the root for ’ishah (“woman”); consequently, the maiming of that limb would be an oblique allusion to being maimed on account of woman. Accordingly, Jacob was maimed in the thigh during the course of the vision, through some divine instrument.) similar to ḥovlim and the like. (9. Cf. Guide II:43, which refers to ḥovlim and other instances of metathesis. On Kaspi’s use of metathesis, see above Chapter 2.) Accordingly he experienced the events of Dinah, (10. He is referring to the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) Rachel, (11. He is referring to the tragic death of Rachel in Gen. 35:16 ff.) and Rebeccah’s handmaid. (12. Gen. 35:8. All three instances caused Jacob much grief.)
NEITHER SHALT THOU SET THEE UP A PILLAR. For an idol, as which the Lord thy God hateth proves. (God hates a pillar set up to an idol.) However, a pillar which is not set up for idol worship is permitted. The most convincing proof of this is found in the portion which opens with the words And Jacob sent (Gen. 32:4). (There, Scripture (Gen. 35:14) relates that Jacob set up a pillar to God. Also see I.E. on Gen. 28:17, (Vol. 1, p. 279), where he writes that Scripture does not prohibit a pillar to honor God.)
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, in Bereshit Rabbah 63,12 expanding on that theme, said that just as Esau himself was red, so his food was red, his country was red, his clothing was red and when the time comes that he has to give an accounting for his crimes the payment demanded from him will be red, i.e. blood. Mount Seir, which was the land allocated to Esau was also known as ארץ אדום, “the red land” (Genesis 32,4). The Midrash quotes verses documenting Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish’s statement.
According To Bereshit Rabbah 65,13 the words שא נא כליך are a reference to the Kingdom of Babylon as we read in Daniel 1,2 ואת הכלים הביא בבלה, “and the vessels (Temple utensils) he (Nebuchadnezzar) brought to Babylon.” The word תליך, “your quiver,” refers to the Medes as we read in Esther 7,10 ויתלו את המן, “they hung Haman.” The word וקשתך, “and your bow,” is a reference to the Greek Empire as we read in Zechariah 9,13: כי דרכתי לי יהודה קשת, “for I have drawn Yehudah taut as a bow, etc.;” finally, the words וצא השדה are a reference to the Roman Empire as we read in Genesis 32,2: ארצה שעיר שדה אדום, “to the land of Seir, which will become the field of Edom, Rome.”
AND HE WENT INTO A LAND. According to Onkelos, the meaning of this expression is “into another land.” But Rashi explained, “He went to stay wherever he could find room” for he went to no particular country but sought a country where he would find room to settle, until he came to mount Se’ir and settled there. In my opinion, the correct interpretation is that Scripture is saying: “And he went to the land of Se’ir,” the name of the place being omitted from the verse as it is self-understood since it has already been mentioned that he dwelled in the land of Se’ir, and it is understood that he led his family there, and right nearby, it is mentioned, And Esau dwelled in mount Se’ir. (Verse 8 here.) A similar case is found in this verse: He went into the castle of the king’s house, and burnt the king’s house over him with fire, (I Kings 16:18.) which means that house of the king in which he was. Similarly, And he burned the high place and stamped it small to powder, and burned the Asherah, (II Kings 23:15.) which means the high place which belonged to Jeroboam, who was mentioned in the beginning of the verse. So also: And Joab said to the Cushite: Go tell the king… And Cushite bowed down to Joab, (II Samuel 18:21.) [which means “the Cushite” mentioned] ; And an ass and the lion, (I Kings 13:28.) [which means “the ass” mentioned above in Verse 24]. So also: For ships were broken at Etzion-geber, (Ibid., 22:49. ) which means “the ships” [mentioned in the beginning of that verse] ; and there are many similar verses. Here also the expression, And he went into a land, is as if it said, “into the land,” i.e., the land of Se’ir which was mentioned.
Yaakov sent messengers before him to Eisov, his brother, to the Land of Seir, to the field of Edom.
And Jakob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother in the land of Gabla the territory of the Edomites,
| וַיְצַ֤ו אֹתָם֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר כֹּ֣ה תֹאמְר֔וּן לַֽאדֹנִ֖י לְעֵשָׂ֑ו כֹּ֤ה אָמַר֙ עַבְדְּךָ֣ יַעֲקֹ֔ב עִם־לָבָ֣ן גַּ֔רְתִּי וָאֵחַ֖ר עַד־עָֽתָּה׃ | 5 J | and instructed them as follows, “Thus shall you say, ‘To my lord Esau, thus says your servant Jacob: (Thus shall you say, ‘To my lord Esau, thus says your servant Jacob…’ Or “Thus you shall say to my lord Esau, ‘Thus says your servant Jacob…’”) I stayed with Laban and remained until now; |
(2) "And he commanded them saying" (Gen. 32:5) - the explanation of "commanded" is that it is an expression of alacrity, as in "The expression of command always implies alacrity" (Rashi on Lev. 6:2 and Kiddushin 29a:13) meaning, that the tzadik brings out his words from his holy mouth in holiness and alacrity, to such a degree that they become so strong [that] "to say" meaning that this thing will be said immediately, that Esav will have a turn about [and become] his brother, because obviously it is not appropriate to make this thing the essence of tefilah. Only through the Clinging that exists in the rest of the tzadik's tefilah, and the tzadik's words from the clean and lucid thoughts, immediately this word comes to fruition, that [the tzadik's] enemies make peace.
(4) "Thus you will say to my master, Esav" (Genesis 32:5) - behold the holy Torah teaches us how to behave in this bitter exile in which we are under the hand of the nations, and we are compelled to accept the exile with love until Hashem will have compassion towards us and redeems us in a complete redemption, soon. And while we are in the bitter exile we are compelled to be submissive to them and call them 'masters'. And this is "thus you will say to my master, to Esav" - meaning, call him master when you talk to him, and then he will continue to do evil to you, through taxes and forced contributions - they will be charged with stealing, and through this Hashem will have compassion on us, since it is enough that we should be submissive to them and give them honor.
(5) "I lived with Lavan and remained until now" (Genesis 32:5) - that behold, LaVaN has the same letters as scoundrel (NaVaL), which is the impulse to evil that is called scoundrel. And after a person merits to work on their two impulses, as it is said "with all your hearts - with both your impulses" then the impulse to evil is transformed into white [lavan] that is, Higher Whiteness [Loven HaElyon, keter]. And how can a person merit this? The essence is through submission, that one should hold oneself in this world as a resident alien [ger] and this is "with Lavan", meaning, that I merited that the impulse to evil was transformed from scoundrel to white. And there is a reason for that: "I lived" [garti], which is an expression for 'gerut'/conversion, meaning, I strengthened myself as a ger/convert with a great submission, and because of that it was not given to me to stay there for a few days, but "I was delayed/acher until now", meaning, I delayed in this work day after/achar day and year after year, and this is what I said (Mishnah Yoma 20:2) "and he already said 'Answer Hashem" and his voice was heard", meaning, that for a long time a person needs to cry out "answer Hashem, help me so I will merit to serve You in truth", and then, one's voice will be heard, but this does not happen quickly, in a short period of time.
"And I have sent these to you to find favor in your eyes” (Genesis 32:5). Later, it repeats, “To find favor in the eyes of my master” (Genesis 32:8). Yaakov was likely truthful, aiming to draw Eisav closer, as the word הגדה implies drawing out, like sinews. Although Eisav could not reach Yaakov's spiritual level, if he found Yaakov’s path appealing and nullified himself to it, he too would achieve rectification. This is the idea behind the gifts, as Rashi explains. Each person must prepare against the evil inclination through appeasement, gifts, and battle, to prevent it from controlling their life. However, one cannot rely solely on personal efforts and must beseech Hashem for mercy to overcome the evil inclination and its tricks, as our sages state: "If Hashem does not help, one cannot prevail" (Kiddushin 30b). The concept of gifts also involves awakening Hashem’s mercy on negative desires, recognizing that everything, even those seemingly disconnected from the divine, belongs to Him and was created for His glory. Thus, one should seek comprehensive rectification, not only personal salvation but also the subjugation of all evil forces.
לאדני, לעשו, “to my lord, to Esau.” We find Yaakov addressing Esau as “my lord,” no fewer than eight times in this portion. This may be the reason why eight kings ruled in the land of Edom before the first king ruled in the land of Israel.
כה אמר עבדך יעקב, “thus has said your obedient servant Yaakov;” Yaakov used this subservient posture in order to cool Esau’s burning anger at what he perceived that Yaakov had done to him. He hinted broadly that his father’s blessing which had portrayed Esau as subservient to him had not been fulfilled at all. In fact, he, Yaakov, was quite ready to recognise his older brother as also his senior.
עם לבן גרתי, he explains that he had learned to adopt such a wealth of animals and servants this was due to my having stayed with my uncle many years. If he had stayed in someone else’s house during all these years he would still be penniless. An alternate explanation of the line: “I have sojourned with Lavan; ”you are aware that I stayed with Lavan as my father and mother have commanded me.” He said this in order to underline that Esau should not flatter himself that he had been a fugitive from Esau’s wrath. A third alternate exegesis of these words: Esau should not be cross that he had not come sooner to pay his respects to him; the only reason for this was that he had been indentured to Lavan under contract.
וישלח יעקב...כה תאמרון לאדוני לעשו, Yaakov sent......thus you shall say to my lord, to Esau: Yaakov was punished for referring to Esau as “my lord.” G–d said to him: “I have said to your mother that the older of her sons will serve the younger” (Genesis 25,23) and you have taken it upon yourself to address your elder brother as “my lord” eight times? This is why in this portion we will read that eight kings ruled over the kingdom of Esau (Edom) before the first king ruled over Israel. This is why this very point has been recorded in this portion at the end of this portion (Genesis 36,31-43)
THUS SHALL YE SAY UNTO MY LORD. Jacob used this language so that it would be clear to them that Esau was his lord and they should address him as a servant addresses his master.
AND STAYED UNTIL NOW. The alef of echar (and stayed) is a first person imperfect prefix. It is vocalized with a tzere to make up for the missing alef of the root. (The root of echar is alef, chet, resh. In the first person imperfect an alef vocalized with a segol is prefixed to the root. Our word thus should have been written e’echar (two alefs respectively vocalized with a segol and a chataf segol). However, it is written echar and has only one alef and is vocalized with a tzere. I.E. points out that this alef is not a root letter. It is a first person imperfect prefix vocalized with a tzere rather than a segol to make up for the missing root letter.) Ehav (I love) in I love them (ehav) that love me (Prov. 8:17) is similar. (The root of ahav (love) is alef, heh, bet. Thus the first person imperfect should be e’ehav. However, the verse has ehav, one alef vocalized with a tzere. See above note.) The alef of the root is dropped because it is extremely difficult to pronounce two alefs back to back. Echar is a kal.
Or “Thus you shall say to my lord Esau, ‘Thus says your servant Jacob:…’”
ויצו אותם לאמור, He instructed them to say, etc. We must first understand the reason for the word לאמור, seeing that Jacob had already said to these messengers: "thus you shall say." Perhaps Jacob meant that they should tell Esau that they had been instructed to say precisely the words they were about to say. Otherwise, Esau might form the impression that the messengers related to him with deference and called him "his master," being aware that he was the senior brother and that it was only common courtesy to address him in that fashion, but that Jacob himself had never uttered the word אדון in relation to his brother. Jacob wanted to be sure that Esau realised that he himself had addressed him as אדון, master. He did so in order to remove any vestige of hatred and jealousy Esau might still, harbour against him in his heart. Were this not the true reason it is difficult to understand why Jacob should refer to Esau as his master even while Esau was not present. We must conclude therefore that Jacob used this term of flattery in order to avoid a possible war between himself and Esau.
עם לבן גרתי, "I have sojourned with Laban, etc." What precisely did Jacob tell Esau in this speech that Esau had not known? Perhaps it is the custom between brothers who are on good terms with one another to exchange details about their experiences in life. Jacob may have done so in order to show that he considered himself on good terms with Esau.
In addition Jacob may have acted very cleverly by implying that there was no point in Esau behaving in a hostile manner, that Laban had already tried this for many years and it had not benefited him at all. The words: עם לבן גרתי were a veiled reference to the wickedness of that man. If he, Jacob, after so many years in the house of that man returned now as a wealthy man with a large family this was proof that it paid to be on good terms with a man such as he. He added: ואחר עד עתה, I delayed my return until now, meaning that all of his wealth had not been acquired in a short period of time but that his success had been ongoing. When he added that he had acquired a substantial amount of wealth, he intimated that his wealth notwithstanding he described himself as junior, as "a servant" to his older brother. His words were designed to melt even a heart of stone.
כה תאמרון לאדוני לעשו, this what you are to say to my lord Esau, etc.” This does not mean that Yaakov addressed Esau as “my lord” even in his absence. It means that Yaakov instructed messengers that if they would be asked they were to say that what they were guarding and guiding was destined as “a gift for my lord Esau”, just as the Torah describes in verse 19.
עם לבן גרתי, “I have stayed with Lavan, etc.” He was anxious to at one and the same time describe the fact that he had not stayed away from home for 22 years out of fear of his brother’s vengeance, but had remained with Lavan as he had had to work very hard. We find the words גרתי משך in that context in Psalms 120,5 where the psalmist bemoans the fact that he had to dwell for a long time with the Meshech and the clans of Kedar. Secondly, he informed Esau that he had become very wealthy though this was of secondary importance to him. G’d had granted him wealth in return for his hard labour. His wealth was the result of the sweat of his brow, he had not inherited it from his fathers. Had his wealth derived from an inheritance, Esau would have been entitled to his share of the inheritance. Thirdly, he wanted Esau to know that he came in peace and was interested in a brotherly relationship with Esau. He was sending the messengers and the gifts to prepare the way for a friendly reunion.
ויצו אותם לאמור. He commanded them to use precisely the words Yaakov instructed them to use in the following verse, i.e. כה תאמרו “you shall say precisely these words!” This is clear from the fact that Yaakov charged his messengers to say to Esau: “thus say to my lord Esau. He should have said only: “thus say to Esau when you meet him, etc.”
THUS SHALL YE SAY UNTO MY LORD ESAU: THUS SAITH THY SERVANT JACOB. He commanded them that they should say “to my lord Esau we belong,” or “we were sent to him,” (The intent of Ramban is to state that Jacob, speaking to his servants, did not refer to Esau as “my lord Esau,” but rather he commanded them to use the expression in Esau’s presence.) and to say to him, Thus saith thy servant Jacob: I have sojourned with Laban. A similar example in this section is the verse: When Esau my brother meeteth thee, and asketh thee, saying, Whose art thou? (Further, Verse 18. The verse concludes that they are to tell him that it is a gift “to my lord Esau.” Again Jacob is telling them what to say.) It may be that in their presence Jacob called Esau “my lord Esau” in order to caution them not to mention Esau in any other but a respectful way even when not in his presence, inasmuch as their lord calls him “my lord.” Know that this respect which Jacob showed for his brother by fearfully saying “my lord” and “thy servant” was due to it being the custom of the younger brother to give recognition and respect to the firstborn as if he were his father, just as the Torah also hints to us on this matter: (Kethuboth 103a. Commenting on the letter vav in the expression, ve’eth imecha (“honor thy father ‘and’ thy mother“), our Rabbis said: “This includes your oldest brother!”) “This includes your oldest brother.” Now Jacob had taken his birthright and his blessing, for which Esau hated him, and now he is acting towards Esau as if the effect of that sale was nil as far as he was concerned, and he is conducting himself towards him as to a firstborn and father in order to remove the hatred from his heart.
ויצו אותם לאמור, he commanded them and said to them: כה תאמרון, the messengers were oblivious of what it was that troubled Yaakov.
עם לבן גרתי, as you are aware of, I was there at the command of my father and mother. He said this so Esau would not think that he had run away on his account.
ואחר, the construction is similar to ואאחר, or as in Maleachi 1,2 ואוהב את יעקב “I displayed love for Yaakov.” In both instances this is an abbreviation for ואאהב. We have similar constructions in vaochal, vaomar, in both instances the first root letter is missing.
גרתי I HAVE SOJOURNED — I have become neither a prince nor other person of importance but merely a sojourner. It is not worth your while to hate me on account of the blessing of your father who blessed me (27:29) “Be master over thy brethren”, for it has not been fulfilled in me (Tanchuma Yashan 1:8:5). Another explanation: the word גרתי has the numerical value of 613 - תרי״ג - it is as much as to say, “Though I have sojourned with Laban, the wicked, I have observed the תרי״ג מצות, the 613 Divine Commandments, and I have learned naught of his evil ways.
(5-6) Wir haben oben gesehen, aus welchen Gründen Jakob arm aus dem väterlichen Hause fortgegangen war, und wenn er jetzt reich zurückkehrt und zumal Esau auch nicht mehr zu Hause ist, lag das Bedürfnis sehr nahe, dem Esau sagen zu lassen, daß, und wie er alles erworben. In drei Worten sagt er Esau das ganze Bittere und Prüfungsvolle seiner Vergangenheit. Fremd und unberechtigt sein ist überall hart, bei einem Laban sein unter allen Umständen eine harte Prüfung, עם לבן גרתי, als Fremder bei einem Laban seine Tage zuzubringen, vergegenwärtigt das bitterste Los. ואחר עד עתה und nicht aus Wohlbehagen, sondern gezwungen war ich, so lange zu bleiben. Ich wäre gerne früher gekommen. Allein bis vor sechs Jahren hatte ich nur Frauen und Kinder, aber noch nicht den ersten eigenen Groschen erworben. Auf diesem harten, wenig beneidenswerten Wege zwanzigjähriger Mühen bin ich zu dem gelangt. was ich habe. Ich habe es für Recht gehalten, dich dies wissen zu lassen, damit — dieses lange Leid Sühne für Vergangenes, und mein jetziger Wohlstand selbst mein Fürsprecher bei dir sein möge.
ואחר עד עתה. This is why I did not come to pay my respects to you until now.
I have not become an officer or anyone of importance... Otherwise it should simply say, “With Lavan I was delayed.”
Another explanation: The gematria of גרתי... I have kept תרי"ג commandments... Thus, you cannot defeat me. When your father blessed you that “you shall live by your sword” (27:40), that is only “When you have cause to be grieved” (ibid). [I.e., “When the Israelites will transgress the Torah.”] But I kept the whole Torah! Maharshal explains that Rashi is answering the question: Why did Yaakov say, “I have not become an officer...”? For this actually would allow the wicked Eisov to claim, “If the blessings were not fulfilled for you, you surely did not keep the mitzvos! Thus I should fulfill regarding you, ‘When you have cause to be grieved, you will throw off his yoke from your neck.’” Therefore Yaakov told him, “I kept all the 613 mitzvos. Nevertheless, I have not become an officer.”
I have oxen, donkeys, flocks, slaves, and maidservants. I have become financially secure since we last met, and I do not need your support. I can even offer you assistance, if you wish. 4 And I have sent to tell my lord, so that I may find favor in your eyes, in the manner of loving brothers anticipating their reunion.
כה תאמרו לאדוני לעשו, “thus you shall say to my lord, to Esau.” This does not mean that Yaakov called his brother: “my lord,” as this would not make sense unless you are in the presence of the person so described. It means that he commanded his servants to address Esau with the title “my lord, thus has said your servant Yaakov.” when they would meet him. It is also possible that that Yaakov did refer to Esau as “my lord” even when he was not in his presence in order to warn his messengers to address him with the proper degree of deference even when they were not in his presence. They would do so once they noticed that even their own master did so even in his absence. All of this was not an unusually obsequious behaviour by Yaakov, but it was customary for the younger brother to refer to his older brother in such terms, as a sign of respect. The reason the Torah reports all this, is to tell us that although Yaakov had purchased the birthright from his brother, he still considered him the senior brother, biologically speaking. He hoped to persuade Esau by this stratagem that the “birthright” in terms of personal honour, was of no concern to him whatsoever.
עם לבן גרתי, ”I have sojourned with Lavan, etc.” I have stayed all this time even though he kept treating me like a stranger (and not like a son-in-law).
ואחר עד עתה, “I delayed my return until now.” I was not forced by external pressures to delay my return, but I did so of my own free will.
“I stayed with Laban” [32:5]. He told them to say to Esau. You hate me for nothing, since I was only a servant and no lord, in the house of Laban. The blessing of my father that he blessed me that I should be a lord over my brothers was not fulfilled for me. Therefore, he said, “I stayed.” He meant by this, there are six hundred and thirteen commandments in the Torah. (The gematria of the word “I stayed” [garti] is six hundred and thirteen.) That is to say, Jacob said to Esau, do not think because I lived with the evildoer Laban, that I did not observe the Torah, and you will vanquish me. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:5.) Since our father said that when Jacob will not study Torah, then Esau will have dominion over Jacob. Therefore, I am telling you that even though I lived with Laban, yet I studied Torah. (Devek Tov, Rashi, Genesis, 32:5, note 1.)
According to Bereshit Rabbah 39, Abraham reportedly said to G-d, "Did not Noach become the founding father of seventy nations?" G-d however, replied that the nation of which it would be said "Who is such a great nation?" (Deut 4,7) will be descended from Abraham. The need to state that those who curse Abraham will be cursed, is ample proof of his erstwhile unpopularity, and of the fact that Abraham had to suffer greatly for his beliefs. Henceforth, however, his detractors would be cursed, and he himself would be visibly blessed. In fact, his very existence would promote blessings for the rest of mankind. (4) Abraham departed Ur Kasdim and Charan, thereby fulfilling G-d’s command. By retaining his wife and nephew however, the separation from his "birthplace" and "father's house" was less than complete. Also, he was careful to take along his material wealth. He not only did not protest the company of Lot etc., but he actively solicited that company, i.e. vayikach, he took. (5) This is why the Torah mentions the presence of those people three times. Abraham proceeded unimpeded until Shechem, notwithstanding the fact that the Canaanite was at that time in the process of driving the Semites out of the country. In such troubled times, a newcomer like Abraham could have expected to suffer at the hands of both adversaries in the struggle for possession of that country. (6) At that time, G-d promised Abraham that the present turmoil would not produce permanent ownership of that land by the Canaanites, but that this land would ultimately belong to a nation yet to be founded by Abraham. In fact, had it not been for the conquest by the Canaanites, taking the land from the Semites and giving it to one family, i.e. the descendants of Abraham, would have been difficult to justify. Gittin 38 explains the justification for Israel's conquest of the land of Sichon and Og in a similar fashion, i.e. the illegal conquest of most of Ammon and Moab by Sichon and Og had paved the way for Israel dispossessing Sichon and Og eventually (in a war started by Sichon). (7) In response to that promise by G-d, Abraham built an altar, but could not very well proclaim his true belief in G-d and call for others to follow him until near Bet El; he settled down in a peaceful atmosphere. Proclaiming the sovereignty of G-d there would be more likely to produce positive results, away from the turmoil of war in other parts of the country. (8) Perhaps because he was still in the company of Lot and other less idealistically inspired fellow travellers, as well as lacking the benefits of circumcision, he decided to ride out the famine in Canaan in neighbouring Egypt. For that reason, he may not have received direct guidance from G-d on the subject. Probably, Abraham considered the certainty of impoverishment, animosity, and likely attack by surrounding tribes, as outweighing the possible dangers in Egypt. Jacob was moved by similar considerations when he complained about his sons' delay in travelling to Egypt to secure a food supply. The appearance of being affluent was in itself capable of inviting attack from those less fortunate (Genesis 42). Similarly, the four outcasts in Kings II Chapter 7 considered any chance of survival in the enemy camp as offering a better chance than certain death by famine in the city or in their primitive place of refuge. No doubt, Abraham had instructed Sarah to assume this brother/sister relationship even before they arrived in Egypt, since he could not reasonably have expected the Egyptians to make enquiries about Sarah's marital status. Surely, the normal thing was for a man to travel with his wife. (9+10+11) Therefore, the brother/sister relationship had to be demonstrated at the outset, so as to prevent any danger to Abraham. He assumed that either his goodwill would be sought actively, i.e. "so that I shall benefit on your account," or that at the very least his survival would be assured i.e. "I shall remain alive on your account." David's conduct in Gat (Samuel I Chapter 22) was motivated by the same considerations. In view of the fact that the Egyptians would most likely react to Sarah's physical beauty, Abraham referred to the fact of her beauty as something that had, of course, been known to him for a long time, but not until then had it been a factor to be considered in their public behavior. (12) He also realized that in the event of his own death, Sarah would consider her own survival under such circumstances as a fate worse than death. Therefore, the entire household maintained the fiction of Abraham and Sarah being brother and sister, so that when Pharaoh later said, "She also said he is my brother," he meant that Sarah had only confirmed the facts which he had already ascertained. There could not therefore be a question of him having stolen another man's wife. The Torah testifies that there had in fact been no need to deny the husband/wife relationship in order to protect themselves against Pharaoh. After Abraham had used all the intellectual faculties at his command to survive the trip to Egypt, G-d now intervened to prevent Pharaoh from forcing his attentions on the presumably single Sarah. G-d’s intervention had become necessary to prevent Abraham and Sarah having problems as a result of their machinations, not despite their machinations. Pharaoh was obviously smitten by G-d in a way that made him impotent, and demonstrated to him that the punishment inflicted upon him was related to his attempt to rape Sarah. Pharaoh did not blame Abraham for having taken precautions to protect himself and his wife, knowing full well that these precautions were justified. What Pharaoh did object to was that Abraham had not at least told him privately, i.e. lee (the word is used repeatedly), what the true relationship between Sarah and him had been. The fact that he had to issue a command to his people not to molest Abraham (Genesis 12,20) proves that Abraham's estimate of the morality of Pharaoh's subjects had been quite accurate. That Abraham could not use the argument he was later to use with Avimelech was obvious, since Pharaoh had challenged Abraham concerning Abraham's evaluation of himself, and not his evaluation of his people. Just because his people were more law-abiding in matters of morality than the Egyptians, Avimelech could challenge the fact that Abraham had seen fit to use deception, and construe it as an insult against his people. The events that occurred in Egypt at this time serve to disabuse us of two erroneous attitudes. 1) The belief that if only human intellect, effort and caution is employed, success is guaranteed. 2) That since everything is in the hands of G-d anyways, our efforts to alter that which seems in store for us are futile and doomed to failure. Therefore, a life of passive acceptance of all dangers ought to be the only path to follow. Abraham had employed all his wits, had made extensive efforts, taken precautions, all to no avail; only then did G-d intervene to smite Pharaoh at the critical moment. Isaiah 50,10-11 conveys a similar lesson. In verse 10, a person relying on G-d is depicted as walking in darkness, relying solely on G-d to provide light. In verse 11, however, those who rely on their own light exclusively, are also scored by the prophet. When the following verse (Isaiah 51,2) states, "Look towards Abraham and Sarah," the message is clearly that the proper way to behave can be learned only by studying what happened to our two ancestors who were called upon to act and whose actions and efforts were blessed by G-d. The Torah proceeds to tell us that Abraham returned to where he came from, that he accumulated material wealth. Though he returned greatly enriched materially, his spiritual path only took him back to Bet El, he had not made notable progress in that area of his life. This may have been due to his having kept Lot, whom he should not have taken along in the first place, at his side. He should have observed G-d’s original command in its entirety. (13) Under the circumstances, G-d now began to prepare the scenario that would lead to the separation of the two men. The scenario was provided by the fact that the land could not support their combined wealth. The company of Lot was no longer suitable for the tzaddik. The mention of the Canaanites as well as the Perusites being in the land of Canaan which they were in the process of conquering from the descendants of Shem, provided the contrast to the rift that developed between the shepherds of Lot and those of Abraham. Abraham realized that the quarrel between the shepherds would lead to an estrangement between their respective masters and, though he was the senior, offered Lot the choice of the areas available. He could have driven Lot away by force, but refrained, thereby demonstrating that material possessions were not uppermost in his system of values. Lot was unabashed in choosing the most fertile land, ignoring the fact that its inhabitants were the most sinful people, more sinful than the ones G-d had bidden Abraham to part company with when He had ordered him out of Ur. Abraham's essential strength of character was displayed clearly in this event, and this is one of the reasons why immediately upon the departure of Lot, we read about the explicit promise of G-d regarding the future ownership of the land of Canaan. This time G-d is much more specific in the promise, seeing that Abraham had renounced material wealth as a primary consideration in his thinking. Also, the apparent success of the Canaanites wresting more of the land from the Semites as evidenced by the two Canaanite tribes already settling there made it necessary for G-d to point out that such possession by the Canaanites would be temporary. We also observe that as long as Abraham remained in the company of Lot, he suffered the temporary absence of his wife, i.e. he was imposed upon. (14) Immediately after his separation from Lot, he becomes capable of defeating the mightiest four kings of their time when he liberates Lot and secures a great deal of booty. No doubt the sequence of these events is to teach that Abraham's spiritual growth had been impeded by the physical proximity of Lot, and could now resume its normal progress. The details about the exploits of these four kings serve to underline their power and the greatness of Abraham's achievement in defeating them. Also, although Abraham had heard about Lot's capture only by implication, he had reacted promptly. The palit, escapee, in 14,13 probably only related to the fact that the five kings had lost the battle and that any survivors had been captured. Abraham having "heard" must be understood in a sense similar to Genesis 23,16, when Abraham had not really "heard" with his ears. Or, like in Esther Chapter 4, when Mordechai is reported as having "heard" about the plot to assassinate the king. That, too, may not have been "hearing" in the literal sense of the word. Despite those quite imprecise reports, Abraham mobilized the forces at his command to engage in a war in order to rescue his nephew. Even at this stage, Abraham had not ceased to feel brotherly responsibility for the safety of Lot. (15) During the encounter with Malki Tzedek, who appeared while Abraham was discussing the spoils of war with the king of Sodom, who himself had been a prisoner rescued by Abraham, the former acknowledged that the spoils rightfully belonged to Abraham. Abraham, however, demonstrated his attitude towards material possessions even more clearly on this occasion. The king of Sodom had the nerve to offer Abraham the spoils, though they were not even his to dispose of. Abraham swore an oath that he would not allow the king of Sodom to lose even a shoelace, except for the food which had been consumed by Abraham's soldiers during the campaign. Abraham was not motivated by haughtiness; he simply did not want his attitude to material wealth to be compared to that of the king of Sodom. He did not want the Sodomites to think that if part of his wealth had its physical origin in the former belongings of the Sodomites, the whole of his wealth must be of similar caliber. He wanted to emphasize that whereas the purpose of the Sodomites was to accumulate wealth in this world, he himself was interested in accumulating wealth in a higher world. In an allegorical sense, one may see in the king of Sodom's invitation the lure of Satan who says to the warrior who has risked his life to amass the spoils of war, "Give me your soul and take for yourself the material things in life." This, of course, is the path which will leave man eventually bereft of both material and spiritual values when he dies. Abraham's response to all those who follow in his footsteps throughout the ages has been, "I have raised my hand to G-d, I will not benefit in the least from the material gains of this struggle, I will not sell my soul except to the extent that physical comforts are instrumental in ensuring my success in my efforts to attain spiritual maturity." This too is the attitude towards wealth expressed by Solomon in Kohelet 5,18. "Also when the Lord gives a man wealth and properties, and He gives him the power to enjoy those and to benefit from his toils, all this is a gift from the Almighty." Since perfection of the human being is unattainable without the help of G-d, and is achieved only gradually, step by step, it is fitting that Abraham from hereon in makes further progress on the ladder of spiritual achievements.
Isaac became suspicious on several counts. The speedy return of the one whom he thought to be Esau was puzzling. He detected a change in Esau's voice. Jacob's reply that G-d had assisted him made Isaac even more suspicious, since he was not used to Esau employing that mode of expression. Therefore, Isaac insisted on feeling Jacob, to reassure himself that his senses had not deceived him, and that his suspicions were in fact unfounded. When relying on his sense of touch, noting that the arms he touched were hairy like those of Esau, Isaac trusted the wrong one of his senses. When Isaac asked a third time, "Are you indeed my son Esau?” Jacob, realizing what bothered his father, kept his reply brief, saying merely, "It is I." In this way he did not give his father's sense of hearing additional leverage. Isaac proceeded to eat the food by means of which he hoped to secure additional evidence as to who stood before him, using his sense of taste. Rebecca who knew Isaac's preferences, had been able to prepare the food in a manner that would not arouse Isaac's suspicions. Isaac asked Jacob to come closer, so that he could employ his sense of smell better, a usually reliable guide. Having obtained evidence by three of his senses (taste, touch and smell) that the correct son stood before him, Isaac considered this sufficiently conclusive and proceeded with the blessing. "He blessed" summarizes the essence, i.e. the spiritual blessing. The words, "May the Lord grant you etc." the material wealth promised, was designed primarily to protect the recipient against the dangers lurking around us at all times. Material wealth is a tool to help our personality development. Using the word "G-d" underlines that these gifts are to be employed only in the service of G-d, not as an end in themselves. When Solomon offered a prayer on the occasion of the dedication of the temple, in which he asked G-d that prayers offered in the temple be answered by G-d, he also qualified his remarks. Concerning prayers offered by Jews, he stipulated that such Jews be deserving; concerning prayers offered by gentiles, he made no such stipulation (Kings I Chapter 8). (5) Since Isaac was convinced that whoever stood before him was meant to receive the blessing, he added the words, "Those that curse you shall be cursed and those that bless you shall be blessed." When Esau arrived, literally seconds after Isaac had concluded blessing Jacob, Isaac became frightened, realizing that the very timing might be evidence of Divine interference. Moreover, having just said "Whosoever will curse you shall be cursed," he realized that he was in no position to retract without the danger of bringing a curse upon himself. By saying about Jacob "he shall also remain blessed," Isaac may have had two reasons: 1) to confirm what he had just done unwittingly, after absorbing the lesson of the sequence of events; 2) to counteract the impression that his agitation had been directed against Jacob, in favor of Esau. As long as Esau thought that only material blessings were involved, he felt confident that he could obtain his share of those blessings also; only after observing the great agitation of his father, did it dawn on him that something more fundamental was at stake. Being Esau, however, he was unable to comprehend that the kind of blessing that Isaac had just given away could not be bestowed on more than one person. For this reason, Isaac said to Esau "your brother came with deceit and took your blessing," referring to that part of the blessing which had not been spelled out in detail, but had merely been referred to by the Torah as "he blessed him." Esau, realizing that his father sided with Jacob since he had not retracted the blessing, exclaimed, "Did he not call him crooked?" meaning that Isaac already at birth, when he named his brother Jacob, had foreseen that he would act deceitfully later on in life, and would thus live up to his name. In stating that this was already the second time that he, Esau, had been victimized by Jacob, Esau's outcry was directed at his father. He asked a third time, "Have you not saved a blessing for me?" He is aware that no living person divests himself of all his possessions. This is in order not to become a charge on public or private charity. (Baba Batra 146). Isaac is forced to explain the nature of the blessing he had given Jacob before he can bless Esau with material blessings. He therefore reviews the terms of the blessing, emphasizing that Jacob has been made the most important human being, the carrier of the destiny of mankind, compared to whom all other people are of secondary importance. The blessing is not one of physical dominion over the rest of mankind; rather it is similar to the blessing Noach received after the deluge. At that time man had been made primary, relative to the animal kingdom, and making the animals sense this had been expressed in the words "and the fear of you shall be on all the beasts of the earth etc." (Genesis 9,2; see our commentary in chapter 15). When Esau still does not understand why he should go out empty-handed, seeing he had served his father far more delicacies than had his younger brother Jacob, Isaac responds to Esau's appeal by predicting that Esau's future would be financially secure. In fact, Esau does not receive a blessing. Isaac repeats that all the material blessings are based only on continued worthiness of the recipient. Esau's anger was not directed at the blessings themselves, concerning which his father had managed to assuage his feelings, but his anger was directed at the machinations by which those blessings had been obtained. He decided that though the act of murdering Jacob would precipitate his father's death, he would not let that bother him. Rebecca, hearing about Esau's plans, and aware now of the sale of the birthright being a second reason for Esau's anger at Jacob, realized that Esau's hatred would not abate. When she tells Jacob to flee because of "what you did to him," she refers to the sale of the birthright. She is sure that the matter of the blessing might have unpleasant results for herself but not for Jacob, since she had volunteered previously to suffer any consequences. She had not, however, assumed the consequences arising out of the sale of the birthright, something she had not even been aware of for the last forty-eight years. Even if Jacob were to kill Esau in self-defense, Esau's family would try and avenge their father's death. Rebecca therefore uses the argument of fearing to lose both her children to make the need for Jacob to flee absolute and beyond arguing. (6) Telling Isaac to send Jacob away to get himself a wife, while not influencing Esau who would see Jacob's departure as flight, would provide the shaliach mitzvah element for his journey. As such, it would act as additional protection for Jacob when he was on a mission of fulfilling the commandment of his father to take a wife and found a family. Esau's reaction is proof that Rebecca's plan worked. "Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob and sent him to Padan Aram to get himself a wife." Esau then proceeded to look for another wife, someone more pleasing to his parents. This shows that the matter of the blessing was no longer uppermost in his mind. The explicit instructions to go to Laban "who was such and such" all served to underline the purposeful, constructive nature of this journey. Laban, after all, was the uncle of Esau as well as of Jacob, and could hardly be expected to side with Jacob in the latter's dispute with his brother. When, many years later, Jacob says to Esau, "I have remained a stranger with Laban throughout all these years," he may well have referred to the fact that Laban could never have been viewed as a haven from Esau's anger, as a place of refuge.
The second tithe was commanded to be spent on food in Jerusalem: in this way the owner was compelled to give part of it away as charity. As he was not able to use it otherwise than by way of eating and drinking, he must have easily been induced to give it gradually away. This rule brought multitudes together in one place, and strengthened the bond of love and brotherhood among the children of men.
[4] Another interpretation: "And Jacob dwelled." In scriptures it is said: "For we are strangers before You, and sojourners, as were all our fathers" (1 Chronicles 29:15). This is the way of the righteous, who are the essence of the world and make themselves secondary. This is how Avraham was, who made himself secondary, as it says "I am a stranger and a sojourner among you" (Genesis 23:4). This is how Yaakov spoke to Esau, "I have sojourned with Laban" (Genesis 32:5). Similarly, Israel is written "strangers and sojourners" (Leviticus 25:23), therefore David says "Hear my prayer, O Lord, and give ear to my cry" (Psalm 39:13), why? Because I am a stranger with You, a sojourner, as were all my fathers. - [edit. this refers to world-to-come "as we are strangers in this world" (Leviticus 25:23)(Duties of the Heart, Fourth Treatise on Trust 4:61)]
“Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother, to the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” (Genesis 32:4). “Jacob sent messengers before him” – Rabbi Pinḥas in the name of Rabbi Reuven began: “Arise, Lord, confront him and subdue him. Rescue me from the wicked with Your sword” (Psalms 17:13) – Rabbi Pinḥas said: Five times in the book of Psalms, David calls for the Holy One blessed be He to arise: “Arise, Lord; save me, my God” (Psalms 3:8); “Arise, Lord, in Your anger” (Psalms 7:7); “Arise, Lord God, raise Your hand. Do not forget” (Psalms 10:12); “Arise, Lord; let man not be arrogant” (Psalms 9:20); “Arise, Lord, confront him” (Psalms 17:13). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘David, my son, even if you call for Me to rise many times, I will not rise. When will I rise? It is when the poor are robbed and the indigent are groaning.’ That is what is written: “Because of the robbery of the poor and the groans of the indigent [now I will arise]” (Psalms 12:6). Rabbi Yona said: “Now I will arise” (Psalms 12:6) – as long as it is wallowing in the ashes, as it were…. (The Holy One blessed be He is, as it were, also wallowing in the ashes.) Rather, when [comes] the day in whose regard it is written: “Shake the dust from you, arise and sit, Jerusalem” (Isaiah 52:2), at that moment: “Be silent, all flesh, before the Lord” (Zechariah 2:17). Why? “For He is roused from His abode of sanctity” (Zechariah 2:17). Rabbi Aḥa said: Like this rooster that moves itself from the ashes. “Confront him [kadma panav]” (Psalms 17:13) – give the wicked early, before he comes to greet You. (Give him his reward in this world, and repay him for his evil before he comes before You to repent.) “Subdue him [hakhri’ehu]” (Psalms 17:13) – tip the scales to condemn him [hakhriḥehu] and break him, just as it says: “They dropped to their knees [kare’u] and fell…” (Psalms 20:9). “Deliver me from the wicked with Your sword” (Psalms 17:13) – deliver my soul from that wicked one (Esau.) who comes by the power of that sword, as it is stated: “By your sword you shall live” (Genesis 27:40). Alternatively, deliver my soul from that wicked one, (Rome, descendants of Esau.) who is Your sword through whom You subjugate the world. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Deliver my soul from that wicked one who is destined to fall by your sword. That is what is written: “For My sword is sated in Heaven; [behold, it will descend upon Edom]” (Isaiah 34:5) – the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘He was going on his way, and then you are sending to him and saying: “So said your servant, Jacob”’ (Genesis 32:5). (Had you not sent to him, Esau would have continued on his way to Edom.)
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – why did he send messengers to him? Rather, this is what he said: ‘I will send him messengers; maybe he will repent.’ He said to them: ‘Say to him: Do not say Jacob remains as he was when he departed from his father’s house, as it is stated: “For with my staff I crossed…” (Genesis 32:11), “He commanded him, saying” (Genesis 32:5) – say to him: Do not say that when he departed from you he took anything from the household property. Rather, [tell him that] I acquired all these as my wages, through my effort,’ as it is stated: “And now I have become two camps” (Genesis 32:11). At the moment that Jacob called Esau “my lord,” the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You abased yourself and called him “my lord” eight times. As you live, I will establish eight kings from his descendants before your descendants,’ as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned [in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31). He [Jacob] said to them [the messengers]: ‘Say to him: If you are prepared for peace, I am with you, and if for war, I am with you. I have warriors, courageous and strong, who say something before the Holy One blessed be He, and He performs their will on their behalf,’ as it is stated: “He performs the will of those who fear him” (Psalms 145:19). That is why David came to give praise and acclaim before the Holy One blessed be He, who helped him when he fled from Saul, as it is stated: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow” (Psalms 11:2). What is written thereafter? “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous man do?” (Psalms 11:3). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, if You had distanced and forsook Jacob, who is the pillar and foundation of the world, as it is stated: “The righteous man is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25), “what can the righteous man do?”’ Regarding that moment, it is stated: “Some on chariots and some on horses, but we invoke the name of the Lord our God” (Psalms 20:8).
“He commanded them, saying: So you shall say to my lord, to Esau: So says your servant Jacob: I have resided with Laban, and tarried until now” (Genesis 32:5). “He commanded them, saying: So you shall say to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbeinu [Yehuda HaNasi] said to Rabbi Appas: ‘Write one letter in my name to our master, Emperor Antoninus.’ He stood and wrote: From Yehuda the Prince to our master, Emperor Antoninus. He took it, read it, and ripped it. He said to him: ‘Write: From your servant Yehuda to our master, Emperor Antoninus.’ He said to him: ‘My teacher, why are you demeaning your honor?’ He said to him: ‘In what way am I better than my ancestors? Did he not say this: “So says your servant Jacob”?’ “I have resided with Laban” – Laban, who is the master of the deceivers, I placed him up my sleeve; (I succeeded in overcoming his deceitfulness.) this man, (You, Esau.) all the more so. Why did I reside with Laban and “I tarried until now”? It is because the adversary of that man [Esau] had not yet been born. But now, the adversary of that man has been born, as Rabbi Pinḥas said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: There is a tradition that Esau will fall only into the hands of Rachel’s children. That is what is written: “Will the young of the flock not drag them?” (Jeremiah 49:20). Why does he call them “the young of the flock”? It is because they are the youngest of the tribes.
[(Gen. 32:4 [3]:) THEN JACOB SENT MESSENGERS. (The bracketed portion extends through the first words of the next section.) This text is related (to Prov. 25:26): A MUDDY SPRING, A POLLUTED SOURCE, IS A RIGHTEOUS PERSON WHO WAVERS BEFORE SOMEONE WICKED. (Tanh., Gen. 1:3; Gen. R. 75:2.) R. Judah b. R. Simon said: Just like a muddy spring and a polluted source, so it is when a righteous person wavers before someone wicked. Another interpretation: < Just as > it is possible for a spring to be muddy and a source to be polluted; < so > it is possible for a righteous person to waver before someone wicked. And who was this < waverer >? This was Jacob when he came from Paddan-aram. What does he < do > ? He sends out and says to Esau (according to Gen. 32:5 [4]): THUS YOU SHALL SAY TO MY LORD ESAU…. Ergo (in vs. 3): THEN JACOB SENT MESSENGERS.
(Gen. 32:4:) THEN JACOB SENT….] This text is related (to Prov. 26:17): A PASSER-BY WHO MEDDLES IN A QUARREL NOT HIS OWN IS LIKE ONE WHO SEIZES A DOG BY THE EARS. (Cf. Gen. R. 78:3.) Who is this person? This is Jacob. When he had set out from his father's house, what is written (in Gen. 28:20)? THEN JACOB VOWED A VOW. What did he say (ibid., cont.]:)? IF GOD IS WITH ME < … > Thus did the Holy One respond to him (in vs. 15): SEE I AM WITH YOU. (Gen. R. 70:4 reports a discussion between R. Ayyevu and R. Jonathan over whether vss. 15 and 20 are disarranged or whether the Holy One simply anticipated Jacob’s vow.) Our masters have said: He responded to him on every < point > except for sustenance. (Gk.: pronoos (“thinking beforehand”). Gen. R. 69:6.) R. Osha'ya said: He also responded to him for sustenance, since it is stated (in Gen. 28:15): FOR I WILL NOT LEAVE YOU UNTIL ('D 'ShR) I HAVE DONE WHAT ('ShR) I PROMISED YOU. Why did he say two times: ('ShR 'ShR)? He spoke, as it were, something difficult. R. Osha'ya said: The Holy One said to him: Blessed (rt.: 'ShR) am I and blessed (rt.: 'ShR) are you when I do this thing for you. Again he demanded < as a condition > (in Gen. 28:21): AND IF I RETURN SAFELY. He said to him (in vs. 15): AND I WILL BRING YOU BACK < UNTO THIS LAND >. R. Hanina b. R. Isaac said: Blessed (rt.: 'ShR) is one born of woman who has heard this from his Creator. See, whatever he demanded from his Creator he promised him. Then, with these promises, he sends and says (in Gen. 32:5 [4]): THUS YOU SHALL SAY TO MY LORD ESAU. Ergo, it is well stated (in Prov. 25:26): < A PASSER-BY WHO MEDDLES IN A QUARREL NOT HIS OWN IS > LIKE ONE WHO SEIZES A DOG BY THE EARS. (The text from Proverbs seems to assume a situation like this: Jacob’s welfare was a matter between himself and his Creator; so why should he get involved with Esau.)
(Gen. 32:5 [4]:) AND HE INSTRUCTED THEM, SAYING: THUS YOU SHALL SAY TO MY LORD ESAU. He called him MY LORD. Jeremiah has said (in Jer. 13:21): WHAT WILL YOU SAY WHEN HE SHALL APPOINT AS YOUR HEADS THOSE WHOM YOU HAD TAUGHT TO BE YOUR FRIENDS? R. Pinhas said: Antoninus gave Our Rabbi (Judah the Prince) the highest honors; but, when Our Rabbi sent me to him, he wrote him a letter and wrote in it: Your servant Judah asks about your welfare. But it displeased Antoninus, namely, that he called himself a servant. He said to him: Do not write again like this. Our Rabbi said to him: I write in such a way to you because I am no better than the patriarch Jacob. When he sent away to Esau, what did he say to him (according to Gen. 32:5 [4])? THUS SAYS YOUR SERVANT JACOB: I have not become an independent authority. (Gk.: authentes.) (Ibid., cont.:) I LIVED WITH LABAN. Not one of the blessings with which your father blessed me has reached me. (Cf. Gen. R. 75:11.) Your father blessed me (in Gen. 27:28): SO MAY GOD GIVE TO YOU OF THE DEW OF HEAVEN AND THE FAT PLACES OF THE EARTH; yet, I do not have one of them in hand. Rather (according to Gen. 32:6 [5]), I HAVE OX AND ASS, SHEEP, which are neither of the heavens nor of the earth. Do you hate me merely because of the blessings, [even though one has yet to reach me]? Did he have < only > one ox and one ass, in that it says (ibid.): I HAVE OX AND ASS … (in the singular)? (Cf. Gen. R. 75:6.) R. Judah and R. Nehemiah differ. R. Judah says: It is a figure of speech, as in the case of one who says in a collective sense: Ass went; cock crowed. (This is the interpretation of modem translations.) But R. Nehemiah said: < He spoke > to him, saying: Here am I, your servant Jacob, humbling myself before you. If you desire it, see, it is fine. But, if not, (ibid.:) I HAVE < AN > OX AND < AN > ASS < … >. [AN OX:] This is Joseph, as stated (of him in Deut. 33:17): LIKE A FIRSTLING OX HE HAS MAJESTY, < AND HIS HORNS ARE THE HORNS OF A WILD OX…. SUCH ARE THE MYRIADS OF EPHRAIM, AND SUCH ARE THE THOUSANDS OF MANASSEH >. There is an aggadic tradition that Esau will only fall at the hands of Rachel's children. Why? Because it is stated (in Jer. 49:20): SURELY THE YOUNGEST OF YOUR FLOCK SHALL DRAG THEM AWAY. These < youngest > are the children of Rachel. (Gen. 32:6 [5], cont.:) AND < AN > ASS. This is the Messianic King, as stated (in Zech. 9:9): REJOICE GREATLY, O DAUGHTER OF ZION, SHOUT ALOUD, O DAUGHTER OF JERUSALEM; < behold your king comes > … HUMBLE AND RIDING UPON AN ASS. (Gen. 32:6 [5], cont.:) A FLOCK. This is Israel, as stated (in Ezek. 34:31): FOR YOU, MY FLOCK, THE FLOCK OF MY PASTURE, YOU ARE HUMANS. (Gen. 32:6 [5], cont.:) MALE AND FEMALE SLAVES. This < also > refers to Israel, about which it is stated (in Ps. 123:2): BEHOLD, AS THE EYES OF MALE SLAVES < LOOK TO THEIR MASTER'S HAND, AS THE EYES OF A FEMALE SLAVE TO THE EYES OF HER MISTRESS, SO DO OUR EYES LOOK TO THE LORD OUR GOD >….
I have sojourned with Laban, and stayed until now. and I have oxen, and asses and flocks, and manservants and maid-servants (Gen. 32:5–6). He was telling Esau: “Though I have lived with Laban, the arch-deceiver, for twenty years, I have acquired oxen, asses, and great riches.” He disclosed this fact to Esau in the hope that when he reflected upon it, he would say to himself: “Jacob went there with nothing more than a staff, and though he worked for Laban, the arch-deceiver, for twenty years, he has become a wealthy man and has returned in peace; how can I possibly contend against him?”
He commanded them, saying; “Thus shall you say unto my lord Esau” (Gen. 32:5). R. Judah the son of Simon began the discussion with the verse: As a troubled fountain, and a corrupted spring, so is a righteous man that giveth way before the wicked (Prov. 25:26). That is to say, the righteous man is like a troubled fountain and a corrupted spring when he demeans himself before the wicked. Thus shall you say unto my lord Esau. Jacob called Esau my lord, for the Torah teaches that one must be respectful toward the government (those in power). R. Ishmael said: Observe that Scripture says: And the Lord spoke unto Moses and unto Aaron, and gave them a charge unto the children of Israel and unto Pharaoh, king of Egypt (Exod. 6:13). (God refers to Pharaoh as king to demonstrate the duty to honor the one in power.) He did so to teach them to be respectful toward the government (those in power).
וימצאהו איש והנה תעה בשדה, “a man found him while he was lost in the field;” this (the three letters in the word תעה) is where the Angel Gavriel gave Joseph a hint of three exiles the Jewish people would endure. ת=400 years of exile in Egypt; ע=70 years of exile in Babylon; ה=5, till the end of the exile commonly known as the Roman exile, till the coming of the Messiah. [The author attributes this to his father of blessed memory. Ed.] He adds that he had heard something along the same lines in the name of Rabbi Binyamin Gozel, but from Genesis 32,5, using the letters of word עתה as the hint.
In the two verses quoted above Solomon informed us of the penalty for stealing from the poor. It is well known that there are four categories of people concerning whom the Torah has expressed especial concern, asking people to be merciful towards them and not to inflict any harm upon them. They are: the poor, the orphans, the widows and the proselytes. Indeed we find that the Torah expresses a warning against discrimination against the aforesaid in one and the same verse in Deuteronomy 16,14 where we read: ושמחת בחגיך, אתה ובנך ובתך ועבדך ואמתך והלוי והגר והיתום והאלמנה אשר בשעריך. “You are to rejoice on your festival, you, your son, your daughter, your male servant and your maid servant, the proselyte, the orphan and the widow in your cities.” Our sages as quoted by Rashi comment: “these four are Mine (G’d speaking). If you will give joy to those who are Mine, I will provide joy for those that are yours.” Mention of the Levites is equivalent to mentioning the poor as the Levites have no source of income other than the generosity of the Jewish farmer. G’d Himself is their portion as we read in Numbers 18,20 אני חלקך ונחלתך, “I am your share and your inheritance.” When the Torah legislated the treatment of the poor it did so both as a positive as well as a negative commandment. It is written (Deut. 15,10) נתון תתן, “you shall surely give (repeatedly),” (15,8) “and you shall repeatedly open your hand for him (the poor).” The negative counterpart of this commandment is found side by side (15,10), לא ירע לבבך בתתך לו, “your heart must not feel bad when you give him.” We also find another basic aspect of this commandment in Deut. 15,7 לא תאמץ את לבבך ולא תקפוץ את ידך מאחיך האביון, “do not harden your heart or close your hand against your destitute brother.” Seeing that the Torah legislated against stealing altogether already in the Ten Commandments as well as in Leviticus 19, 19,13, there was no need to stress a prohibition against stealing from the poor. The instruction to give to the poor would have been sufficient to make it plain that it is forbidden to steal from the poor instead of giving to the poor. The fact that the Torah nonetheless writes words prohibiting this prompted Solomon to tell us that the penalty for stealing from the poor is far harsher than that for stealing from ordinary people. It was not Solomon’s habit to repeat commandments which have been spelled out in the Torah already and to simply repeat them in his volume משלי, Proverbs. Whenever he does so, he does so only in order to reveal an additional dimension to such a commandment. After all, who is so great that he could arrogate to himself to add to the Torah something Moses had not already thought of or been told by G’d to write down? Solomon, in common with later sages, only added “fences” to the Torah, i.e. warned against conduct which might lead to infringing Biblical commandments. This is why he said: “do not steal from the poor because he is poor,” i.e. stealing from him is so commonplace seeing that the poor is defenseless, that we must be warned not to exploit his weakness. The poor does not have protagonists such as the rich have. Everybody hates the poor and keeps his distance from him, even his relatives. This is why Solomon emphasises that the temptation to steal from the poor is great precisely “because he is poor.” Solomon therefore warns us not to think that because the poor do not have defenders of flesh and blood that they are without recourse. On the contrary, G’d Himself is their advocate and will see to it that they do not suffer because they are being exploited due to their poverty. He will go out of His way to administer punishment to anyone who steals from the poor. Contrary to the penalty for thieves who do not steal from the poor specifically, whose penalty the Torah expressed in terms of financial restitution and penal charges, someone who steals from the poor will endure chastisement of body and soul. This is the meaning of the words וקבע את קובעיהם נפש, “he will put in their places those who have tried to put the poor in their place.” The Torah warns us in many places not to disadvantage orphans and widows, i.e. כל אלמנה ויתום לא תענון, ”do not oppress any orphan or widow” (Exodus 22,21). Our sages in the Mechilta comment on this verse: “even the widow of a king (presumably wealthy and influential) is included in this commandment.” The same applies to children of a king left orphaned. The reason is that in spite of their financial resources, the state of mind of such widows and orphans is one of melancholy and they are apt to cry at the slightest provocation. It is unfortunately a fact of life that people do take advantage of orphans and widows. The Torah goes on to say: אם ענה תענה אותם.....והרגתי אתכם בחרב והיו נשיכם אלמנות ובניכם יתומים, “if indeed you will persecute them..then I will kill you and your wives will become widows and your children orphans.” The Torah conditions this harsh punishment on the assumption that the victim cried out to G’d for vengeance. Generally speaking, people faced with unfair treatment put their faith in seeking recourse from a human tribunal. The orphan and widow have no other recourse than G’d Himself. This is why G’d listens specifically to their outcries and fights their battles for them. Solomon also addresses the plight of orphans and widows in this chapter, and this is why he said (Proverbs 23,10-11) אל תסג גבול עולם, ובשדי יתומים אל תבא. כי גואלם חזק. הוא יריב את ריבם אתך. “Do not remove ancient boundary marks; do not encroach upon the field of orphans. For they have a powerful redeemer; he will fight their battles against you.” The Torah also takes up the plight of the proselytes (strangers, immigrants to the land of Israel) on many occasions For instance, we find in Exodus 22,20 וגר לא תונה ולא תלחצנו כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים. “And do not taunt or oppress a stranger (convert) for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” The Torah cites an additional reason for treating the proselyte fairly when it writes (Exodus 23,9) כי אתם ידעתם את נפש הגר, “for you are familiar with the mentality of the stranger.” Significantly, the Torah did not speak of your “knowing the stranger,” but of your being familiar with נפש הגר, the soul, the mentality of the stranger. You know that the mentality of strangers is one of feeling subdued, humbled, etc., so that his eyes are constantly turned towards G’d seeing he lacks in self-confidence. The Talmud (Baba Metzia 58) speaks of the prohibition of reminding a proselyte or even his son of his former deeds or the deeds of his father. When such a proselyte comes to study Torah one is not to say to him: “ how can the mouth which used to enjoy all manner of forbidden foods presume to qualify to study the holy Torah.” The reminder of the Torah that when the Jewish people were still enslaved in Egypt their status was not superior to the recent proselyte is an example of the Rabbinic dictum מום שבך אל תאמר לחברך, “do not speak to your fellow man about a blemish as long as you yourself are afflicted with a similar blemish.” (Baba Metzia 59). In fact we find that the righteous themselves are referred to as גרים, strangers, the expression גר being derived from גרגיר, something that has been separated from its origin. The righteous is in the habit of viewing himself as distinctive, a loner, in the sense that he is different from the majority. For instance, he does not view his residence on this earth as something other than temporary. This is what King David had in mind when he said (Psalms 119,19) “I am only a stranger on earth, do not hide Your commandments from me.” He viewed himself as a tourist who has already been invited to commence a journey though he does not know the time of departure. Seeing that he does not know when he will depart, he must accumulate provisions for his journey to guard against a sudden and unprepared departure. What do these “provisions” consist of? The observance of G’d’s commandments. This is what David meant when he asked G’d not to hide His commandments from him. We also note that all of the patriarchs have been referred to as גרים on different occasions. Avraham said of himself (Genesis 23,4) “I am a stranger or a resident stranger amongst you” when he prepared to buy a burial ground for Sarah. Yitzchak was commanded by G’d to remain in the land of Canaan during the famine, albeit as a stranger. The wording is גור בארץ הזאת, “sojourn in this land on a temporary basis” (Genesis 26,3). Yaakov is referred to as a stranger in our verse (first verse of our portion וישב) as well as in Genesis 47,4 and when he described his long stay at Lavan’s as that of a stranger in Genesis 32,5.
What did Yaakov mean when he described himself as having taken that city בחרבי ובקשתי, ”with my sword and with my bow?” Did he really mean that he personally had been involved in a battle for the town of Shechem? Yaakov meant that when the time would come for the Jewish people to inherit the land of Canaan this would be preceded by physical warfare. Our verse is an allusion to Joshua 11, 19-20 that “there was not a city that had made peace terms with the Israelites; all were taken in battle. For it was the Lord’s doing to stiffen their hearts to give battle to Israel, in order they might be proscribed without quarter and wiped out, as the Lord had commanded to Moses.” [The only exception were the Gibeonites who misrepresented themselves as not being Canaanites and tricked the Israelites into making a covenant with them]. Actually, you would have expected Yaakov to say: בחרב וקשת, “with sword and bow,” instead of “with my sword and my bow.” The reason Yaakov represented the sword and bow he spoke of as being his very own was that he claimed that success of the Israelites in battle was due to his merit. Compare Psalms 44,4: “it was not by their sword that they took the land, their arm did not give them victory, but Your right hand, Your arm, and Your goodwill for You favoured them.” The psalmist attributes the success of the Israelites’ arms to the merit of the patriarchs. The word “Your goodwill” is a reference to Yaakov. The words “Your right hand” are a reference to Avraham, and the words “Your arm” are a reference to Yitzchak. The facial features of Yaakov are engraved on G’d’s throne. Onkelos translates the word בחרבי as בצלותי, “with my prayer,” and the word בקשתי as ובבעותי “with my entreaty.” We could read the word bekashti as bakashati, “my request,” changing only the vowel pattern. From a defensive point of view, prayer and entreaty may be viewed as viable alternatives to sword and bow. It is also possible that the word בחרבי is a veiled reference to Torah, i.e. the merit of having studied Torah. The patriarchs had not only studied but also observed even minutiae of the Torah precepts. They had divined by means of their intellect what G’d would require of the Jewish people when He would give them the Torah in due course. Our sages also interpreted Yaakov’s words when he sent a message to his brother Esau as informing him that he had observed the 613 commandments of the Torah while employed by Lavan. The words he used (Genesis 32,5) to hint at this were עם לבן ג-ר-ת-י, the word גרתי having a numerical value and the same letters as 613. We find that the Torah is compared by our sages to a two-edged sword in the hands of those who study it and practice it in Shir Hashirim Rabbah 1,16 (compare Psalms 149 6). A two edged sword cuts with both edges. The Ten Commandments, i.e. the Tablets, are also described by the Torah as being two-edged, i.e. as having been engraved from either side (Exodus 32,15).
So shall you do Because of alacrity, caution, and encouragement, he added a “nun,” like (Gen. 32: 5): “So shall you say (תאמְרוּן),” and like (Ruth 2:8f.): “and here you shall stay (תִדְבָּקִין) with my maidens. Your eyes shall be on the field that they reap (יִִִקְצרוּן),” and like (ibid. 3:18): “until you know (תֵּדְעִין) how the matter will be resolved, for the man will not rest, etc.”
He commanded them saying, This is what you should say to my master, Eisov. Your servant, Yaakov says, I lived as a stranger with Lavan, and was delayed until now.
and instructed them to say, Thus shall you speak to my lord Esau: Thus saith thy servant Jakob, With Laban have I dwelt, and have tarried until now.
| וַֽיְהִי־לִי֙ שׁ֣וֹר וַחֲמ֔וֹר צֹ֖אן וְעֶ֣בֶד וְשִׁפְחָ֑ה וָֽאֶשְׁלְחָה֙ לְהַגִּ֣יד לַֽאדֹנִ֔י לִמְצֹא־חֵ֖ן בְּעֵינֶֽיךָ׃ | 6 J | I have acquired cattle, asses, sheep, and male and female slaves; and I send this message to my lord in the hope of gaining your favor.’” |
(6) And should you say - and from where comes the livelihood of a person (that spends a long time praying)? To that question the text says "and I have ox and donkey" (Genesis 32:6) meaning, livelihood comes automatically if we do the will of the Place. "I send this message to my lord in the hope of gaining your favor" (Genesis 32:6) - meaning, this is the way of the nations of the world, when they see the honor and riches of Israel, then they love Israel, and then they favor Israel, even if they do not enjoy Israel, in any instance they give favor. "And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying: we came to your brother etc" (Genesis 32:7) - meaning, the hint is that the words of the tzadik are effective and enter in the heart of Esav, transforming him in a brother, as we explained above, however, "he also comes to meet you", meaning, even though he behaves and comes to meet you, his deeds are the opposite of your good deeds. "And four hundred men with him" hints that even though he does all sorts of evil deeds, he still says that he has a place in the world to come, that he has 400 hidden worlds, and this is "with him", that he says that with him there are 400, hinting to 400 worlds, as we explained.
(1) Or one could also say - "I have oxen and donkeys" (Genesis 32:6) that behold it is written "and E-lohim said 'let the waters swarm with living soul [nefesh chayah], and let birds fly over the earth'" (Genesis 1:20). We can read this through hints: through the Torah, which is called 'water', a person merits [to become] 'living soul', which is the higher soul. "And let the birds fly over the earth" meaning, that a person may fly through their thoughts to the higher worlds. "And E-lohim created the great lizards" (Genesis 1:21) and see Rashi's explanation: and the words of the aggadah (Baba Batra 74b:6) - 'this is Leviathan, created both male and female' (Rashi on Genesis 1:21:1). One could say that Rashi z"l hints with his words [that it is necessary] to respond the the language of the Text "and He created" which at a first glance looks superfluous. Also, to the the change in the language, as it should say "and [God] said 'may there be great lizards etc'". However, according to the issue pointed out above, it will be explained that this is a hint to the tzadik who clings to the Blessed One, who is called 'Leviathan', an expression for accompanying [leviyah] and clinging to the Exalted Blessed Name. It is impossible that a person would come to this level without being with the Holy Blessed Name, since at the outset the Holy Blessed Name commanded that a person should work alone regarding this level, to merit a soul, and therefor it is written "and He said etc". But regarding the second level, which is to merit clinging to the Blessed One, called by the name Leviathan, which is to be in such clinging as to almost be disconnected from reality, until the Holy Blessed Name cools the person - and this is "cooled the male" [Ed - the original text Bava Batra 74b:7 is 'cooled the female'], meaning that in this clinging the Holy Blessed Name cools the person so as not to uproot them from reality, "male" is a hint to clinging. "Killed the female" is a hint to such a tzadik, whose female side is the yetzer hara, and the tzadik killed it, completely. "And salted [her] for the tzadikim in the world that is coming" (Bava Batra 74b:6) is a hint for the tzadikim that come after, that will be easy for them to serve the Blessed Name through what the tzadik caused to be, with their deeds, as above. "Salted" is an expression of sweetening, since the salt sweetens the meat, and so too the tzadik sweetens the yetzer hara [impulse to evil] until it is easy for the tzadikim that are coming in the future to serve the Holy Name, with no effort and no strain, and the two levels spoken above are given to the tzadik by the Blessed Name as a gift.
למצוא חן בעיניך, in order to find favour in your eyes.” Yaakov wants a reconciliation with his brother, and in order to achieve this he is willing to be completely transparent with Esau concerning all that he owns.
OXEN AND ASSES. These are nouns referring to the respective species. (The Hebrew has an ox and an ass, hence I.E.’s comment.)
AND I HAVE SENT TO TELL MY LORD. That I wish to do whatever he commands me. (The verse does not say what they were to tell Esau. I.E. points out that following to tell my Lord, we must insert: that I wish to do whatever he commands me.) This is the meaning of that I may find favor in thy sight (Once we insert that I wish to do, etc., in the text, the meaning of so that I may find favor in thy sight becomes clear.)
ויהי לי שור וחמור, “I acquired oxen and donkeys, sheep and servants.” Yaakov mentioned his great wealth by understating it, i.e. as if he had only acquired a single ox and a single donkey, etc., as he did not want to appear boastful. He followed the dictates of Jeremiah 9,22 “let not the wealthy boast of his wealth.” It is customary for all righteous people to belittle themselves and their belongings. The wicked, by contrast, boast of their wealth as we see from Esau who claimed יש לי רב, “I own a great deal” (33,9).
Actually, if the Torah had followed its own rules, it should have mentioned the sheep first, i.e. צאן וחמור, שור seeing that the category called צאן, i.e. sheep and goats, is the most superior species amongst the animals. We find that the Torah does so in the case of Avraham (Genesis 12,16) “and he treated Avram well on her account so that he acquired (flocks of) sheep and (herds of) cattle, etc.” We find a similar sequence in the way the Torah describes Yitzchak’s wealth (Genesis 26,14) “he acquired flocks of sheep and herds of cattle.” We also find this order of Yaakov’s wealth when the Torah (as distinct from Yaakov) describes it in 30,43: ”he acquired many sheep and maid-servants and men-servants and camels and donkeys.” You will note that in all of these instances the sheep (and goats) are mentioned first. If Yaakov did not want to mention his sheep and goats first this was because Esau had “lost” his blessing on account of these goats. Rivkah had sent Yaakov to the צאן, instructing him to select two good goats to prepare a meal for Yitzchak which could compete with the venison Esau was expected to hunt.(27,9). Mentioning the צאן first would have sounded like rubbing salt in Esau’s wound. It is interesting to note that after the angels had returned to Yaakov with their report of Esau approaching in a hostile manner, the Torah describes Yaakov as dividing his earthly possessions into two camps (32,8). Again the Torah lists the צאן before any other livestock. Even after Yaakov and Esau had reconciled and Esau had accepted Yaakov’s gifts as a sign of the reconciliation, the Torah again lists the צאן first in 33,13 A Midrashic (Tanchuma Vayishlach 1) approach to our verse: “Why did Yaakov first mention the fact that he had acquired oxen? He hinted that Joseph, who was going to be known as שור, “ox”, had already been born. Joseph was to be the natural enemy of Esau and what Esau represented. When describing future events, the prophet Ovadiah, 18 uses Joseph as symbolic of the entire Jewish people when he predicts: “and the House of Joseph flame, and the house of Esau straw; they shall burn it and devour it, and no survivor will be left of the House of Esau, -for the Lord has spoken.” In Deuteronomy 33,17 when Moses blesses the Jewish people, he wrote of Joseph: בכור שורו הדר לו, “like the firstling bull in his majesty, he has horns like the horns of a wild-ox.”
ויהי לי שור וחמור. All the types of possessions Yaakov mentioned are not to be understood as single items but as categories of possessions. We find similar constructions in Kings II 7,10 כי אם הסוס אסור, which does not mean that a single horse had been tethered, but that the horses belonging to the army of the Aramites were tethered, the soldiers having fled. Similarly, Samuel I 14,24 where the words ואיש ישראל נגש do not mean that a single Israelite was distressed, but that a contingent of Israelites was in a depressed state of mind.
AND I HAVE SENT TO TELL MY LORD. I.e., “to announce that I am coming to you. That I may find favour in thy sight for I am at peace with you and seek your friendship.” These are Rashi’s words. Rashi’s intent is that the verse; I have sent to tell my lord, does not refer to the previous verse, I have sojourned with Laban, etc. but, instead, it says, “And I have sent to tell my lord that I have come to find favour in thy sight and to do whatever my lord will command.” But it is more correct to say that it refers to the verse above: “And I have sent to tell my lord that I have wealth, belongings, and precious things, to do with them according to your desire and will.” He thus hinted to him that he would send him a present from them, or that Esau may take from him whatever he desires. And so, when Esau asked Jacob, What meanest thou by all this camp which I met? he [Jacob] said: To find favour in the sight of my lord. (Genesis 33:8.)
ויהי לי שור וחמור AND I HAVE OXEN AND ASSES — Our father promised me, (27:28) “[God will give thee] of the dew of heaven and of the fat places of the earth” — these are neither of the heaven nor of the earth
שור וחמור (literally, an ox and an ass) — It is the customary thing to speak of many oxen as an ox (Genesis Rabbah 75:6) — a man says to his fellow, “During the night the cock crowed”; he does not say “the cocks crowed”
ואשלחה להגיד לאדוני AND I HAVE SENT TO TELL MY LORD — to announce that I am coming to you.
למצא חן בעיניך THAT I MAY FIND FAVOUR IN THY EYES, for I am at peace with you and seek your friendship.
למצוא חן בעיניך, for I have no doubt that you will be happy to see that I have become wealthy and the fact that I tell you the good news will please you.
These are neither from the heavens nor from the earth. Although they are nourished from the earth, they do not actually grow from the earth. Otherwise, [if Yaakov meant as follows, a contradiction arises.] First he said, “I lived as a stranger,” to convey that the blessings were not fulfilled. Then he said ויהי לי שור וחמור, [detailing his many blessings. And he must have meant שור וחמור in plural,] as is customary to refer to many oxen as “ox.” This is obviously so, for he sent Eisov a whole camp as a gift, and would be proven a liar if he meant, “I acquired one ox [and one donkey].” According to Rashi’s other explanation above, Yaakov was saying: “Although I kept the 613 mitzvos, my father’s blessing has not been realized. I have only oxen and donkeys, not the rest of my father’s blessing, which is “from the fat of the land.” Therefore, [since my merits have not been offset by my rewards,] I do not fear you.
To announce that I am coming to you. [Rashi knows this] because if Yaakov was sending [the messengers] to tell him, “I lived as a stranger with Lavan... I acquired oxen and donkeys...” then [the next phrase,] “To find favor in your eyes,” would also refer to this. And that cannot be, for such a message is not a reason to find favor; it is merely [a reason] that Eisov should not hate him. Therefore Rashi explains, “To announce that I am coming to you” to be subservient to you — and through this will I find favor in your eyes. Maharshal writes that Rashi is answering the question: Yaakov said before, “This is what you should say.” Why does he say [again], “To tell my master”? Perforce it means, “To announce that I am coming.” In this way I will find favor, because when people send [messages] to appease someone, they do not come themselves. But I will even come myself! All this is because I am at peace with you.
The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came to your brother, to Esau; moreover he is coming to meet you, and four hundred men are with him. Since this was a large battalion, Jacob suspected that it was not merely a guard of honor. Esau did not respond directly to the petition brought by the messengers; they simply observed him heading in Jacob’s direction.
ויהי לי שור וחמור, “I acquired herds and flocks, etc.” Even though I have always been considered a יושב אהלים, a “yeshivah bachur, a “highbrow,” a misfit in the world of “men of the world,” I am not as naïve as you think, as thanks to G’d’s help I have become wealthy. This was not a boast, but Yaakov wanted to make Esau think twice before he would launch a military attack on him.
ואשלחה להגיד לאדוני, “I have sent messengers to inform my lord of my impending arrival.” According to Rashi these words were meant to show Esau that Yaakov came with friendly intentions, bent on healing any breach that had existed between them. According to this explanation, the words are not a repetition of something implied previously. Nachmanides does understand the last few words as referring to what had been said before, i.e. Yaakov’s announcing that he had become wealthy since he had last seen Esau. Seeing that he had attained such wealth, he was able to treat Esau with the honour due to an older brother. i.e. this was the reason for the tokens of his esteem he had sent ahead of himself. If Esau, preferred, he could make a selection of the gifts Yaakov had sent for his approval. Some commentators see in Yaakov’s conduct confirmation of what Solomon said in Proverbs 19,7 כל אחי-רש שנאהו, “all the brothers of a poor man hate him.” Yaakov wanted Esau to know that he did not have to hate him, as he had not come as a potential burden, i.e. a poor relation who is in need of a handout. On the contrary, he was bent on finding favour in his eyes.
“I have acquired cattle, asses, sheep and slaves” [32:6]. Jacob said to Esau: the blessing of my father was “of the dew of heaven and the fat of the earth” [27:28]. This means, the dew of heaven and the fat of the earth. That which I have is not from heaven nor is it from the earth, but is an ox, an ass, and sheep and goats. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:6.) Bahya writes here. Why did the verse here write oxen and asses first, and then sheep? The Torah would first write the sheep, since they are the most important of all the animals, as we find with Abraham, “I acquired sheep and cattle” [Genesis, 12:16], and concerning Jacob, “he had many sheep, goats and cattle” [30:43]. The explanation is that Jacob did not want to mention sheep and goats, since he thought: I took the blessing from Esau through sheep and goats. I took a young goat from the pen and I slaughtered it and made food for my father. I put the fur on my hands and my throat, so that Isaac should not recognize me. That is why Jacob did not want to mention “I have sheep,” but he first mentioned, “I have oxen and asses.” This is also why later in the Torah portion, when Esau appeared to Jacob and Jacob saw that Esau was at peace with him, Jacob first mentioned sheep, and afterwards oxen and asses. The Midrash writes that he first mentioned oxen and asses. This shows us that Joseph was called ox and he was the adversary of Esau. That is to say, Jacob showed Esau that he was not afraid, since he had the help of Joseph. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:6.)
Maimonides, in his Moreh Nevuchim Chapter 32, Section 4, points out that the attitude of people to the institution of prophecy is similar to their attitude to creation ex nihilo. Those who cannot accept the latter, cannot accept the former either. They cannot accept that G-d is free to grant the status of prophet to whom He wants. The believers in creation ex nihilo, however, face no such difficulty and can accept that the gift of prophecy is bestowed by G-d on whom He chooses whenever He chooses. According to the Greek philosophers, if the necessary moral and other qualifications are present, prophecy status follows automatically. According to Jewish belief, G-d’s freedom to grant prophecy to a person who possesses the proper qualifications remains unimpaired. It is a little difficult to understand Maimonides who says that the failure of a person with the right qualifications to be elevated to the status of a prophet is a rare occurrence. Let us accept the premise then that prophecy is something most exquisite, unique, and belongs to the wonderful endowments that are beyond natural law. It is granted by G-d as a reward for the highest degree of closeness to G-d, which the person selected as a prophet had attempted to establish. This is the reason why original Adam already needed to observe commandments, by means of which he could attain that relationship with his Creator both qualitatively and quantitatively. We find this in increased measure with Noach, and in still greater measure with Abraham, of whom G-d said "for I know him, so that he will command his sons and his household to observe the ways of the Lord and to practice righteousness and justice" (Genesis 18,19). G-d related to Abraham via the institution of prophecy not because of his superior mental faculties, but because "Abraham listened to My voice" (Genesis 26,5). This is why we find the same characteristic amongst Israel and not other nations. As we say in Psalms 147, "He has not done so for any other nation." However, the prophet and his stature is interdependent with the people amongst whom he lives. The people influence his own stature either positively or negatively. The Talmud Sukkah 25 tells that all the students of Hillel deserved the same degree of Divine inspiration as had been granted Moses, but since their peers did not deserve it, it was withheld from them. The presence of a prophet in a given society is itself a gift for that generation. G-d explained to Jeremiah, when the latter was despondent because his prayer for rain had not been answered, that if he could lead his people to prayer before the Lord, he himself could prevail also. Under the existing conditions however, even the intercession of a Moses or Samuel would be quite ineffective, (compare chapter 15 in Jeremiah) As a concession to Jeremiah, G-d lowered the ante, saying that if Jeremiah could at least separate the relatively good people from the thoroughly rotten and corrupt ones, he would have some degree of success. “you will be My mouthpiece." (Jeremiah 15,19) All this means that the people amongst whom Jeremiah laboured, had an impact on his ability to be close to G-d. At the same time, G-d exhorts Jeremiah not to slacken in his efforts and to persevere in his mission. The point made is that as long as Jeremiah is seen to be involved with the people, there is a chance that they will turn to him; should he allow himself to become remote however, there would be no chance whatsoever. For these reasons, prophets throughout the ages have not been of equal stature, each having operated in a different environment from that of his colleagues. Each respective environment left its imprint on the respective prophet's personality. Many of the qualities and attributes that a person lacks, can be compensated for by devotion and dedication, which in turn leads to the gift of prophecy from G-d. This is proven conclusively by the experience of the Jewish people when they stood at the foot of Mount Sinai and said the famous words "we shall do and we shall listen." (Exodus 24,7) The Talmud in Nedarim 38, says that prophecy does not reside within a person who is not strong, wise, wealthy, etc., which suggests that G-d confers the gift of prophecy only on those who demonstrate their eagerness to translate theory into practice, either by way of their minds or their physical endowments. "Wisdom" helps to create wholesomeness of form in matters requiring study and contemplation of religious truths. In the words of Kohelet 7,12, "wisdom makes its owners come truly alive." Without this "wisdom," everyone is like a corpse, and it is not the corpse who can sing the praises of the Lord, (compare Pslams 115) Once man has achieved this relative level of perfection, he can go on ascending by degrees and will become endowed with prophetic powers as a reward for and result of his own efforts. Daniel chapter 8 from verse 15 onwards, describes this process. "When I, Daniel had seen the vision and I sought understanding, then, behold there stood before me the likeness of a man." He explains that because of his intense desire to gain greater insights, the vision was granted to him. The word "man" implying an intermediary, refers to the angel Gabriel whom Daniel mentions first of all. The Talmud Berachot 25, explains that G-d grants wisdom to those who are intelligent already. This is illustrated by a parable in Kohelet Rabbah I, about the wealthy merchant who would display his wares only before the well to do, not before those who would not squander their money. Similarly, G-d does not bestow the gift of prophecy on shallow minded individuals on whom such a gift would be wasted. Therefore, we find in Exodus 31,6, "and in the heart of every wise-hearted person have I given wisdom." Divinely inspired wisdom would be paired with natural intelligence to help in constructing the materials needed for building the tabernacle in the desert. The Mechilta tells that anyone who lacked sight on one eye could not experience giluy shechinah, the revelation at Mount Sinai. This is what Daniel meant (chapter 10,7) when he said: "I, Daniel alone saw the vision; the people who were with me did not see the vision, but a great fear overcame them and they fled into hiding." Although Ralbag describes all this as being part of the vision, no one else having in fact been present with Daniel at the time, he does not cite any proof in support of his thesis. We will therefore assume that the verse is to be understood literally, i.e. as an actual occurrence. Daniel describes the progress of how prophets receive direct communication from G-d. First, it is received by the brain alone; it does not spread to the other faculties. On the contrary, it confuses them so that Daniel says "I had no strength left," standing on hands and knees. Later he stood on his feet but trembled; still later he stood on his feet but was dumbfounded. Finally, he was told chazak vechazak, grow stronger and stronger! (verse 19) At that point Daniel was able to reply and invite verbal communication. All this proves that proper prophetic insight and communication from G-d, requires physical strength and health. The relationship between body and mind is described like the relationship between the brain and the men who were with Daniel at that time. The latter symbolise the physical attributes. Wealth also belongs to the matters that help prepare perfection in one's external needs. Food, drink, clothing are all prerequisites for study and contemplation in an atmosphere of serenity. In Deuteronomy chapter 29, Moses stresses that during all the forty years Israel had been in the desert, G-d had not only provided food and water, but ensured that the people had adequate clothing, shoes etc. This proves that the provision of one's physical needs is a prerequisite for the successful pursuit of spiritual attainments. These three points were appreciated by the king of Babylon when he ordered to have Jewish children of aristocratic parentage brought to his Court, children who had no physical blemish, were intelligent and able to absorb the most intensive training in the Chaldean language. The king ordered these children to be given daily rations of food. He mentioned two specific physical attributes that were required in order that these children would qualify for that program, but stressed three additional mental attributes. The words va-yeman hamelech, the king provided, sound very similar to the word man, the food the Israelites ate in the desert. (Daniel 1, 3-6) In this connection it is interesting to note the instructions given to king Saul by the prophet Samuel immediately after he had anointed Saul. We read in Samuel I 10,2-6, "when you depart from me this day, you will meet two men at the grave of Rachel, in the territory of Benjamin, at a place called Tzeltach. They will say to you... the she asses you have come to search for, have been found. Your father has stopped worrying about the matter of the she asses and worries instead about you, saying "what can I do about my son?" Go from there quickly, you will come to Elon Tabor where three men seeking the Lord at Bet El will meet you. One of them carries three young goats, one of them carries three loaves of bread, and one of them carries a hose filled with wine. They will greet you and give you two loaves of bread which you should accept from them. After that, you will come to the hill of G-d where the Philistine representatives are stationed. When you arrive at the town, a band of prophets will encounter you from the altar. They are carrying musical instruments and prophesy. The spirit of the Lord will come over you also, and you will join them in prophesying. You will be turned into a different person." The reference to the she asses symbolises material wealth. (Jacob had said "I have acquired oxen and donkeys," Genesis 32,6) The second symbol, physical well being, is represented by the two loaves of bread Saul was to accept and consume. This was in order to give him physical strength. The third sign, that of the musical instruments, is symbolic of the medium that would enable him to receive Divine inspiration. We see this point confirmed in Kings II 3,15, when the music put the prophet Elisha in the mood to receive Divine communication. These three otot, signs, enable a person who is so equipped to become capable of receiving Divine inspiration. A causal relationship definitely exists here. Once one has received such Divine inspiration, definitely exists here. Once one has received such Divine inspiration, one becomes a person of different stature. The prophet Samuel had told Saul something of great importance when he said to him "do for yourself whatever you think yourself capable of, for the Lord is with you." (verse 7) The message is that Saul should not be satisfied with what he had achieved up to that point, but see it as a link in a chain to still greater achievements he should strive for. Jeremiah expresses a similar thought (Jeremiah 9,23) when he calls out "let not the wise man boast of his wisdom, nor the wealthy of his riches etc., but if he must boast, let him boast about the degree of closeness to Me he has attained." The lesson is that we are never to consider the possession of any attribute as an end in itself, but only as an aid towards realising our task in life. Another interpretation of that verse in Jeremiah could be that G-d says "I, the Lord, find the performance of deeds of loving kindness, justice etc. appealing, as distinct fom the splendid isolation in which philosophers like to wrap themselves, ignoring the supposedly "lower" masses." When Elijah departed this world and Elisha was consecrated as his successor, the former describes three journeys he had to undertake. A great deal can be learned from that. (Kings II chapter 2) It is worthwhile noting that the destinations of the three journeys are progressively further away from the center of the land of Israel. Since the Shechinah resides in Israel, one would have expected these journeys to focus progressively on sites nearer the heart of Israel, the holy Temple etc. It appears that Elijah was desirous of matching the stature of Moses. Therefore, G-d sent him to the area where Moses had been buried. His first journey to Bet El was to signal that he should not use his physical attributes to traverse the length and breadth of the country and to enjoy such a trip physically, but he should go to Bet El and benefit from the wisdom of Torah and Avodah. Just as the physical exuberance and strength of children tends to be sapped in school when they apply all their energies to their studies, so the concentration on spiritual values would sap the physique of Elijah. He hinted to Elisha that his mission was merely to walk to Bet El, to the presence of the Shechinah, and to remain on the threshold of the house of G-d. He asked Elisha to consider seriously if he was able to subjugate his whole body so that it would be employed only in pursuit of spiritual values. Elisha's reply, of course was "by your life, I will not abandon your path." Afterwards Elijah said to Elisha that G-d had ordered him to go to Jericho. We know from the book of Joshua that all the captured loot from the captured city of Jericho had been declared "holy to the Lord," the metal going to the temple treasury, the balance being burned. (Joshua chapter 6) This was a hint to Elisha that all material wealth is useful and permitted only when it is put in the service of the Lord, if such a person wants to attain the perfect character that leads to the gift of prophecy. Here too, Elisha responded that he would remain at Elijah's side, and he accompanied him to Jericho. After that, Elijah said to Elisha that G-d had sent him to the river Jordan, which must be symbolic of the intense longing for wisdom. Our sages paraphrase the thought by saying "eyn mayim ela Torah", the only water that really quenches thirst is true Torah knowledge. Solomon expresses it in Proverbs by saying "drink water from your true fountain," i.e. your Creator. (Proverbs 5,15) Elijah impresses upon Elisha the importance of clinging to wisdom with the utmost tenacity, never to be satisfied with what had already been achieved. Elisha was tested to see if indeed he could walk on the waters of the river, thereby displaying an achievement surpassing that of Elijah's other disciples. Elijah gave of his spirit to him and not to the others, some of whom had not even reached the level of going to Bet El. Whereas Bileam is a prime example of the misuse of natural endowments and wealth, Moses is an example of someone who was endowed with all the attributes mentioned, employing them all exclusively in the service of G-d and his great mission. For this reason, he merited to rise to the highest level of prophecy possible. G-d explained this when Miriam and Aaron discussed Moses in a disparaging manner. (Numbers chapter 17, see details on this in chapter 76). It is this subject matter that our sages had in mind when they quote Rabbi Samuel son of Nachman in Vayikra Rabbah 1, as saying that the eighteen commandments involving erection of the tabernacle corresponded to (a) the eighteen vertebrae in our spine, (b) the eighteen benedictions in our central prayer the amidah, (c) the eighteen remembrances in the keriyat shema and the eighteen remembrances in Psalm 29. We need to understand why the number eighteen is so central to this statement. It will be demonstrated that all eighteen relate to the physical and material attributes needed to achieve the goal of perfection. None are to be used except in the service of G-d given directives. The attributes of physical beauty, strength, health and dignity of bearing, are symbolised by the eighteen spinal cords which are the backbone of all that is important physically, without which even upright posture is impossible for man. The eighteen commandments involving the erection of the tabernacle mean that we must serve the Lord by employing all our physical endowments when constructing the tabernacle, the prefabricated equivalent of the Temple. Concerning the use of one's health in an approved manner, this is expressed by prayer, seeing that all these matters are the subjects of the requests we make in our central prayer the amidah. As the Mishnah in Avot expresses it, "we temporarily abandon eternal life in favour of the prerequisites of life on this planet." This statement was made concerning those who indulge in unduly long prayers, stressing their requests for material blessings. Concerning attributes of mind and spirit, all of which are subsumed under the heading "wisdom," our sages say that these are symbolised by the eighteen remembrances contained in the Keriyat Shema. It is obvious that all paragraphs deal with aspects of faith in one way or another, as well as knowledge of, love and reverence for G-d. The ultimate perfection, the goal of which is understanding of G-d to the maximum extent that it is given to humans to achieve, is found symbolised in the eighteen remembrances contained in Psalm 29. This Psalm beautifully describes both maasseh merkavah and ma-asseh bereshit, i.e. esoterics and the story of Creation. As we discussed in the previous chapter, perfect praise can be bestowed only by one who is himself perfect to the extent that such perfection is attainable by his species. Anyone who conducts himself perfectly in these four areas, (the 4-times 18) and leads a saintly life, qualifies for being called upon by G-d, is called EL, an elevated being. After having completed the tabernacle, G-d called Moses EL, i.e. "vayikra el Moshe (Leviticus 1,1). This was in reward for having performed "ka-asher tzivah hashem et Moshe,” exactly as G-d had commanded Moses. After Moses had built the palace for the King, as it were, he was invited to come into the palace. From all the foregoing we have potent proof that prophecy resides only within those who possess the qualifications discussed, and who use those qualifications properly. If a Moses who had been endowed with outstanding natural attributes, required all these preparations to achieve his highest stature, how much more so must others not so generously endowed at birth labour before they can qualify! The Midrash Shocher Tov on Psalm 19, goes to some length to explain how Moses, while he was in Heaven "for forty days and forty nights," could distinguish between day and night. The point, of course, is to make us aware that even a man who had risen to the level of Moses, could never become completely oblivious to conditions of life as they are on earth. The Torah needed to tell us only that Moses remained on or above Mount Sinai for forty days, and we would have concluded that the nights were included. The emphasis on the word "nights" then suggests that he remained aware of the difference even when in a world where such differences do not exist. (Jonah's having remained inside the whale for three days and nights is a different situation).
In reference to the law concerning the first-born of man and cattle it is distinctly said, “And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the Lord slew all the first-born in the land of Egypt, etc., therefore I sacrifice to the Lord,” etc. (Exod. 13:15). But it can easily be explained why only cattle, sheep, and asses are mentioned in this law; these are kept as domestic animals, and are found in most places, especially in Palestine, where the Israelites were shepherds, they, their fathers, and forefathers; comp. “Thy servants are shepherds, both we and also our fathers” (Gen. 47:3). Horses and camels, however, are not wanted by shepherds, and are not found in all places; thus in the booty of Midian (Num. xxxi.) no other animals are mentioned but oxen, sheep, and asses. But asses alone are indispensable to all people, especially to those who are engaged in the field or in the forest. Thus Jacob says, “I have oxen and asses” (Gen. 32:5). Camels and horses are not possessed by many people, but only by a few, and are only found in a few places. The law that the first-born of an ass was to have its neck broken [in case it is not redeemed], will only ensure the redemption of the ass. It has, therefore, been said that the act of redeeming the ass is to be preferred to that of breaking its neck.
Another matter, “I have oxen [shor], and donkeys [vaḥamor]” (Genesis 32:6). Shor – this is Joseph, as it is stated: “A firstborn bull [shoro] is his majesty” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Vaḥamor – this is Issachar, as it is written: “Issachar is a strong-boned donkey [ḥamor] (Genesis 49:14). Joseph’s grandson is destined to eradicate Amalek, as it is stated: “Joshua (Joshua was from the tribe of Ephraim, who was Joseph's son.) weakened Amalek and its people by sword” (Exodus 17:13). Issachar’s descendants know what the Holy One blessed be He does in His world, as it is stated: “From the children of Issachar, possessors of understanding of the times, to know what Israel should do; their leaders were two hundred” (I Chronicles 12:33). “Flocks [tzon]” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “You, My flock [tzoni], flock of My pasture, you are man” (Ezekiel 34:31). “And slaves [ve’eved]” – this is David, as it is stated: “I am your servant [avdekha] son of your maidservant” (Psalms 116:16). “And maidservants [veshifḥa]” – this is Avigayil, as it is stated: “Here is your handmaiden as a maidservant [leshifḥa]” (I Samuel 25:41). “Jacob was very frightened and distressed. He divided the people who were with him, and the flocks, and the cattle, and the camels, into two camps” (Genesis 32:8). At that moment, those messengers went to Esau and saw armed warriors with him, and they came and told Jacob, as it is stated: “The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came to your brother, to Esau” (Genesis 32:7). What is: “And four hundred men with him”? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: Four hundred kings wearing crowns. Some say: Four hundred prefects were with him. Rabbi Yanai said: Four hundred generals were with him. When they related to Jacob all that multitude, he was afraid and he divided his wives and children into two camps, as it is stated: “He divided the people who were with him…[into two camps].”
“I have oxen and donkeys and flocks and slaves and maidservants, and I have sent to tell my lord, that I may find favor in your eyes” (Genesis 32:6). “I have oxen [shor] and donkeys [vahamor]…” (Shor and Ḥamor are singular nouns used to connote numerous oxen and donkeys.) – Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis, Rabbi Yehuda says: From one ox, many oxen emerged; from one donkey, many donkeys emerged. Rabbi Neḥemya said: In people’s vernacular they say ox, camel. The Rabbis say: “Shor” – that is the one anointed for war, as it is stated: “A firstborn bull [shoro] is his majesty” (Deuteronomy 33:17). (The verse continues: “With them he will gore the peoples together at the ends of the earth.”) “Ḥamor” – this is the messianic king, as it is stated: “He is humble, and riding upon a donkey [ḥamor]…” (Zechariah 9:9). “Flocks [tzon]” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “You, My flock [tzoni], flock of My pasture” (Ezekiel 34:31). “And slaves and maidservants [ve’eved veshifḥa]” – “Behold, as the eyes of slaves to the hand of their master, [as the eyes of a maidservant to the hand of her mistress]” (Psalms 123:2); “Be gracious to us, Lord; be gracious to us, for we have had more than enough of scorn” (Psalms 123:3).
(Gen. 32:5 [4]:) AND HE INSTRUCTED THEM, SAYING: THUS YOU SHALL SAY TO MY LORD ESAU. He called him MY LORD. Jeremiah has said (in Jer. 13:21): WHAT WILL YOU SAY WHEN HE SHALL APPOINT AS YOUR HEADS THOSE WHOM YOU HAD TAUGHT TO BE YOUR FRIENDS? R. Pinhas said: Antoninus gave Our Rabbi (Judah the Prince) the highest honors; but, when Our Rabbi sent me to him, he wrote him a letter and wrote in it: Your servant Judah asks about your welfare. But it displeased Antoninus, namely, that he called himself a servant. He said to him: Do not write again like this. Our Rabbi said to him: I write in such a way to you because I am no better than the patriarch Jacob. When he sent away to Esau, what did he say to him (according to Gen. 32:5 [4])? THUS SAYS YOUR SERVANT JACOB: I have not become an independent authority. (Gk.: authentes.) (Ibid., cont.:) I LIVED WITH LABAN. Not one of the blessings with which your father blessed me has reached me. (Cf. Gen. R. 75:11.) Your father blessed me (in Gen. 27:28): SO MAY GOD GIVE TO YOU OF THE DEW OF HEAVEN AND THE FAT PLACES OF THE EARTH; yet, I do not have one of them in hand. Rather (according to Gen. 32:6 [5]), I HAVE OX AND ASS, SHEEP, which are neither of the heavens nor of the earth. Do you hate me merely because of the blessings, [even though one has yet to reach me]? Did he have < only > one ox and one ass, in that it says (ibid.): I HAVE OX AND ASS … (in the singular)? (Cf. Gen. R. 75:6.) R. Judah and R. Nehemiah differ. R. Judah says: It is a figure of speech, as in the case of one who says in a collective sense: Ass went; cock crowed. (This is the interpretation of modem translations.) But R. Nehemiah said: < He spoke > to him, saying: Here am I, your servant Jacob, humbling myself before you. If you desire it, see, it is fine. But, if not, (ibid.:) I HAVE < AN > OX AND < AN > ASS < … >. [AN OX:] This is Joseph, as stated (of him in Deut. 33:17): LIKE A FIRSTLING OX HE HAS MAJESTY, < AND HIS HORNS ARE THE HORNS OF A WILD OX…. SUCH ARE THE MYRIADS OF EPHRAIM, AND SUCH ARE THE THOUSANDS OF MANASSEH >. There is an aggadic tradition that Esau will only fall at the hands of Rachel's children. Why? Because it is stated (in Jer. 49:20): SURELY THE YOUNGEST OF YOUR FLOCK SHALL DRAG THEM AWAY. These < youngest > are the children of Rachel. (Gen. 32:6 [5], cont.:) AND < AN > ASS. This is the Messianic King, as stated (in Zech. 9:9): REJOICE GREATLY, O DAUGHTER OF ZION, SHOUT ALOUD, O DAUGHTER OF JERUSALEM; < behold your king comes > … HUMBLE AND RIDING UPON AN ASS. (Gen. 32:6 [5], cont.:) A FLOCK. This is Israel, as stated (in Ezek. 34:31): FOR YOU, MY FLOCK, THE FLOCK OF MY PASTURE, YOU ARE HUMANS. (Gen. 32:6 [5], cont.:) MALE AND FEMALE SLAVES. This < also > refers to Israel, about which it is stated (in Ps. 123:2): BEHOLD, AS THE EYES OF MALE SLAVES < LOOK TO THEIR MASTER'S HAND, AS THE EYES OF A FEMALE SLAVE TO THE EYES OF HER MISTRESS, SO DO OUR EYES LOOK TO THE LORD OUR GOD >….
(Lev. 5:1:) “And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing […, if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity].” This text is related (to Eccl. 5:1), “Do not be rash with your mouth, and let not your heart hasten to bring forth a word before God.” These [words refer to] people who vilify the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. Come and see, when the celestial beings were created, those below were created with half of the [divine] name, as stated (in Is. 26:4), “for through Yh, (YH is the first half of the divine name, which the Hebrew spells out where the translation reads THE LORD.) the Lord formed the worlds.” (The midrash interprets tsur ‘olamim as FORMED THE WORLDS (i.e., this world and the world to come) rather than as the more usual EVERLASTING ROCK. For similar interpretations, see yHag. 2:1 (77c); Men. 29b; Gen. R. 12:10; M. Pss. 62:1; 114:3; cf. also M. Pss. 118:14.) But why were they not created with all of it? So as not to mention the full name [of the Holy One, blessed be He] with him. Woe to those creatures who vilify the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, in vain. See what is written about offerings (in Lev. 1:2), “When one of you presents an offering to the Lord.” It does not say "to the Lord, an offering," but “an offering to the Lord” (so that who changes his mind about an offering in mid-sentence not mention God’s name for no reason). (Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 1:6; Ned. 10ab; Sifra to Lev. 1:2, Wayyiqra, Parashah 2; Sifre, Deut.32:3 (306); Gen. R. 1:13.) And [yet] people vilify the name of the Lord in vain. It is therefore stated (in Eccl. 5:1), “Do not be rash with your mouth…. for God is in heaven and you are on earth.” For who would say that God is not in heaven and that people are not on earth? [Accordingly], Solomon has said, “Every time that the weakest of the weak is above, he defeats the warrior below.” Go and learn from Abimelech (in Jud. 9:53), “But a certain woman dropped an upper millstone on Abimelech's head and cracked his skull.” (Since the woman was above the warrior Abimelech in the tower of Thebez, her killing him is an example of a relatively weak person defeating a warrior from above.) And if he was a warrior among warriors and there was none like him, and [yet] a woman [was able to] kill him from above, how much the more so in the case of the Holy One, blessed be He! See what is written about Him (in Dan. 4:32), “All the inhabitants of the earth are of no account, and He does as He wishes [with the host of heaven and with the inhabitants of the earth].” It is also written (in Ps. 47:3), “For the Lord most high is awesome, a great King over all the earth,” and people are below. (Eccl. 5:1:) “Therefore let your words be few.” So what is there for you to do? To put your hand upon your mouth and upon your ear in order to neither speak nor hear. Ergo (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins.” (These words also appear in Lev. 5:21 [6:2].) (Lev. 5:1:) [“And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing,] when he is a witness to what he has either seen or come to know, [if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity].” This text is related (to Prov. 29:24), “The one who shares with a thief hates his own soul; he hears swearing and does not speak out.” What has caused anyone to say of him, “If a soul sins?” [It is] simply because he did not come and tell a sage, “So-and-so blasphemed the name of the Holy One, blessed be He.” He therefore shares his iniquities with him, as stated (in Lev. 5:1), “if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity.” Therefore Solomon has said (in Prov. 29:24), “The one who shares with a thief hates his own soul.” Just as when the thief is caught, his partner is convicted along with him; (Cf. Lev. R. 6:2.) so whoever hears blasphemy of the Holy One, blessed be He, and does not speak out is convicted along with him. And let no one say, “What denunciation (lashon hara’ah) do I say?” The Holy One, blessed be He, has said (in Lev. 5:1ff.), “’On every matter,’ there is a denunciation in it. [But] with cursing the name, there is no denunciation.” Why? Because [it is] just like a case of a person cursing his companion. When he hears him, it is of no concern to him. But if he has cursed his father in his presence, he puts his life on the line and says, “You have cursed my father.” Moses said (in Deut. 32:6), “Is He not your Father who created you?” (Lev. 5:1:) [“And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing,] when he is a witness to what he has seen.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If you want to bear witness, bear witness; but if not, I will bear witness.” Thus it is stated (ibid.), “when he (He) is a witness.” And where is it shown that the Holy One, blessed be He, is called a witness? Where it is stated (in Jer. 29:23), “I am the One who knows and bears witness, says the Lord.” Come and see. All the parashioth written in this book have “mistake” written in them, except for this parashah, in which “mistake” is not mentioned. (In fact, MISTAKE (shegagah), i.e., UNINTENTIONAL SIN, does appear in this parashah (in 5:15, 18). Elsewhere in Lev. the word only appears in 4:2, 22, 27; 22:4.)) About him Solomon has said (in Eccl. 5:5), “Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin, and do not say before the angel that it was a mistake,” (in Eccl. 5:1), “for God is in the heavens.” It is comparable to two people who threw stones at an image of a king. (Gk.: eikonion, a diminutive form of eikon.) One was drunk, and one was in possession of his senses. Both of them were caught and went to trial. [The judge] rendered a [guilty] verdict (Gk.: apophasis.) against the one with his senses and acquitted the one who was drunk. So it is in the case of whoever sins. It is concerning him that “mistake” is written (in Lev. 4:2) – “When a soul sins by mistake (rt.: shgg) [against any of the Lord's commandments]….”; (and likewise in Lev. 4:13) “And if the whole congregation of Israel should err (rt.: shgg).” And [about] all of them; because they sinned by mistake, they bring an offering and it shall be forgiven them. It is so stated (in Numb. 15:26), “The whole congregation of the Children of Israel and the stranger who resides in their midst shall be forgiven because [it happened] to all the people by mistake.” But the one who blasphemes receives a [guilty] verdict, as stated (in Lev. 24:16) “And the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death.” It is also written (in Jer. 4:2), “And you shall swear, ‘As the Lord lives,’ in truth, in justice, and in righteousness; then shall nations bless themselves in Him, and Him shall they glory.” Scripture also says (in Deut. 10:20), “The Lord your God you shall fear, Him you shall serve, to Him you shall hold fast”; then after that, “and by Him you shall swear.” (See Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1.) (Ibid.:) “The Lord your God you shall fear,” so that you will be like those three of whom it is written, “he feared God (yr' 'lhym)”: Abraham, Joseph and Job. About Abraham it is written (in Gen. 22:12), “for now I know that you fear God (yr' 'lhym).” About Joseph it is written (in Gen. 42:18), “I fear (yr') God ('lhym).” About Job it is written (in Job 1:2), “he feared God (yr' 'lhym) and shunned evil.” (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) “Him you shall serve,” in that you will be busy with the Torah and with [fulfilling] the commandments. (Ibid. cont.:) “To him you shall hold fast,” in that you will honor the Torah scholars and benefit them with your property. Moses said to Israel, “Do not think that I have allowed you to swear by His name, even in truth. It is only, if all these conditions (mentioned earlier in the verse) abide with you, that you are entitled to swear; and if not, you are not entitled to swear [by His name], even in truth.” You shall not be like those of whom it is written (in Jer. 7:9), “[Will you …] swear falsely and sacrifice to Baal?” Rather, fulfill all these conditions and after that you are Mine, as stated (in Jer. 4:1), “If you return, O Israel, says the Lord, if you return unto Me [….]” Then after that [it says] (in vs. 2), “And you shall swear, ‘as the Lord lives’….” Our masters have said, “Even in truth one cannot swear.” Why? Thus have our masters taught (in Dem. 2:3): Let not someone from Israel be unrestrained in vows (See also Ned. 20a.) or in jesting, (or to lead one's companion astray with an oath by saying it is not an oath). There is a story about the royal mountain where there were two thousand towns, and all of them were destroyed because of a truthful oath that was unnecessary. (Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1; cf. also Git. 57a.) Now if one who swears in truth has this happen, how much the more so in the case of one who swears to a lie? How did they act? One would utter an oath to his companion that he was going to such and such a place to eat and drink. Then they would go and act to fulfill their oath. It is therefore stated (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing.” Now when the Holy One, blessed be He, comes to judge all people in the world to come, He will judge them along with sorcerers and adulterers. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Mal. 3:5), “Then I will draw near to you in judgment; and I will be a swift witness against sorcerers, against adulterers, against those who swear to a lie (in My name).” And I am finding them guilty and bringing them down to Gehinnom. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “With the mouth that I gave you to be praising and glorifying My name, you are reproaching, blaspheming, and swearing to a lie in My name? Since I created all people to praise Me, as stated (in Prov. 16:4), “The Lord has made everything for His own purpose.” So is it not enough for you that you do not praise Me, but [that] you blaspheme [Me as well]! The Scripture has said (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea, [for it cannot rest (rt.: shqt)].” [They are] just like this [kind of] sea which has waves in its midst exalting themselves upward. When each and every one of them reaches the sand, it is broken and returns (hozer). (The word also means “repents.”) And its companion also looks at it breaking, and [yet] exalts itself upward without repenting (hozer). So are the wicked, who look at one another and exalt themselves. Therefore, they are likened to the sea, as stated (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea….” So did all the generations, the generation of Enosh, the generation of the flood, and the generation of the dispersion (i.e., of the Tower of Babel), not learn from each other. Instead they were exalting themselves. Therefore they are compared to the sea (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea.” (Is. 57:20, cont.:) “For it cannot rest (rt.: shqt).” The wicked have no rest in the world, but the righteous have serenity (shqt), as stated (in Jer. 30:10), “and Jacob shall again have peace (shqt) and quiet with none to make him afraid.” Another interpretation (of Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea.” Just as the sea has its dirt and mud in its mouth, so the wicked have their stench in their mouth. Thus it is stated (at the end of Is. 57:20), “and its waters toss up slime and mud.” It is not from choice that one hears blasphemies and invectives, but from the midst of the sins which are within him. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins and hears a voice swearing….” (Most translations equate the sinning with the swearing. This more literal translation illustrates the point that the swearing comes from a soul which has already sinned.) You find [that there are] three things under human control and three things not under human control …. (Tanh., Gen. 6:12 (i.e., Toledot 12); Gen. R. 67:12.) And not only [now] but even in the world to come. [So it is stated] (in Job 12:23), “He exalts (msgy') nations and destroys them.” The written text (ketiv) is “mshg'” (which means, misleads). (In unpointed Hebrew the Sin (S) and the Shin (Sh) look alike. Since MShG’, which is pointed mashge’, can also be spelled with the extra yod (i.e., Y), the two words are interchangable in an unpointed text.) Then He destroys them [and] brings them down to Abaddon, (Abbadon is a name for Hell, which means “destruction.”) while the righteous watch them. Thus it is stated (in Is. 66:24), “Then they shall go out and look at the corpses of the people who have rebelled against Me; their worms shall not die nor shall their fire be quenched”.
When the angels were about to depart (to go to Esau), what did Jacob tell the angels to say to him: I have an ox, and an ass (Gen. 32:6). Did he possess only a single ox and a single ass (as the text literally states)? From the size of the gift he sent him, we know that he had at least two hundred she-goats and twenty he-goats (ibid., v. 15). He told them to say this because the righteous person is always modest about himself, while the wicked exaggerates his importance, as did Esau, when he said: I have many (ibid. 33:9). Scripture states regarding the righteous and the wicked; There is that pretendeth himself rich, yet hath nothing; there is that pretendeth himself poor, yet hath great wealth (Prov. 13:7).
THEY SLEW MEN. Scripture employs the term ish (man) generically as it does shor (ox) and chamor (ass) for oxen and asses (Gen. 32:6). They slew men alludes to the inhabitants of the city of Shechem.
It would have appeared to us that ba-even (with stones) (Literally, with a stone.) (v. 2) is a collective noun. (Hence ba-even is to be rendered with stones.) Compare, And I have oxen (shor), (Literally, an ox.) and asses (chamor) (Literally, an ass.) (Gen. 32:6). (Literally, and I have an ox and an ass.) However, the words of tradition are correct. (The rabbis took ba-even literally. According to the Midrash the culprit was first stoned by one stone. See Sanhedrin 6:4, “The place of stoning was twice the height of a man. One of the witnesses knocked him down…If he died that sufficed; but if not, the second witness took a stone and dropped it on his heart. If he died that sufficed; but if not, he was stoned by all Israel.”) They are true. Rabbi Jonah the Spanish grammarian who rests in paradise says that and against his family (v. 5) means all those like him. (Rabbi Jonah was bothered by God’s threatening the family of the sinner with punishment when they apparently did not commit any sin.) Who brought us into this trouble? (Of not interpreting our verse literally.) Our verse is to be taken literally. The people of the land (Spoken of in verse 4.) will hide their eyes because they are of his family. (In other words, the family spoken of in our verse is to be identified with the earlier mentioned (v. 4) people of the land who hid their eyes from the sinner)
The words להעלות נר, are sort of a headline. The word נר means “lamps” (pl.) just as when Yaakov told Esau that he had acquired שור וחמור (Genesis 32,6) he did not mean that he had acquired only one of each, but that he had made acquisitions of these respective species of domestic animals. We find a similar use of the “singular” אשה, in Judges 21,16, where the words כי נשמדה מבנימין אשה do not mean that “a woman of the tribe of Benjamin had been killed,” but that ”all the women of Benjamin had been destroyed.”
I acquired oxen, donkeys, sheep, servants and maidservants. I have sent [these messengers] to tell my master, to find favor in your eyes.
And of all that in which my father blessed me there is nothing in my hand; but I have a few oxen and asses, sheep, and servants and handmaids; and I have sent to tell my lord that that blessing hath not profited me; that I may find mercy in thine eyes and that thou mayest not maintain (enmity) against me on account thereof.
| וַיָּשֻׁ֙בוּ֙ הַמַּלְאָכִ֔ים אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֖ב לֵאמֹ֑ר בָּ֤אנוּ אֶל־אָחִ֙יךָ֙ אֶל־עֵשָׂ֔ו וְגַם֙ הֹלֵ֣ךְ לִקְרָֽאתְךָ֔ וְאַרְבַּע־מֵא֥וֹת אִ֖ישׁ עִמּֽוֹ׃ | 7 J | The messengers returned to Jacob, saying, “We came to your brother Esau; he himself is coming to meet you, and his retinue (retinue Trad. “men,” yet women may be in view. See 33.15; cf. 24.59; contrast Judg. 9.49 with Exod. 32.28. See further the Dictionary under ’ish.) numbers four hundred.” |
(6) And should you say - and from where comes the livelihood of a person (that spends a long time praying)? To that question the text says "and I have ox and donkey" (Genesis 32:6) meaning, livelihood comes automatically if we do the will of the Place. "I send this message to my lord in the hope of gaining your favor" (Genesis 32:6) - meaning, this is the way of the nations of the world, when they see the honor and riches of Israel, then they love Israel, and then they favor Israel, even if they do not enjoy Israel, in any instance they give favor. "And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying: we came to your brother etc" (Genesis 32:7) - meaning, the hint is that the words of the tzadik are effective and enter in the heart of Esav, transforming him in a brother, as we explained above, however, "he also comes to meet you", meaning, even though he behaves and comes to meet you, his deeds are the opposite of your good deeds. "And four hundred men with him" hints that even though he does all sorts of evil deeds, he still says that he has a place in the world to come, that he has 400 hidden worlds, and this is "with him", that he says that with him there are 400, hinting to 400 worlds, as we explained.
The Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah 76:2) explains that when the pasuk states "And he was fearful and concerned" (Bereishis 32:7), it means that Yaakov was worried about two extremes: killing Eisav or being killed by him. Yaakov was concerned that if he distanced Eisav too much, Eisav might be completely lost, but if Eisav got too close, he could harm Yaakov's holiness. Thus, Yaakov "divided into two camps," reflecting his inability to unify with absolute truth while confronting wickedness. He had to lower his level, as indicated by his statement, "קטנתי - I have become small," signifying his divided state. Once Yaakov left Eisav, he was elevated to the name Yisrael and was no longer troubled by Eisav. The name Yaakov was associated with his struggle with Eisav, dealing with him through trickery. With the new name Yisrael, he no longer needed to engage in such tactics and could connect to absolute truth. The name change symbolizes a rebirth, elevating Yaakov significantly. This explains why Yaakov used the term קטנתי, as he felt small like an infant being reborn.
וגם הולך לקראתך, “he is also coming toward you happy to welcome you.”
וארבע מאות איש עמו, “he took them along in order to honour you.”
AND MOREOVER HE COMETH TO MEET THEE. He was told that you are coming.
וישבו המלאכים, The messengers returned, etc. The meaning is that they brought back a reply and said "we have come to your brother, to Esau, etc." i.e. he presented himself as your brother, whereas in actual fact he has remained Esau. "He is also coming to meet you," i.e. as a brother, but since he has taken four hundred armed men with him this is proof of his evil intentions against you.
The words "we have come to your brother" may also mean that although he has met us with a happy face i.e. displaying brotherliness, we displayed anger ourselves seeing that he has remained Esau true to form. This is what the Midrash we have quoted meant when it described the messengers as appearing garbed in fiery garments riding on fiery horses. The reason the messengers did not bring back a definitive evaluation was because outwardly Esau displayed brotherliness whereas in his heart he was still the same old Esau, hating Jacob.
וגם הולך לקראתך, “and he is also coming towards you, etc.” It is possible to explain the word וגם as including the celestial representative of Esau. who was also on the way to engage Yaakov in battle as we know from verse 25 ויאבק איש עמו, “a man wrestled with him.” This would reinforce what I have written earlier that if the מלאכים which the Torah describes Yaakov as having sent ahead as spies or messengers had been mere mortal human beings, how would these have known anything about the celestial representative of Esau being on the way to engage Yaakov in mortal combat? The reason the Torah uses two expressions to describe Yaakov’s fear, i.e. ויירא ויצר לו, is that Yaakov worried both about the approaching physical ecounter with Esau and at the same time he worried about the spiritual confrontation which was apparently about to take place between his and Esau’s spirit.
וארבע מאות איש עמו., “and four hundred (armed) men with him.” These men were all ready for combat. The reason the Torah did not describe these men as coming with Esau by the word אתו rather than עמו, is that the expression אתו is reserved for the righteous. We find it in connection with the righteous Joseph such as in Genesis 39,23 באשר ה' את, seeing that G’d was with him.” The reverse is true of the wicked when we read in Chronicles 2,32,8 עמו זרוע בשר, ועמנו ה' אלוקינו לעזרנו, “with him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the Lord our G’d.”
וישובו...אל אחיך אל עשו, they mentioned the name Esau after having referred to him as אחיך, “your brother.” They meant that “Esau still holds the old grudge against you.”
וגם הולך לקראתך, he also reveals his hatred of you by marching with 400 men against you now that he knows you are in the vicinity.
וארבע מאות איש עמו, he does not walk toward you with peaceful intentions but he is on his way in order to fight you.
AND THE MESSENGERS RETURNED TO JACOB, SAYING. These messengers had fulfilled their mission, but Scripture did not relate this for it would serve no purpose. The meaning of the expression, And moreover he cometh to meet thee, is that “even as you go to meet him, so he goes to meet you, and you will quickly encounter one another.”
באנו אל אחיך אל עשו, and you have found favour in his eyes, just as you said you would;
out of the joy at the impending reunion he approaches to meet with four hundred men, all in your honour. This, basically, is the plain meaning of the verse. This is also the plain meaning of Exodus 4,14 where the Torah describes Aaron coming to meet his brother Moses whom he had not seen for many years, and the Torah adds that he is overjoyed at the prospect.
באנו אל אחיך אל עשו WE CAME TO THY BROTHER, TO ESAU — to him of whom you said he is my brother, but he behaves towards you as Esau, the wicked — he is still harbouring hatred (Genesis Rabbah 75:7).
וגם הולך לקראתך, not only have we seen him, but he did not react with satisfaction when we told him about your wealth. But, אגם הולך לקראתך עם ארבע מאות איש, he also marches toward you with 400 men in order to attack you. The expression לקראת meaning to approach with hostile intent is repeated in Numbers 20,20 when again Edom (Esau) is threatening the Israelites.
But he acts towards you as the wicked Eisov... Otherwise, why does it say, “Eisov”? Yaakov had only one brother! Perforce, “Eisov” connotes he who is famous for extreme wickedness. (Re’m) A further explanation: Rashi is answering the question: It should say באנו אל עשו אחיך, like it is written אל עשו אחיו at the beginning of the parshah. Why does it say אל אחיך אל עשו? Maharshal explains [that Rashi is answering the question:] Why does it say אל twice? We need not object: [Accordingly,] why did Yaakov say לאדוני לעשו (v. 4)? For the answer is: There, Yaakov was commanding them to speak with honor. But here, where they are reporting the reply to Yaakov, why did they speak in this fashion? Thus Rashi explains as he does.
Faced with Esau’s clear numerical advantage, Jacob was very frightened of the prospect of bloodshed, and furthermore he was distressed, as he had nothing against Esau personally. 5 Consequently, he prepared to defend himself and divided the people who were with him, including the slaves and maidservants, his comrades, and other people who had joined him due to his success in Haran, and the flocks, the cattle, and the camels, into two camps.
וגם הולך לקראתך, “he is also on his way to meet you.” Just as you are walking towards him, so he is coming towards you, and you will soon meet up with one another. The reason the messengers phrased Esau’s approach not as בא לקראתך, the usual syntax, but said הולך לקראתך , was to alert Yaakov that while on the way, Esau was mobilizing his soldiers, before meeting up with his brother.
“We came to your brother Esau” [32:7]. Rashi writes: the messengers said to Jacob. You called Esau brother, but Esau is the same old Esau, an evildoer. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:7.)
“He is also coming” [32:7]. Bahya writes that the verse teaches us that the angel of Esau was also coming toward Jacob to help Esau. Therefore, the word “also” is written here. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:7.)
"And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying: 'We came to your brother Esau, and he is also coming to meet you, and four hundred men with him'" (Beresheet 32:7). He asks, After saying, "We came to your brother," do we not know they referred to Esau, as he had no other brothers? He answers, "We came to your brother" means that he did not repent and walk the path of righteousness, as may be thought, but remained the evil Esau as before. "and he is also coming to meet you..." does not mean, as you may say, by himself, but rather he has "four hundred men with him."
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – come and see what is written before this matter: “Jacob said, when he saw them: [This is the camp of God]” (Genesis 32:3). How many were in a camp of God? Two thousand myriads of ministering angels, as it is stated: “The chariots of God are myriad, thousands upon thousands of companies. My Lord is among them, at Sinai, in holiness” (Psalms 68:18). “He called the name of that place Maḥanayim” (Genesis 32:3). Why were there two camps? It teaches that they gave Jacob four thousand myriads of ministering angels and they appeared to him like a king’s armies, some of whom were clad in iron, some of whom were on horseback, and some of whom were sitting in chariots. He [Esau] encountered those clad in iron. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those on horseback. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those in chariots. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob,’ as it is stated: “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” (Genesis 33:8). Jacob, too, would mention to Esau the name of the Holy One blessed be He, to scare him and to frighten him, as it is stated: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). To what is this matter analogous? It is to one who invited another to a meal, and he (The guest.) ascertained that he sought to kill him. He [the guest] said: ‘The taste of this dish is like the taste of a dish that I tasted in the king’s palace.’ He said: ‘He knows the king?’ He was afraid and did not kill him. The same is true of Jacob. When he said to Esau: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” wicked Esau said: ‘The Holy One blessed be He brought him to all this glory? I will no longer be able to overcome him.’
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – why did he send messengers to him? Rather, this is what he said: ‘I will send him messengers; maybe he will repent.’ He said to them: ‘Say to him: Do not say Jacob remains as he was when he departed from his father’s house, as it is stated: “For with my staff I crossed…” (Genesis 32:11), “He commanded him, saying” (Genesis 32:5) – say to him: Do not say that when he departed from you he took anything from the household property. Rather, [tell him that] I acquired all these as my wages, through my effort,’ as it is stated: “And now I have become two camps” (Genesis 32:11). At the moment that Jacob called Esau “my lord,” the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You abased yourself and called him “my lord” eight times. As you live, I will establish eight kings from his descendants before your descendants,’ as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned [in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31). He [Jacob] said to them [the messengers]: ‘Say to him: If you are prepared for peace, I am with you, and if for war, I am with you. I have warriors, courageous and strong, who say something before the Holy One blessed be He, and He performs their will on their behalf,’ as it is stated: “He performs the will of those who fear him” (Psalms 145:19). That is why David came to give praise and acclaim before the Holy One blessed be He, who helped him when he fled from Saul, as it is stated: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow” (Psalms 11:2). What is written thereafter? “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous man do?” (Psalms 11:3). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, if You had distanced and forsook Jacob, who is the pillar and foundation of the world, as it is stated: “The righteous man is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25), “what can the righteous man do?”’ Regarding that moment, it is stated: “Some on chariots and some on horses, but we invoke the name of the Lord our God” (Psalms 20:8).
Another matter, “I have oxen [shor], and donkeys [vaḥamor]” (Genesis 32:6). Shor – this is Joseph, as it is stated: “A firstborn bull [shoro] is his majesty” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Vaḥamor – this is Issachar, as it is written: “Issachar is a strong-boned donkey [ḥamor] (Genesis 49:14). Joseph’s grandson is destined to eradicate Amalek, as it is stated: “Joshua (Joshua was from the tribe of Ephraim, who was Joseph's son.) weakened Amalek and its people by sword” (Exodus 17:13). Issachar’s descendants know what the Holy One blessed be He does in His world, as it is stated: “From the children of Issachar, possessors of understanding of the times, to know what Israel should do; their leaders were two hundred” (I Chronicles 12:33). “Flocks [tzon]” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “You, My flock [tzoni], flock of My pasture, you are man” (Ezekiel 34:31). “And slaves [ve’eved]” – this is David, as it is stated: “I am your servant [avdekha] son of your maidservant” (Psalms 116:16). “And maidservants [veshifḥa]” – this is Avigayil, as it is stated: “Here is your handmaiden as a maidservant [leshifḥa]” (I Samuel 25:41). “Jacob was very frightened and distressed. He divided the people who were with him, and the flocks, and the cattle, and the camels, into two camps” (Genesis 32:8). At that moment, those messengers went to Esau and saw armed warriors with him, and they came and told Jacob, as it is stated: “The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came to your brother, to Esau” (Genesis 32:7). What is: “And four hundred men with him”? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: Four hundred kings wearing crowns. Some say: Four hundred prefects were with him. Rabbi Yanai said: Four hundred generals were with him. When they related to Jacob all that multitude, he was afraid and he divided his wives and children into two camps, as it is stated: “He divided the people who were with him…[into two camps].”
“The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came to your brother, to Esau; moreover he is coming to meet you, and four hundred men with him” (Genesis 32:7). “The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came to your brother, to Esau” – you treat him like a brother, but he treats you like Esau. (He wants to harm you, and does not relate to you as a brother.) “Moreover he is coming to meet you, and four hundred men with him” – Reish Lakish said: “With him” – those who are with him are like him. Just as he is mighty and capable of standing against four hundred men, so, each and every one of them is capable of overcoming four hundred men. Rabbi Levi said: He went and took a license from Egypt to collect taxes. He said: ‘If I can overcome him, fine. If not, I will say to him: Pay taxes, and as a result, I will confront him and kill him.’
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – this is what was said with divine spirit by Solomon king of Israel: “Blessings upon the head of the righteous, and villainy will cover the mouth of the wicked” (Proverbs 10:6). Corresponding to whom did Solomon state this verse? He said it corresponding only to Jacob and Esau. “Blessings upon the head of the righteous” – this is Jacob. “And villainy will cover the mouth of the wicked” – this is the wicked Esau. Happy are the righteous who are blessed on earth and are blessed in Heaven, and this is appropriate, as it is stated: “So that one who blesses himself in the land will bless himself by the God of faithfulness” (Isaiah 65:16) – to inform you that all the blessings that Isaac blessed Jacob, corresponding to those, the Holy One blessed be He blessed him from on High. Isaac said to him: “God will give you from the dew of the heavens…” (Genesis 27:28), and the Holy One blessed be He blessed him with dew and rain, as it is stated: “The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of many peoples like dew [from the Lord, like raindrops]” (Micah 5:6). Isaac said to him: “and from the fats of the earth” (Genesis 27:28), and the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “He will give rain for your seeds with which you will sow the ground” (Isaiah 30:23). Isaac said: “Peoples will serve you” (Genesis 27:29), and the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Kings will be your caregivers, and their princesses, your wet nurses” (Isaiah 49:23). Isaac said: “You will be a lord to your brethren” (Genesis 27:29), and the Holy One blessed be He said to him through Moses: “To place you uppermost over all the nations” (Deuteronomy 26:19). You learned that all the blessings that Isaac blessed Jacob from below, corresponding to that, the Holy One blessed be He blessed him from on High. His mother Rebecca, too, blessed him corresponding to them, as it is stated: “He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High” (Psalms 91:1). So she said to him: “For He will charge His angels on your behalf [to guard you in all your ways]” (Psalms 91:11). When she said that to him in that language, the Divine Spirit blessed Him: “When he calls upon Me, I will answer him…” (Psalms 91:15). Once the Holy One blessed be He blessed him, why did his father bless him again, as it is stated: “Isaac summoned Jacob, and he blessed him”? (Genesis 28:1). It is, rather, that Isaac saw through the divine spirit that his descendants were destined to be exiled among the nations. He said to him: ‘Come and I will bless you blessings of exile, so that the Holy One blessed be He will return to you and gather you from the midst of the exiles.’ What are the blessings? “In six troubles He will deliver you, and in seven, no harm will touch you. …From the scourge of the tongue you will be hidden, and you will not fear pillage when it comes. At pillage and hunger you will laugh, and from the beasts of the earth, do not fear” (Job 5:19, 21–22). That is why it is stated: “Blessings upon the head of the righteous.”
Another matter, “Jacob sent” (Genesis 32: 4) – “Lord, do not grant the desires of the wicked. Do not bring their scheme to fruition [zemamo al tafek]; may they depart, Selah” (Psalms 140:9). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, do not realize for wicked Esau the thoughts of his heart.’ What is “zemamo al tafek”? He said before him: ‘Master of the universe: Place a muzzle for wicked Esau so that his satisfaction will not be complete.’ What muzzle did the Holy One blessed be He make for wicked Esau? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: ‘These are the residents of Barbary and the residents of Germany, whom the Edomites (This refers to Rome, which was being attacked by Germanic tribes.) fear.’ Another matter, “do not grant the desires of the wicked” – he said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, just as it was Laban’s intent to harm me, but you did not allow him to do so, so, too, regarding the thoughts of my brother Esau who is thinking to kill me, thwart his evil.’ He was one of three people who thought [to do] evil, but they were unsuccessful – Esau, Yerovam, and Haman. Esau, as it is stated: “Esau said in his heart” (Genesis 27:41). Regarding Yerovam it is written: “Yerovam said in his heart” (I Kings 12:26). Regarding Haman it is written: “Haman said in his heart” (Esther 6:6). What is “Esau said in his heart”? He said: ‘Cain killed his brother, and the Omnipresent did nothing to him. Ultimately, he [Adam] begot additional sons, and they inherited the world with him. But I, I will kill Isaac my father first, and then I will kill Jacob my brother, and I will inherit the world alone,’ as it is stated: “Let the days of mourning for my father approach” (Genesis 27:41) – he said: ‘First, I will hasten the mourning for Father, and then: “I will kill my brother Jacob”’ (Genesis 27:41). But the Holy One blessed be He did not enable him to do so. That is why it is stated: “Do not grant the desires of the wicked.”
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. Did he lack something? Indeed, when they said to him (in Gen. 32:7 [6]): MOREOVER HE (Esau) IS COMING TO MEET YOU, AND THERE ARE FOUR HUNDRED MEN WITH HIM; he arose and prepared a gift. (Gk.: doron.) (According to Gen. 32:15-16 [14-15]) he began by giving she-goats because they were tender. Afterwards < according to the text, there were > he-goats, ewes, rams, < and > THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS. [R. Levi said: If I went around among all the tents of Kedar (i.e., of the Ishmaelites) you would not have found THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS.] Look at Jacob's wealth! In addition (according to Gen. 32:16 [15]) he gave FORTY COWS AND TEN BULLS. R. Isaac said: < These did > not include precious stones and pearls. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:14 [13]): THEN HE TOOK FROM WHAT WAS IN HAND, < i.e., > things taken up in the hand. These would be precious stones and pearls. R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: All twelve months that he spent with him, he would so honor him (with gifts) on each day. In this regard Jacob said (in Deut. 16:19): FOR A GIFT BLINDS THE EYES OF THE (PRUDENT) [WISE]. < He reasoned > a fortiori, how much the more < would a gift blind > the wicked! Just consider this: I am honoring him so that he will not touch me.
(Gen. 34:2, cont.:) SO HE TOOK HER, LAY WITH HER, AND VIOLATED HER. Because of what sin did the uncircumcised one come upon her? It is written (in Job 6:14) TO ONE WHO IS DESPONDENT LOYALTY IS DUE FROM HIS NEIGHBOR EVEN THOUGH HE SHOULD ABANDON THE FEAR OF THE ALMIGHTY. However, when our father Jacob came along with the tribes, Dinah was with him < as well >. As soon as the messengers came and said to him (according to Gen. 32:7 [6]): WE CAME UNTO YOUR BROTHER ESAU, Jacob took Dinah and put her in a chest so that Esau would not see her and take her for a wife. (Gen. R. 76:9.) The Holy One said to him: You have withheld her from him. By your life, she is ready for an uncircumcised man, i.e., the one about whom it is written (in Job 6:14): TO ONE WHO IS DESPONDENT LOYALTY IS DUE FROM HIS NEIGHBOR. If she had been married to Esau, perhaps she would have converted him. When Job took her, did she not convert him? (See ySot. 5:8 (20c); BB 15b; Gen. R. 57:4; 80:4.) He therefore withheld her. See, < now > the son of a cursed (rt.: 'RH) one has come across her. Ergo (in Gen. 34:2): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR … SAW (rt.: R'H) HER.
(Gen. 32:7 [6]:) AND THE MESSENGERS RETURNED < UNTO JACOB, SAYING >: WE CAME UNTO YOUR BROTHER ESAU. What do you think about him? < Is he > your brother? He is Esau. (Cf. Rashi, ad loc.: You used to say: He is my brother, but he acts toward you like Esau the Wicked.) (Ibid., cont.:) HE ALSO IS COMING TO MEET YOU. He is on the go all day, AND (ibid., cont.) FOUR HUNDRED PEOPLE ARE WITH HIM. What do you think about < the meaning of > AND FOUR HUNDRED PEOPLE ARE WITH HIM? R. Samuel bar Nahmani said: Each and every one of them was appointed over four hundred people. (The interpretation comes from the words WITH HIM, which are understood to mean, “like him.” Thus, as Esau commanded four hundred, so did each of them command four hundred. So Gen. R. 75:7.) As soon as Jacob heard that, what is written (in Gen. 32:8 [7])? AND JACOB WAS < GREATLY > AFRAID.
Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua (ibid. 17:14). He was one of the four righteous men who was given a sign. Two of them took cognizance of the sign, and two did not. Jacob and Moses were given signs, but they did not take cognizance of them. Jacob: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee withersoever thou goest (Gen. 28:15); nevertheless, Then Jacob was greatly afraid (ibid. 32:8). Should a man to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has given a promise become frightened? However, Jacob said: Perhaps I became unworthy while living with Laban, the sinner, whose home was impure and sinful. Moses was given a sign, but he did not comprehend it, as it is said: Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua. Thus He was saying (to Moses): You shall die, and Joshua will lead Israel into the land. He told him that in this verse, but he failed to take cognizance of it, and so he later pleaded, as it is said: And I besought the Lord at that time … let me go over, I pray thee (Deut. 3:25).
And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying … “He cometh to meet thee with four hundred men” (Gen. 32:7). Thereupon, Jacob was greatly afraid and was distressed (ibid., v. 8). Why is the word for “fear” repeated in this verse? He was greatly afraid that he might be killed and distressed lest he should be forced to kill. Jacob was an extremely powerful man. Proof of this is that he had subdued a mighty angel, as is said: So he strove with an angel and prevailed; he wept, and made supplication unto him (Hos. 12:5). But at that moment he began to plead for mercy, as it is said: Deliver me, I pray thee, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau (Gen. 32:12).
"The emissaries returned to Jacob." This refers to the human as well as to the spiritual emissaries. The spiritual emissaries told Jacob: באנו אל אחיך, "We have come to your brother, whereas the human emissaries told him: אל עשו, "To Esau." He is also coming to meet you;" this was said by the emissaries sent to the Celestial Regions who reported about Samael. וגם ארבע מאות איש עמו; "and he also has four hundred men with him." This was reported by the human messengers who had been despatched to Esau.
LET MY SOUL NOT COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL. Rabbi Aaron (Gaon of the school of Pumbedita. The great Hai Gaon was among his students.) explained the word tavo (come) in Let my soul not come (tavo) as having the meaning of set like the meaning of ba (goeth down, to set) in and the sun goeth down (ba) (Eccles. 1:5). (The word ba means to come. In Eccles. 1:5 the word ba means sets, i.e., when the sun goes down (sets) it is no longer in the sky. Similarly the word tavo, which comes from the same root, here means will set. Let my soul not set from their council means let my soul always be in their council.) He interpreted let my soul not come into their council as meaning, I do not want to be outside of their council. However, Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation inverts the meaning of the verse. (Rabbi Aaron interpreted Let my soul not come in to their council to mean let my soul not set from their council. The verse means I do not want my soul to be in their council. Thus Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation is precisely the opposite of what the verse actually says.) If Jacob praised Simeon and Levi, why did he mention weapons of violence? Furthermore, Jacob told his sons, Ye have troubled me, to make me odious unto the inhabitants of the land (Gen. 34:30). (We thus see that Jacob was angry at what his sons did to the inhabitants of Shechem and on his deathbed would not praise them for this act.) The truth of the matter is that Simeon and Levi placed Jacob and his household in great jeopardy by their actions in Shechem. Indeed, were it not for the terror of God that was upon the cities that were round about them (Gen. 35:5), they would have surrounded Jacob and his family and exterminated them all. He (Rabbi Aaron) similarly explained (That is, in a positive manner, not that Jacob castigated his sons but praised them for slaying the inhabitants of Shechem and destroying its wall. Rabbi Aaron interprets verses 6-7 as follows: Let my soul not set from their council, from their assembly let my glory not be excluded; For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they uprooted a cursed wall; For their anger was fierce, and their wrath it was cruel. Rabbi Aaron interprets verse 8 as follows: I will give them a good portion in Jacob (achallekem be-ya’akov) and may they multiply in Israel (va-afitzem bi’yisra’el) (Filwarg).) Cursed be their anger (v. 7) as meaning and in their self will they uprooted a cursed wall, (Rabbi Aaron renders ikkeru shor (they houghed oxen) as they uprooted a wall.) for their anger was fierce. The above explanations are unpalatable. (Literally, cold, i.e., unpalatable as cold food (Krinsky).) Let my soul not come into their council. (I reject them. I.E. takes Jacob’s words and gives them a new twist.) Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen (Rabbi Moses ben Samuel Gikatilla, an 11th century Bible commentator. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 and the notes thereto.) says that kevodi (my glory) is synonymous with nafshi (my soul). He notes that we find the two often used synonymously in the book of Psalms. Rabbi Moses’ interpretation is correct since our text repeats itself in different words, (The point is that the second half of the line repeats what the first half said but in different words. In the first half it uses nafshi, in the second kevodi. However, both mean one and the same.) as is the style of prophetic statements. We thus find, Ask thy father, and he will declare unto thee, Thine elders, and they will tell thee (Deut. 32:7), and (in Num. 23:8) How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? And how shall I execrate, whom the Lord hath not execrated? Thus into their council means the same as unto their assembly, come (tavoh) the same as be united (techad), and nafshi the same as kevodi. However, Rabbi Judah ben Balam the Spaniard (Bible commentator and grammarian who lived in the 10th and 11th centuries. “His commentaries (in Arabic) on most of the Bible are remarkable for their philosophical method and use of comparison with Arabic.” (Cecil Roth, Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 940).) says that Rabbi Moses erred. He maintains that kavod (glory) refers to the body because the body is the glory (kavod) of the soul in the same way that a necklace is the ornament to the neck, (The body is inferior to the soul, yet it is considered the soul’s glory in the same way that a necklace, although certainly less important than the neck, is nevertheless called the ornament of the neck (Cherez).) as we find in the verse Who satisfieth thy body (edyekh) with good things (Ps. 103:5). (The Hebrew edyekh ordinarily means your ornament. J.P.S. translates it as thine old age. Rabbi Judah Balam interprets edyekh as referring to the body. However, I.E. in Psalms interprets edyekh as referring to the soul.) Rabbi Judah offers as a proof text, (That kavod refers to the body.) Yea, let him lay my glory (kevodi) in the dust. Selah. (Ps. 7:6). (Which proves that glory cannot refer to the soul for it is impossible to lay the soul in the dust.) However, I say that Rabbi Judah errs, for we find Scripture saying, So that my glory (kevodi) may sing praise to Thee (Ps. 30:13), (I.E. interprets this verse in his commentaries on Psalms as follows: So that all that have a soul (kavod) may sing praise to thee. We thus see that kavod refers to the soul. Rabbi Judah might retort that Ps. 30:13 should be interpreted: so that my body may sing praise to thee, or all that have a human form (kavod) may sing praise to thee.) and Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory (kevodi) rejoiceth; My flesh (i.e., my body) also dwelleth in safety (Ps. 16:9). (Kavod must refer to the soul for otherwise body is mentioned twice in our verse. I.E. in Psalms interprets my heart as referring to man’s intelligence, my glory (kevodi) to man’s soul, and my flesh to the body.) As to the proof which Rabbi Judah offered from Yea, let him lay my glory in the dust, it is figurative. What the verse means is that my soul will be lowered as low as possible, i.e., to the dust. Positive proof that my interpretation is correct comes from My soul (nafshi) cleaveth unto the dust (Ps. 119:25). (This verse certainly must be taken figuratively. Similarly, Ps. 119:25.)
Jacob was the man whose deepest spiritual encounters happened when he was on a journey, alone and afraid at the dead of night, fleeing from one danger to another. In this parasha, we see him fleeing from Esau and about to meet Laban, a man who would cause him great grief. In the following parasha we see him fleeing in the opposite direction, from Laban to Esau, a meeting that filled him with dread: he was “very afraid and distressed” (Gen. 32:7). Jacob was supremely the lonely man of faith.
Jacob flees to Laban where he encounters more conflict; he is on his way home when he hears that Esau is coming to meet him with a force of four hundred men. In an unusually strong description of emotion the Torah tells us that Jacob was “very frightened and distressed” (Gen. 32:7) – frightened, no doubt, that Esau would try to kill him, and perhaps distressed that his brother’s animosity was not without cause.
It is likely that the very real transformation in Yaakov’s character engenders a new response from his brother. This understanding of Esav’s change of heart dovetails the widely held view that Esav originally brought a war party to attack Yaakov upon his long-delayed return home to Israel. (See Bachya, Seforno et al. on Bereshit 32:7.) According to this approach, the change of heart occurs in Esav sometime between Esav’s going out to confront Yaakov and their actual meeting. Most likely, the wealth and political savvy behind the sophisticated retinue of gifts sent by Yaakov creates doubts in Esav’s mind. Although Esav came with hostile intentions, the gifts do not fit in to the picture he had of Yaakov based on the last time he had contact with him. Yaakov’s unexpected approach forces Esav to reevaluate his position toward his brother. Thus, by the time Esav actually meets Yaakov, he understands that it is no longer Yaakov whom he meets, but rather Yisrael. Consequently, it is his “new” brother who is able to elicit a change in Esav’s hostile stance.
The men of Levi did as Moses had bidden; and some three thousand of the people fell that day.
So each of the troops also lopped off a bough; then they marched behind Abimelech and laid them against the tunnel, and set fire to the tunnel over their heads. Thus all the people (people Or “occupants.”) of the Tower of Shechem also perished, about a thousand men and women.
The messengers returned to Yaakov saying, We came to your brother, to Eisov, and he is also coming to meet you; and there are four hundred men with him.
And four hundred men, warlike leaders with him.
And the messengers returned to Jakob, saying, We came to thy brother, to Esau, and he also cometh to meet thee, and four hundred chief--warriors with him.
| וַיִּירָ֧א יַעֲקֹ֛ב מְאֹ֖ד וַיֵּ֣צֶר ל֑וֹ וַיַּ֜חַץ אֶת־הָעָ֣ם אֲשֶׁר־אִתּ֗וֹ וְאֶת־הַצֹּ֧אן וְאֶת־הַבָּקָ֛ר וְהַגְּמַלִּ֖ים לִשְׁנֵ֥י מַחֲנֽוֹת׃ | 8 J | Jacob was greatly frightened; in his anxiety, he divided the people with him, and the flocks and herds and camels, into two camps, |
And the messengers returned to Jacob and said, We came to your brother Esau, and he is also coming to meet you, and four hundred men are with him. Then Jacob was very afraid and distressed” (Genesis 32:7-8) The verse says: “May only goodness and kindness pursue me all the days of my life” (Psalms 23:6). A person does not always know what is good for him; for who is wise enough to think that they always know what is in their best interest? Sometimes, the goodness even runs after a person. G-d, in His mercy, wants to shine His light, deliverance and success upon him; yet the person has no idea that he would benefit from this thing and be successful, and so he turns around and runs away from what is for his own good. Therefore, with holy inspiration, King David asked on behalf of all Israel, “May only goodness and kindness pursue me.” Even when I don’t have enough insight to accept these things in my life, and, in fact, I run away from them; still, I beg You that they should run after me, until they overtake me, and I welcome them and bring blessing into my life. (This teaching reflects the idea that even apparently negative occurrences are actually for our own good. G-d’s nature is ultimately loving and beneficent, and therefore, even suffering will ultimately be revealed to have been for our benefit. Indeed, Kabbalah teaches that there are many things that can only be repaired through suffering, such as purification from certain sins. In such as case, Divine blessing would only come after the experience of purification. However, the Baal Shem Tov, in his great love for the Jewish people, propounded yet another principle: G-d is all-powerful, and can therefore accomplish the same repair that suffering achieves through loving means. The Baal Shem Tov composed the following prayer that reflects this idea: “I know that even the bad is for my good. However, You are G-d, and not a man, and you can transform the bad to real good, so that even though there won’t be any aspect of bad left, even so, it will be completely for my benefit, so that the necessary repair can come from the good itself.” (See Mishmeret Yitamar, Vayishlach.) This can be understood with a parable taught be the Baal Shem Tov: Once, a simple country villager rebelled against the king. Everyone was sure that he would be caught and sentenced to death. However, the king did something else. As soon as he learnt of the rebellion, he appointed the villager to be mayor of his town. Later, he appointed him to a higher position, and then to an even higher one, until he made him one of the dukes of the land. However, the more he promoted the man, the worse the man felt for having originally rebelled against the king, who showed him so much kindness. This was the king’s intention. For had he punished the man once at first, the man’s pain would not have been as great as that which he felt over a long period of time, in the face of the king’s continual beneficence. Likewise, when a person sins, G-d showers upon him even more grace than before. When the person realizes G-d’s goodness to him, despite his behavior, he is immediately humbled and repents of all that he is doing wrong. (See Otzar Mishle Chasidim, vol. 1, p. 85).) Likutey Torah, Ki Tavo
The messengers returned to Jacob with the report: “We came to your brother Esau, and he is also heading toward you. He has 400 men with him.” And Jacob was very frightened and distressed… (Genesis 32:7-8) It is written: “And like the fear of You, so is Your wrath” (Psalms 90:11). That is, a person should always fear G-d, just as when he is in distress (I.e. in a time of G-d’s wrath.) and he fears G-d greatly. The verse can also be interpreted in reverse. In a time of distress, do not merely be afraid [due to the situation], for it is proper to feel the fear of G-d always. (Even when a person is afraid of a mortal danger, he should realize that the situation is being orchestrated by G-d; thus, it is G-d whom he should fear, not the situation itself.) Likutim Yikarim, p. 4c
"And I have sent these to you to find favor in your eyes” (Genesis 32:5). Later, it repeats, “To find favor in the eyes of my master” (Genesis 32:8). Yaakov was likely truthful, aiming to draw Eisav closer, as the word הגדה implies drawing out, like sinews. Although Eisav could not reach Yaakov's spiritual level, if he found Yaakov’s path appealing and nullified himself to it, he too would achieve rectification. This is the idea behind the gifts, as Rashi explains. Each person must prepare against the evil inclination through appeasement, gifts, and battle, to prevent it from controlling their life. However, one cannot rely solely on personal efforts and must beseech Hashem for mercy to overcome the evil inclination and its tricks, as our sages state: "If Hashem does not help, one cannot prevail" (Kiddushin 30b). The concept of gifts also involves awakening Hashem’s mercy on negative desires, recognizing that everything, even those seemingly disconnected from the divine, belongs to Him and was created for His glory. Thus, one should seek comprehensive rectification, not only personal salvation but also the subjugation of all evil forces.
ויירא יעקב מאד (upon hearing this) “Yaakov was very much afraid;” you may well ask that after Yaakov had been met by angels, as we read at the end of the last portion, and these angels were clearly meant to protect him, what did he have to worry about? This obvious question is answered by our sages by explaining that one of these angels was Michael, Yaakov’s protective angel, whereas the second one was Samael, Esau’s angel. Knowing this, Yaakov had no way of knowing which of these two angels was more powerful. This is why he became very fearful. Yaakov feared that although he had sent a conciliatory message to Esau, he was afraid that through some inadvertent sin he might have committed recently, he might fall victim to his older brother. He was especially conscious of the fact that he had overstayed his time at Lavan for six years in order to amass some money, instead of returning to the land of Canaan and fulfilling the commandment of honouring his father and mother, especially so, seeing that his father was blind. (Based on Bereshit Rabbah 76,2) He therefore did not credit Esau with having friendly intentions. Another exegesis about the words: באנו אל אחיך, ”we have come to your brother;” (but he did not respond with a single word). He only said that he would proceed to meet Yaakov; he did not have to come to him, and the messengers returning added that Esau was accompanied by four hundred men. Esau did say that he would speak with Yaakov personally. Yaakov’s fear resulted from the fact that now he was no wiser than before. He had no clue as to Esau’s real intentions.
ויצר לו, “he was anxious;” the letter י has the vowel tzeyreh underneath it;
ויחץ את העם אשר אתו, “he split up the entourage that was with him;” Yaakov had said to himself: “if Esau should see me fleeing, (instead) I will awaken feelings of hatred within him.”
ויירא יעקב, “Yaakov was greatly afraid;” seeing that Yaakov had had many assurances from G–d, why would he be afraid of the encounter with his brother Esau? He realised –belatedly-that he had erred in staying with Lavan after having completed his 14 years of service, in order to marry. During the years when he had worked to amass material wealth, his brother Esau had performed the commandment of honouring father and mother. He was afraid that he did not have sufficient merits to overcome Esau’s lead in that department. (B’reshit Rabbah 76,2) According to the Midrash, G–d’s promise to protect him, was limited to while he was outside the borders of the Holy Land.
ויצר לו, “he was distressed;” his distress was over his inability to overcome his fear of Esau in spite of the assurances he had received from G–d. (attributed to Harav Eliav hacohen) An alternate interpretation. The commentator agrees with the meaning of the words: ויירא. However, he interprets the word ויצר as referring to his fear when hearing that Esau was on the way with an armed escort planning to kill him. He knew from his mother that although Esau had sworn to await the death of his father before killing Yaakov (Genesis 27,41) he had changed his mind; when he is quoted as referring to G–d as “the G–d of my father Yitzchok,” instead of “the G–d of my father,” that Yitzchok had died in the meantime, (during the 36 years he had been away from home) as G–d does not associate His name with a living person. (Compare B’reshit Rabbah on that verse.)
AND WAS DISTRESSED. This thing distressed him. (According to Filwarg. Others interpret slightly differently.) Va-yetzer (and he was distressed) is in the hifil. (Since va-yetzer is a hifil the word does not mean and he was distressed, but rather, it distressed him. Hence I.E. comments “this thing distressed him”; i.e., his brother’s coming distressed him. Others maintain that va-yetzer is a nifal meaning and he was distressed. Filwarg asks, “If va-yetzer is a hifil why isn’t it vocalized va-yatzer as is the rule with a double root (tzadi, resh, resh is the root of va-yetzer) in the hifil?” He suggests that va-yetzer is irregular. Weiser suggests that perhaps I.E.’s text of the Bible was vocalized va-yatzer. For a discussion of the problems concerning this comment of I.E., see Filwarg, Weiser and Cherez.) It is similar to ve-hetzar (Which is in the hifil.) (and he shall besiege) in and he shall besiege (ve-hetzar) thee (Deut. 28:52).
AND HE DIVIDED. The yad of va-yachatz (and he divided) is vocalized with a pattach because it precedes a guttural. (The root of va-yachatz is chet, tzadi, heh. Va-yachatz is an abridged kal imperfect with a conversive vav. In such cases the yod is vocalized with a chirik. Compare, ve-yifen and va-yiven. Hence I.E.’s comment.) Compare, (va-ya’al) in And Moses went up (va-ya’al moshe) (Ex. 19:20). (Here, too, we have an abridged imperfect with the yod vocalized with a pattach rather than a chirik. The reason is also that it precedes a guttural (the ayin). The root of va-ya’al is ayin, lamed, heh.)
Yaakov was very frightened. When Yaakov realized that he was afraid despite Hashem’s assurance, he reckoned that he was not worthy of miraculous salvation and began preparing naturalistic stratagems instead.
ויירא יעקב, Jacob was afraid, etc. He prepared himself to either kill or be killed. He was very afraid of being killed; he was pained by the possible need to kill Easu in self-defence. This is why the verse mentions מאד, very much, in connection with this fear.
Inasmuch as the angels had warned him of Esau's duplicity, that he would pretend to be brotherly, Jacob was afraid not to prepare himself for war in the event Esau planned to kill him while he was unarmed. On the other hand "it distressed him" that the very fact that their encounter would be an armed one might precipitate a war which Esau had not really intended until he saw Jacob armed. His hatred would be rekindled only because he presumed that Jacob confronted him in a fighting stance when he looked at his weapons. As a result of such considerations Jacob divided his camp; the first camp would display friendliness whereas the second camp would be armed and ready for battle.
ויירא יעקב מאד ויצר לו , “Yaakov was very fearful as well as distressed.” Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 76,2 comment on this that the word ויירא refers to Yaakov’s fear of being killed, whereas the word ויצר refers to his discomfort at the thought of having to kill Esau in self-defense. Seeing that twenty years earlier G’d had assured him in the dream of the ladder that He would be with him and would protect him, why did he have any reason to be afraid at all? Our sages answer that Yaakov never considered G’d’s promise as ironclad but as subject to his conducting himself as worthy of it. Yaakov worried that he might have committed sins during the last twenty years which had invalidated G’d’s promise to him. This, at any rate is the approach of the Talmud to this problem in Berachot 4. The sages of the Talmud there comment further: “why is there a dot in Psalms 27,13, on the word לולא? David said: לולא האמנתי לראות בטוב ה', “If I had not had the assurance that I would enjoy the goodness of the Lord, etc.” He meant “O Lord, I am certain that You will repay the righteous in the hereafter for the good deeds they have performed on earth. However, I am not at all sure that I will have a share in the hereafter as I may have forfeited my share through sin.” Seeing that David referred to himself as חסיד, “pious,” (compare Psalms 86,20), how could he doubt that he would have a share in the hereafter? Again the sages answer that he was afraid that some sin he had committed would result in his forfeiting his claim to the hereafter. [The dot on the second letter ל in the word לולא is considered as restrictive, as if to say “if nothing contrary to the present condition will occur.” Ed.] Another approach: Yaakov was altogether not concerned about anything happening to himself, personally. After all, he was a recipient of G’d’s promise and he considered this as perfectly adequate. He was concerned about his children, his wives, and the members of his household who had not received such an assurance from G’d. This is the meaning of (verse 8) “he divided up the children (between two camps).” As proof for this interpretation look at the words פן יבא והכני אם על בנים, “lest he come and smite me by killing children with their mother.” He did not say the word והכני, “and strike me,” as an independent statement referring to him personally, as something that he was afraid of for himself. After all, Esau’s quarrel was with Yaakov, not with his wives or children. He was not concerned about himself per se. His only fear was of what might happen to his children and to his wives.
You ought to appreciate that this paragraph contains an explanation of what exactly did happen to Yaakov as a result of his encounter with Esau. There is also a hint of what would be a correct form of relationship between the respective descendants of Esau and Yaakov during the long course of Jewish history. It is worth our while to consider Yaakov’s preparations for his fateful encounter with Esau as something to use as a model for ourselves in our dealings with the descendants of Esau. Basically, Yaakov used a three-pronged approach. 1) He prepared to wage war if it were forced upon him. 2) He prayed to G’d for deliverance. 3) He prepared gifts to soften the mood of his adversary. The first stage of his preparation, mobilising for war, is described in our paragraph in verse eight when the Torah writes that he divided the camp in two to give himself the maximum chance for at least one camp to escape unharmed. He then engaged in prayer when he appealed to G’d, saying (verse 12) “please save me from my brother, from Esau.” The third part of his preparation, i.e.. sending gifts (or bribes if you will), is found in verses 14-21. A great Jewish King, the King Chiskiyah learned from Yaakov when Jerusalem was under siege when he faced Sancheriv, [who during his time was the foremost conqueror of the world who had already liquidated the Northern Kingdom and exiled the Ten Tribes, Ed.]. We read in Kings II 18,15 that Chiskiyah gave all the silver that was in the treasury of the Temple and in his own vaults to Sancheriv in accordance with that King’s demands. He also readied what few forces remained at his disposal for war (Chronicles II 32,6). Finally, he prayed (Kings II 19,15) asking G’d to demonstrate His power to the world at large by saving the Kingdom of Yehudah. We have to act similarly whenever we find ourselves threatened by hostile Gentile forces. However, nowadays when G’d’s displeasure with us has become manifest seeing we are still in exile, we must not provoke war against our enemies as is evident from Song of Songs 2,7 השבעתי אתכם בנות ירושלים וגו', “I have made you take an oath o daughters of Jerusalem, etc.” One opinion in the Talmud Ketuvot 111 understands the oath as an undertaking by Jews in exile not to rebel against the local rulers and try and recapture the land of Israel by force of arms.
ויירא ויצר, the reason why the Torah repeated the emotions Yaakov experienced twice but in different words was to underline how strongly he felt this fear. In Bereshit Rabbah 76,2 these two expressions are described as basically meaning the same thing, the only difference being that the former is intransitive, Yaakov being afraid of being killed, whereas the latter describes a similar fear, but that of having to kill one’s adversary.
ויחץ, Rabbah Chiyah said that in this part of the verse the Torah teaches us prudence. A man must not place all his eggs in one basket.
THEN JACOB WAS GREATLY AFRAID. This was because they told him that Esau had gone forth from his city and was coming to meet Jacob, and moreover, that he took along many men — four hundred. He thus greatly feared for his life, for he said, “He has not taken all these men except for the purpose of waging war against me.” It appears to me in this matter that Esau did not receive the messengers properly and paid them no heed. Perhaps they did not even come before him for he did not at all give permission for them to come before him and speak to him for otherwise, Scripture would have related that Esau questioned them concerning his brother’s welfare and about his circumstances and those of his household and children. [Scripture further would have told how Esau requested] that they convey greetings to Jacob and tell him that he is proceeding towards him to see him, and they would have told it thus to Jacob. Scripture, however, does not narrate that the messengers transmitted a word in Esau’s name. Instead, he [Esau] kept his wrath in his heart, (See Amos 1:11.) and he came with his army for the purpose of doing Jacob evil. Now the messengers had investigated the matter in the camp, and they knew that he was going to meet Jacob. This is the meaning of the word vegam (and moreover) [in the verse, and moreover he goeth to meet thee], for they said, “We came to thy brother Esau, (Verse 7 here.) but he did not answer us a word, and he sent you no greeting, and moreover, he goeth to meet thee with might and an army.” This was why he added fear to his fear, as Scripture says, And Jacob was greatly afraid, and was distressed. And so our Rabbis said that the messengers recognized hatred in him[Esau]. Thus they said: (Bereshith Rabbah 75:7.) “We came to thy brother Esau. You behave towards him like a brother, but he behaves towards you like Esau the villain.” However, in the end, when Esau saw the great honor that Jacob bestowed upon him and how he prostrated himself before him, bowing to the ground seven times (Genesis 33:3.) from the distance until he approached him, his mercy was aroused, and he thought that Jacob is recognizing his birthright and his pre-eminence, as I have explained. (Above, Verse 5.) And with this he was comforted, for the hearts belong to G-d, Who turns them whither He will. (See Proverbs 21:1.)
ויירא יעקב, in his heart; Although he had pretended to his messengers that Esau approached with a large delegation in order to honour him, he did not believe this himself, but he was convinced that Esau’s intentions were hostile.
ויצר, a word derived from the same root as Numbers 25,17 צרור את המדינים, “harass the Midianites.” The construction is not unlike that of the word ותקל in Genesis 16,4 which describes Hagar’s attitude to her mistress after she had become pregnant by Avraham. The word there is derived from the root קלל.
ויחץ, from the root חצה, to divide into half. We find this word in this sense in Numbers 31,42 describing Moses as having divided the booty from the Midianites into two halves.
ויירא...ויצר HE FEARED GREATLY AND WAS DISTRESSED — He was afraid lest he be killed, and he was distressed that he might have to kill someone (Genesis Rabbah 76:2).
Wir können uns sehr wohl in Jakobs Lage versetzen, und müssen dies um so mehr, je bedeutsamer die Begegnung ist, in deren Folge Jakob eine Offenbarung wurde, welche das göttliche Gesetz dem Jakobsvolke zur ewigen Erinnerung in das tägliche Mahl verwebte.
Wie Jakob und Esau hier einander gegenübertraten, so stehen sich bis auf den heutigen Tag Jakob und Esau gegenüber. Jakob: der dienende, arbeitende, sorgenerfüllte, mit Familiengliedern gesegnete Familienvater. Esaw: der "fertige, gemachte" Mensch. Was Jakob trotz des erhaltenen Segens und der erhaltenen Erstgeburt erst durch zwanzig mühevolle Jahre hatte erringen und erkämpfen müssen und nun als das größte Los, als die größte Errungenschaft mit heimbrachte: selbständiger Familienvater sein zu können, das ist andern die von der Wiege an mitgegebene natürlichste Voraussetzung, das hatte Esaw, "der fertige, gemachte" Mensch, schon, als Jakob erst auszog, in vollem Maße besessen; und während Jakob mit seiner Arbeit das Glück errang, Familienvater zu sein, war Esau inzwischen eine politische Größe, war Volks-Heerführer, ein אלוף mit seinen Reisigen geworden. So der äußere Gegensatz des ,"Fersenhalters" und des "Gemachten".
Zwei Prinzipien sinds, die sich in Jakob und Esau begegnen und deren Kampf und Sieg die Weltgeschichte bedeutet. Das menschlich beglückende und beglückte Familienleben in Jakob, der Glanz politischer Macht und Größe in Esau. Jahrtausende herab gilts dem Kampfe: ob es genüge, Mensch zu sein, und alle soziale und politische Macht und Gestaltung nur Wert habe als Mittel, dieses Höheziel aller Menschenbestrebungen zu erreichen, oder ob alles Menschliche im Menschen, Haus und Familienleben, nur da sei, um den Trophäen der Politik etc. etc. zum Unterwurf zu dienen.
Und wie ganz anders ist Jakob dem Esau gegenüber, als eben dem Laban. Wir erkennen, welche Kraft das Bewusstsein der Unschuld gibt, und welch ein drückendes Gefühl selbst auch nur aus dem Anschein einer Verschuldung erwächst. Zwanzig Jahre Kampf gegen unschuldig zu erleidendes Unrecht schlagen nicht so nieder, als eine Minute einem Menschen gegenüber, von dem wir wissen, daß er sich durch uns gekränkt fühlen muss und die Motive, die uns, wenn auch nicht rechtfertigen, doch entschuldigen können, gar nicht einzusehen vermag!
Jakob fürchtete, obgleich ihn die Schutz zusagende Gottesverheißung geleitete; מכאן, bemerkt das lehrende Wort der Weisen, שאין הבטחה לצדיקים בע"הז, es gibt keine unbedingte Zusicherung dem Frommen in diesem Leben. Eine jede ist durch fortdauernde Untadelhaftigkeit bedingt, eine jede kann in jedem Augenblick durch einen Fehltritt verscherzt werden; שמא יגרום החטא, das ist die Besorgnis, die aus der Brust der erwähltesten Frommen nie weicht. — ויֵצר לו — ist der Form nach von יצר nicht von צרך oder צור, dem gewöhnlichen Ausdruck für Not und Bedrängnis. יצר das verstärkte יסר, binden, heißt: bilden, formen. Alles Bilden ist ein Beschränken des Stoffes in ein durch den Zweck gegebenes Maß. Sind doch diese Begriffe so verwandt, daß wir auch bilden durch צור ausgedrückt finden: ויצר אותו בחרט. Schmot 32, 4 und צורָה geradezu: Form heißt. Vielleicht ist es ein Unterschied, ob Not durch צור oder durch יצר ausgedrückt wird. צר ist die äußere Beschränkung unseres Kreises, so daß wir uns nicht mehr frei bewegen können. Sie lässt unser inneres Wesen unangetastet. Ihr Gegensatz ist מרחב, die Weite. יצר aber wäre eine solche beengende Gestaltung der Verhältnisse, daß wir ihrer Obmacht als völlig willenloser Stoff zur Beute fallen. Sie gewinnen eine solche Obermacht über uns, daß sie aus uns machen können, was sie wollen. In solcher Lage fühlte sich Jakob damals Esau gegenüber, und das ist die Lage, in der wir uns Jahrhunderte herab den Esauvölkern gegenüber befanden. Es ist das jener Zustand, den die Galutverkündung חמת קרי (Wajikra 26, 28) "Wüten des Zufalls"; nennt, daß unser Heil, unser Leben, unser Fortkommen nirgends das Beabsichtigte, Maßgebende war, sondern sich den Zwecken aller Übrigen als das Unberechtigte hingeben und sich mit dem begnügen musste, was als Abhub von der Glückstafel des andern uns zufällig zufiel. ויצר לו sagte demnach: Jakob fühlte, daß er der Willkür des an der Spitze einer bewaffneten Macht gegen ihn heranziehenden Esau völlig preisgegeben sei, und, um doch etwas zu retten — teilte er. So war auch unsere Zerstreuung im Galut das Mittel unserer Erhaltung und Rettung. Nie und nirgends konnte uns Esaus Schwert auf einmal erreichen. Während wir am Rhein bluteten, waren unsere Brüder im Sklavenreiche glücklich, und umgekehrt. צרקה עשה ה"בה לישראל שפזרן לבין האומות (Pesachim 87b). Dasselbe tat Jakob im Drange der Not.
ויירא lest he be killed. You might ask: Had Hashem not promised him when he left his father’s house, “And I will bring you back to this land” (28:15)? The Gemara (Berachos 4a, Sanhedrin 98b) answers: [He feared that] sin might cause [the promise not to be fulfilled]. Another answer: The promise was only, “And I will bring you back to this land,” meaning to Eretz Yisrael, but not to his father’s house. See Re’m, R. Noson, Gur Aryeh and Minchas Yaakov.
ויצר לו that he might kill others. [Question: Why did this distress him?] The answer is: Yaakov feared he might kill Eisov, and Yitzchok loved Eisov and considered him a good person. It would pain Yitzchok greatly and bring him to curse Yaakov. (Midrash Tanchuma) An alternative answer: Yaakov surely did not fear killing Eisov, for it says in Sanhedrin 72a: “If someone comes to kill you, kill him first.” Rather, Yaakov feared that he might kill Eisov’s men, who came to kill not Yaakov but Yaakov’s men. Only Eisov came to kill Yaakov. Indeed, Eisov’s men would be attacking Yaakov’s men, and one may save the attacked even by taking the attacker’s life. But if injuring the attacker’s limb would suffice to save the one being attacked, then for killing the attacker [instead of just injuring him] one is liable for the death penalty. Thus, Yaakov feared he might kill them in the confusion of war even where injuring a limb would suffice. Some ask: Why did Yaakov fear being killed? Eisov said, “When the mourning days for my father approach, I will kill my brother Yaakov” (27:41), and Yitzchok was still alive. A further question: Why did Eisov send Elifaz to kill Yaakov [at the time that Yitzchok was alive]? It seems the answer is: When Eisov said he will not kill Yaakov while his father is alive, this applied only if Yaakov was with Yitzchok. But if he was elsewhere, Eisov would kill him. See Minchas Yaakov.
He said to his traveling companions, or to himself: If Esau will come to wage war upon the one camp, and smite it, we may not be capable of defending ourselves; however, at least the remaining camp will escape; it will be spared.
ויירא יעקב, “Yaakov was afraid (when he heard this). He worried that the merit of Esau having practiced the commandment of honouring father and mother during the 35 years when Yaakov had not been able to do this, would give him an edge in any hostile confrontation.
“And four hundred men with him” [32:8]. Four hundred men went with Esau.
“Jacob was greatly frightened and anxious” [32:8]. Jacob was very frightened that they should not kill him and he was also afraid that he should not kill other people, as Rashi writes. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:8.) Bahya writes that Jacob was afraid of Esau and he was afraid of Esau’s guardian angel. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:7.) Hizkuni also writes: why was Jacob afraid? There were angels to protect him. The explanation is that the angels who were there, one was Michael, and the other one was Samael, the evil one, the guardian angel of Esau. That is why Jacob was very afraid. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:8.) Ibn Shuaib and Toldot Yizhak write. Jacob was afraid that he would be killed, and he was also pained that Esau was coming to kill him. This means that my father must have died. Esau had said that when his father would die, he would kill Jacob. Jacob was pained that he did not honor his father, while Esau had honored his father greatly. (Ibn Shuaib, Derashot, I; 67; Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 32:7.) Toldot Yizhak asks a question. Why does the verse say, “Jacob was greatly frightened” [32:8]? This means, Jacob was very afraid that they would kill him. Afterwards, it says, “he was afraid” [32:8], and it is not written, “he was very afraid.” He was sad that he would kill strangers. The explanation is that Jacob said: if I will kill strangers, then the sin is not so great as the Talmud says, “if someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first.” (B. Sanhedrin, 72a.) This means, if someone comes to kill you rise up and kill him first. Therefore, it is written, “Jacob was greatly frightened” [32:8]. That is to say, he was very afraid that he would be killed. “He was afraid,” he was afraid that he would kill others, but it is not written “greatly” that he was very afraid to kill others. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 32:7.)
(1+2+3) Since Balak had been aware of how Israel had tricked the Canaanites into confrontation after having appeared to sidestep Edom and Moab, his people were divided in their view of the Israelites. Some were afraid that Israel's tactics were designed to destroy Moab eventually. Of them the Torah says "vayagar, it was afraid. The other group was concerned about the encirclement that was taking place and that would eventually change the neighbouring countries. Balak "saw" the division amongst his subjects. Since Midian as one of Moab's neighbours would be the first country vitally affected by the Israelites' presence in that region, they were invited as allies. The message to Bileam telling him of the facts, especially the miracle that Israel had managed to escape from Egypt, made the request particularly urgent. Describing the apparent hopelessness of defeating Israel by warfare alone, Balak depicts the huge masses of people, suggesting by the use of the words "I" and "we" in the same sentence that possibly, through combined efforts of Bileam's curses and warriors led by Balak, Israel could be defeated. The reference to Bileam's ability to confer blessings, indicated that Balak was desirous of obtaining those blessings for his own people at the same time. Alternately, perhaps he committed a Freudian slip having reference to the blessings which Bileam would in fact bestow on the Jewish people, instead of curses. The reason that Balak's messengers took the magicians' instruments with them was to test the sincerity of Bileam. Our sages teach that the difference between the real prophet and the charlatan, the pretender lies in the former's ability to communicate the word of G'd at any time, whereas the pretender must wait for certain horoscopic constellations to appear in the correct correlation to each other. The ability of Bileam to respond immediately, would indicate that his response was genuine, was the word of G'd. As soon as Bileam asked the messengers to stay overnight till he could consult G'd, they realised that the undertaking did not meet with G'ds approval. This is why the elders of Midian, who were familiar with Bileam's mode of operation, did not even bother to wait. Only the Moabite elders stayed overnight, kessem, the magician's tool was the infallible instrument then, by means of which one could gauge G'ds real attitude as revealed by Bileam. That is why the elders needed the instrument, not Bileam. (4) Of all the improper enquiries that can be addressed to G'd, there is hardly one that could be more offensive than the request to commit an obviously criminal act and expect Divine blessing for such an act. If one were to ask a Rabbi's approval for commission of an act of adultery, surely this would be an insult to the Rabbi. If the questioner himself is known to be well versed in Jewish law, the insult would be even greater. Surely the first sin of Bileam consisted in asking G'd to curse a people so obviously His favourites. The very notion that G'd would undo all that He had done for that nation in order to enable Bileam to earn a fat fee from Balak is culpable. Therefore G'ds first reply was "what kind of people have come to you?" When Bileam uses Balak's terminology of describing the Jewish people, he adds insult to injury. Even though in the mouth of Balak, the descripition of the Jewish people is far from flattering, and Moab, owing its very existence to the patriarch of the Jewish people should have had every reason to refer to them with respect, Balak, who thought he had reason to fear them, looked at them from a distorted point of view. Bileam however, had no such excuse. In referring to G'ds chosen people in such derogatory terms, he made himself even more culpable than by his audacity in approaching G'd on the subject altogether. In keeping with his supposed stature, he should have categorically refused to involve his prophetic powers in such an undertaking. When the Talmud Shabbat 104, teaches that whoever wants to heap impurity upon himself is given an opportunity to do so, the question "who are the people that have come to you?" illustrates that dictum. Surely G'd had been aware who the people were, but Bileam deserved to enmesh himself more deeply in his sinful quest. The Jewish people to whom the term Adam applies, (chapter 3 essay 8) certainly deserves better of Bileam. Bileam seems at pains to deny the Jewish people's claim to four characteristics. 1) He refers to the Jewish people as nameless, describes them merely as " the people who came out of Egypt"; he makes it appear as if this people did not even qualify for a name of its own. 2) In referring to the Jewish people's departure from Egypt, Bileam seems intent to deny that G'd had played any role in that exodus. This is why he is made to emphasize later who it was that took Israel out of Egypt. "The Lord who took them out of Egypt." (Numbers 23,22-3. 3) He refers to Israel as "covering the earth," indicating that Israel lacks orderliness, and is comparable to a horde of wild beasts. Therefore, he is made to pay tribute to the civil and moral manner in which Israel has set up camp. ("How beautiful are thy tents" Numbers 24, 5) 4) In wishing to curse the Jewish nation, he denies them the basic distinction of having been made "in the image of G'd," an attribute that applies to all human beings and is rooted in the dominion G'd has granted man over the animal kingdom. To atone for this insult, he is forced later to prophesy that this very nation will produce the Messiah who will exercise dominion over all of mankind. Haman had also begun to denigrate the Jewish people by referring to them as being nameless. (Esther 3,8) Bileam has to atone for this subsequently, by referring to Israel by both its names, i.e. Israel and Jacob. Notwithstanding any of the above, G'ds reply to Bileam in this instance was very civil. "Do not go with them, do not curse this nation which is blessed." G'd is trying to tell Bileam that to accompany these people is improper, regardless of the purpose of the mission. In his wickedness, Bileam relates only part of G'ds reply, namely the part about not being allowed to go. The part about the futility of the undertaking he withheld. Understandably, this led the elders of Moab to believe that Bileam's refusal was motivated by considerations other than Divine opposition. (5+6) When, upon arrival of a more distinguished set of emissaries, they reproach him by saying "do not hold back in coming to me," Bileam has the audacity to ask G'd about the same undertaking a second time. G'd in His anger, answers him in such a manner that he will be embarassed publicly when he does go with them. The ambiguous nature of G'ds reply was designed to encourage him to go, in order that he humiliate himself in front of the princes from whom he was seeking honour and glory. When G'd in His reply said "if these men came to call you, go with them, only the word I speak to you you may do," (instead of "you may say") this gave Bileam leeway to think that he still possessed freedom of expression. When Bileam tried to use this apparent loophole in G'ds instructions, G'd became angry and sent His angel to intercept him. The three stoppages and beatings administered to Bileam's she-ass demonstrated clearly the nature of Bileam's sin and his subsequent chastisement. The first time the angel positions himself in such a manner that he could be bypassed without great exertion. Bileam should have refused the request by Balak's messengers. Instead, he chose to circumvent the will of G'd. The ass does likewise, arousing Bileam's anger. He strikes her, but not too severely. Balak too, when he hears Bileam bless Israel the first time instead of cursing it, admonishes Bileam when he says "I have called you to curse my enemies and you have seen fit to bless them." The second time the angel positions himself in a narrow passage, leaving the she-ass no way to pass him without hurting the rider in the process. This arouses more anger in Bileam, he strikes her again, presumably harder than the first time. This corresponds to Bileam's second sin, when he encouraged the elders of Moab to think G'd might change His mind in favour of the planned mission. Balak gives Bileam a tongue lashing by saying "if you cannot curse, at least do not bless." Bileam is forced to admit that he is quite powerless in the matter, and has to do what G'd says to him. The final confrontation between the angel and the she-ass is such that the latter cannot proceed against the angel without incurring death. Therefore, she lies down, the greatest protest imaginable against her master. Bileam reacts violently, striking her with a rod this time. In the ensuing dialogue between the she-ass and her master, Bileam is made to acknowledge that his longstanding and intimate knowledge of the she-ass's behaviour should have alerted him to the fact that only an unusual set of circumstances could have accounted for such a radical change in the behaviour of an animal whose primary function it was to serve as transportation for her master. Similarly, Bileam had reached the stage where he had to refuse Balak's request without even double checking with G'd whether it still pleased Him to bless Israel. When Balak became aware of this outright refusal of Bileam even to try to carry out the task he had been hired for, Balak sends him home in disgust. Bileam's humiliation is thus complete and corresponds to the manner in which he who had been privileged to enjoy visions other mortals had not been granted to see, had nevertheless rebelled against G'd. (6) The angel too had remonstrated with Bileam about his having struck the she-ass three times. Bileam who had accused the she-ass of having humiliated him, had himself been guilty of trying to manipulate G'd three times, and thus to humiliate Him. His punishment therefore fits his crime. When the angel finally becomes visible to Bileam, the latter admitting his sin, he volunteers to go home. Now, however, he has to carry on, in order to suffer public humiliation not only in the presence of the elders of Moab. Those elders, seeing that Bileam could not even control his she-ass, surely had developed their own opinion of the effectiveness of a man like this against the Jewish nation. The thrust of the she-ass's argument was that Bileam of all people should not have condemned her conduct without examination of the circumstances. He had known her long enough. Similarly, Bileam's longstanding familiarity with the ways of G'd, should have prevented him from accepting an assignment so obviously at variance with the friendship for Israel G'd had revealed in His relationship with that nation. If indeed, Bileam refers to himself as the shetum ha-ayin, the one who sees on one eye, he may well be referring to his lack of vision in a belated recognition of his own humble stature and lack of insight. His eyes were opened only after he had displayed blindness. This is the meaning of the words nofel u-gluy eynayim, "after he had fallen, his eyes were opened." (Numbers 24,4) Bileam, in acknowledging that he had sinned because he had been unaware of the angel's presence, acknowledges that ignorance itself can be sinful. If someone strikes his parents because he is unaware of a statute fordidding such an act, he cannot plead innocence, since it was up to him to realise that such conduct is intolerable in the eyes of the law. Similarly, a man of the intellectual stature of Bileam could not plead ignorance as an excuse, and should have been alerted by the animal's strange behaviour. The reason the animal itself did not disclose the presence of the angel, has been discussed in chapter ten. In chapter twenty one we have discussed why Bileam had chosen to ride a she-ass. (8) Now that Bileam had received an inkling of what was likely to be in store for him,- private as well as public humiliation-, he tries to back out and offers to go home to save himself further disgrace. But at this point the angel orders him to proceed and to travel with the messengers until he will have played the part that G'd had assigned to him. (Perhaps the use of the word im, describes the relationship with the messengers, underlining that he is now captive for the purpose of this mission) (9) The phrasing of the instruction "only what I tell you, you can say" (Numbers 22,35) robs Bileam even of the freedom of speech which he had previously thought he still possessed, when G'd had restricted him only with the words "it you must do." When he arrived in Moab, Bileam felt obligated to acquaint Balak with his impotence, and he downgrades the value of anything he may say beforehand, by explaining that he is acting under Heavenly compulsion. It appears that Balak had not wanted him to come to him, but rather to proceed towards Israel and curse that nation. Balak's request, (22,17) "do not hold back walking elay, means "on my behalf" rather than "towards me." Balak had meant to convey that he would compensate Bileam handsomely even if the latter never came to Moab, but would merely curse Israel from a suitable vantage point. Balak tries to forestall Bileam coming to the capital of Moab. Bileam stresses that even though he had "arrived" i.e. come, he did not "go." He is trying to tell Balak that his appearance is due only to coercion from on high. Whereas previously Bileam had been willing to "go" without "doing" anything of substance, now he was not even in a position to "say" something of his own free will. ("I am not even able to speak" 22,38) Whereas G'd had only forbidden action, the angel even forbade speech. Thus the angel is not merely repeating G'ds previous instructions. In spite of all this, resourceful Bileam proceeds to emulate Israel's sacrificial rites, when he builds seven altars and offers only pure animals, hoping that if this does not advance his cause, at least it will not hinder it. When he expresses the hope that "perhaps the Lord will meet with me,” (23,3) he admits that he can never be sure of establishing communication with G'd He is quite unlike Moses of whom the expression "he called" is always used. The one and only time G'd had in fact communicated with Bileam directly, is carefully described as vayikor, as a kind of "happening." Even this happening never seems to have occurred again. Bileam now had to employ his prophetic insights to compensate for his derogatory references to Israel previously. Instead of allowing Israel to remain nameless, he now uses both the term "Israel" and "Jacob" to describe it. (10) He confesses that Balak had dragged him down from what once had been a position of lofty grandeur. (23,7) He accords Balak his full title "king of Moab," not as previously. When Bileam says "how can I curse when G'd has not cursed?" he acknowledges that he had not had any business asking G'd about such a mission. Conversely, when David suffered curses at the hands of Shimi ben Geyrah, (Samuel II 16,8) the former could not believe that Shimi could have done so except if he had been so instructed by G'd. Once David became aware that he had been giving Shimi too much credit for having acted morally, he told his son Solomon how to deal with Shimi when the time would be ripe. Bileam now proceeds to extol Israel's virtues. "I view as towering higher than rocks;" (23,9) "they are in a world apart from others, a nation that dwells in isolated splendour."
RELIGIOUS FEAR And yet fear afflicts the greatest. We recall the words in which the Torah describes Jacob, anticipating his meeting with Esau. “Jacob was very afraid and distressed.” (Genesis 32:8.) Rabbinic interpretation caught the fateful dilemma that lay behind these words. “He was very afraid, that he might be killed. He was distressed, that he might have to kill.” (Tanchuma, Genesis Rabbah and Rashi ad loc.) Jacob experienced physical fear that he might be overcome by Esau. But he experienced ethical fear also: that in overcoming Esau he might be forced to act like Esau. There are some victories that, in a spiritual sense, are a defeat.
Because Jacob saw through the Holy Spirit the oppression of the last exile, in the end of days, it is said of him, "Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed" (Beresheet 32:8). As a result, he divided the holy nation in exile into three parts, as it is written: "And he put the handmaids and their children foremost" (Beresheet 33:2). At first in the exile of Edom, "and Leah and her children after, and Rachel and Joseph last of all." Because he saw their eventual poverty and suffering, (he prayed for them): "So that I come back to my father's house in peace" (Beresheet 28:21). (He prayed): "And will give me bread to eat, and clothing to wear" (Ibid.)
[2] Another interpretation: "A Song of Ascents. I lift up my eyes to the mountains..." (Psalms 121:1) This refers to the time when Jacob fled from Laban, and he went and settled in the mountains. Laban pursued him and caught up with him, as it says, "And Laban caught up with Jacob, and Jacob pitched his tent on the mountain" (Genesis 31:25). Laban intended to kill Jacob, as Moses says, "An Aramean sought to destroy my father" (Deuteronomy 26:5). And who was that Aramean but Laban, who sought to destroy our forefather Jacob? Jacob began saying, "I lift up my eyes to the mountains," and God apparently revealed Himself to the wicked Laban and made himself Laban's emissary in order to fulfill Jacob's needs, as it says, "And God came to Laban...and did not permit him to harm him [Jacob]" (Genesis 31:24). And Jacob was later afraid of Esau, as it says, "And Jacob was greatly afraid" (Genesis 32:8). He said, "Whoever saved you from Laban will save you from me," as it says, "Happy are you, O Israel! Who is like you, a people saved by the Lord..." (Deuteronomy 33:29).
“They turned and ascended via the Bashan, and Og king of Bashan emerged against them, he and his entire people, to the battle at Edre’i” (Numbers 21:33). “They turned [vayifnu] and ascended” – some say that they waged the war with Siḥon in Elul. They performed the festival [of Sukkot] in Tishrei, and the war with Og was after the festival, just as it says: “You shall turn [ufanita] in the morning and go to your tents” (Deuteronomy 16:7). “Og king of Bashan emerged” – as the Holy One blessed be He assembled them [the army of Og] before them to deliver them into their hand. “The Lord said to Moses: Do not fear him, for I have delivered him into your hand, him and his entire people and his land; and you shall do to him as you did to Siḥon king of the Emorites, who resides in Ḥeshbon” (Numbers 21:34). “The Lord said to Moses: Do not fear him, for I have delivered him into your hand” – this is what the verse said: “Happy is a person who is always afraid” (Proverbs 28:14). That is the attribute of the righteous; even though the Holy One blessed be He promises them, they do not divest themselves of fear. Likewise with Jacob: “Jacob was afraid” (Genesis 32:8) – why was he afraid? He said: ‘Perhaps I was sullied with something while at Laban’s, and it is written: “He shall not see a shameful matter in you, and turn from behind you” (Deuteronomy 23:15) – and the Holy One blessed be He would have forsaken me.’ Moses, too, like his patriarch, grasped fear. Why was he afraid? He said: ‘Perhaps Israel committed a trespass in the war with Siḥon, or were sullied with transgression.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Do not fear” – they all completed their acquisitions justly. “Do not fear him” – as no mighty warrior had stood in the world who was tougher than he, as it is stated: “As only Og king of the Bashan remained from the rest of the Refaim” (Deuteronomy 3:11). He remained from the mighty warriors killed by Amrafel and his allies, as it is stated: “They smote the Refaim at Ashterot Karnayim” (Genesis 14:5), and this is their remnant, like olives that remain among the pomace, as it is stated: “The survivor came and told Abram the Hebrew; and he was dwelling on the plains of Mamre the Emorite, brother of Eshkol and brother of Aner, and they were allies of Abram” (Genesis 14:13) – this is Og, and it depicts him as a remnant, as it is stated: “From the rest of the Refaim.” His intention was that Abram go out and be killed. The Holy One blessed be He granted him the reward of his legs, (The reward for his effort to come and report to Abram what had befallen Lot.) and he lived all those years. But He collected from him, as he fell by the hand of his descendants. When Moses came to wage war with him, he feared him. He said: ‘I am one hundred and twenty years old, and this one is more than five hundred. If he did not have merit, he would not have lived all these years.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Do not fear him, for I have delivered him into your hand” – kill him by your hand. “You shall do to him as you did to Siḥon…” – “We destroyed [vanaḥarem] (The term ḥerem can mean destroyed or proscribed.) them, [as we did to Siḥon]” (Deuteronomy 3:6). But is it not written: “But all the animals, and the spoils of the cities, we looted for ourselves” (Deuteronomy 3:7)? It is, rather, that they proscribed [heḥerimu] the corpses, to derive no benefit from them. “They smote him, his sons [banav], [and his entire people]” (Numbers 21:35) – “his son [beno]” is written, (In our version of the Bible banav is written (see Minḥat Shai, Bemidbar 21:35).) as he had a son tougher than he was. The Holy One blessed be He said to Israel: ‘In this world, you eradicate the nations a little at a time, but in the future, I will eliminate them all at once,’ as it is stated: “Nations will be burnings of lime, cut thorns ignited with fire” (Isaiah 33:12).
“God's angel then stood on a narrow path through the vineyards, a fence on this side and a fence on that side” (Numbers 22:24). “The donkey turned from the road, and went” (Numbers 22:23) – this wicked one is going to curse an entire nation that has not wronged him, and strikes his donkey so that it will not go into the field, and it is written: “The angel of the Lord stood on a narrow path through the vineyards” (Numbers 22:24). Could he not have gone after him? (Why did the angel need to conceal himself in ambush rather than confronting Bilam directly?) Rather, this is the attribute of the Holy One blessed be He. A flesh-and-blood king sends an executioner to kill a person, the executioner follows him for many days. The one who incurred liability for death eats and drinks, and the executioner follows him relentlessly from place to place. But before the Holy One blessed be He, it is not so. The executioner stands in his place, and one who incurred liability for death comes to him on foot. So that the angel would not be troubled to go after Bilam, he preceded him to the road. “The angel of the Lord stood on a narrow path [bemishol] [through the vineyards]” – He said to him: ‘Are the vineyards (Israel is likened to God’s vineyard (Song of Songs 7:13).) sold like foxes [shualim]?’ (Based on Song of Songs 2:15. Do you think that you will be able to ruin the vineyards in exchange for the money you received?) “A fence on this side [mizeh] and a fence on that side [mizeh]” – you will be unable to overcome them, as in their hands are: “Tablets inscribed on both their sides; from this side [mizeh] and from that side [umizeh] they were inscribed” (Exodus 32:15). “The donkey saw the angel of the Lord, and it was pressed to the wall, and it pressed Bilam's foot against the wall, and he carried on striking it” (Numbers 22:25) “The angel of the Lord moved forward, and stood in a narrow place, where there was no way to turn right or left” (Numbers 22:26). “The donkey saw the angel of the Lord, and it was pressed to the wall…. The angel of the Lord continued passing” – what did he see that led him to precede him three times, before he appeared to him? He [the angel] showed him the signs of the patriarchs. Initially, there was space on this side, and from that side, “and the donkey turned from the road, and went” (Numbers 22:23). In the second, there was space to move only to one side. In the third, “there was no way to turn right or left.” What were these signs? If he sought to curse the descendants of Abraham, he would find from this side and from that side the descendants of Ishmael and the descendants of Ketura. If he sought to curse the descendants of Isaac, he would find the descendants of Esau on one side, “it was pressed to the wall.” The descendants of Jacob, he found no dross in them. That is why it said in the third: “In a narrow [tzar] place” – this is Jacob, as it is written: “Jacob was very frightened and distressed [vayetzer]” (Genesis 32:8). “Where there was no way to turn right or left” – as there is no dross in any of his descendants. “The donkey saw the angel of the Lord, and it lay down beneath Bilam, and Bilam's wrath was enflamed, and he struck the donkey with the staff” (Numbers 22:27). “The donkey saw the angel of the Lord, and it lay down beneath Bilam, and Bilam's wrath was enflamed, and he struck the donkey with the staff [bamakel]” (The word makleh means demeans (see Deuteronomy 27:16).) – due to the humiliation with which it humiliated him. “The Lord opened the mouth of the donkey, and it said to Bilam: What did I do to you, that you struck me these three times?” (Numbers 22:28). “The Lord opened the mouth of the donkey” – to inform him that the mouth and the tongue are in His control. If he seeks to curse, his mouth is in His control. “It said to Bilam: What did I do to you that you struck me these three times [regalim]?” – it alluded to him: You are seeking to uproot a nation that celebrates three pilgrimage festivals [regalim]. “Bilam said to the donkey: Because you abused me; had there been a sword in my hand, I would have killed you now” (Numbers 22:29). “Bilam said to the donkey: Because you abused [hitalalt] me.” Even though he speaks in the holy tongue, the language of an idolater is despicable. (The choice of the word hitalalt has connotations of sexual abuse, as in Judges 19:25, in the context of the concubine in Giva.) “Had there been a sword in my hand” – this is analogous to a doctor who comes to cure one bitten by a snake with his tongue. (By use of a spell.) On the way, he saw a certain gecko and began seeking a rod to kill it. They said to him: 'This one you are unable to overcome, how did you come to cure one bitten by a snake with your tongue?' So, the donkey said to Bilam: 'You are unable to kill me unless you have a sword in your hand. How do you seek to uproot an entire nation?' He was silent and did not find an answer. The princes of Moav began wondering, as they witnessed a miracle without precedent in the world. “The donkey said to Bilam: Am I not your donkey, that you have ridden upon me from your start until this day? Have I made it a habit to do thus to you? He said: No” (Numbers 22:30). Some say that he said to them: 'It is not mine.' It responded to him: “Am I not your donkey that you have ridden upon me from your start until this day?” You learn that he was not elderly, as the donkey was older than he was. “Have I made it a habit to do thus to you?” Once it spoke, it died, so they would not be saying: ‘This is the one that spoke,’ and render it an object of worship. Another matter, “have I made it a habit to do thus to you?” The Holy One blessed be He spared the honor of that wicked one, so they would not say: ‘This is the one that dismissed Bilam.’ If the Holy One blessed be He spares the honor of the wicked, it goes without saying regarding the honor of the righteous. Likewise it says: “And a woman who shall approach to any animal to mate with her, you shall kill the woman and the animal” (Leviticus 20:16), so they will not say: ‘This is the animal by means of which so-and-so woman was put to death.’ This is to inform you that the Holy One blessed be He spares the honor of people, knows their needs, and sealed the mouth of the animal. Were it to speak, one would be unable to subjugate it and withstand it, as this is the dumbest of the animals and the wisest of the wise men. When it spoke, he was unable to withstand it.
Another matter, “I have oxen [shor], and donkeys [vaḥamor]” (Genesis 32:6). Shor – this is Joseph, as it is stated: “A firstborn bull [shoro] is his majesty” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Vaḥamor – this is Issachar, as it is written: “Issachar is a strong-boned donkey [ḥamor] (Genesis 49:14). Joseph’s grandson is destined to eradicate Amalek, as it is stated: “Joshua (Joshua was from the tribe of Ephraim, who was Joseph's son.) weakened Amalek and its people by sword” (Exodus 17:13). Issachar’s descendants know what the Holy One blessed be He does in His world, as it is stated: “From the children of Issachar, possessors of understanding of the times, to know what Israel should do; their leaders were two hundred” (I Chronicles 12:33). “Flocks [tzon]” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “You, My flock [tzoni], flock of My pasture, you are man” (Ezekiel 34:31). “And slaves [ve’eved]” – this is David, as it is stated: “I am your servant [avdekha] son of your maidservant” (Psalms 116:16). “And maidservants [veshifḥa]” – this is Avigayil, as it is stated: “Here is your handmaiden as a maidservant [leshifḥa]” (I Samuel 25:41). “Jacob was very frightened and distressed. He divided the people who were with him, and the flocks, and the cattle, and the camels, into two camps” (Genesis 32:8). At that moment, those messengers went to Esau and saw armed warriors with him, and they came and told Jacob, as it is stated: “The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came to your brother, to Esau” (Genesis 32:7). What is: “And four hundred men with him”? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: Four hundred kings wearing crowns. Some say: Four hundred prefects were with him. Rabbi Yanai said: Four hundred generals were with him. When they related to Jacob all that multitude, he was afraid and he divided his wives and children into two camps, as it is stated: “He divided the people who were with him…[into two camps].”
“Jacob was very frightened and distressed. He divided the people who were with him, and the flocks, and the cattle, and the camels, into two camps” (Genesis 32:8). “Jacob was very frightened and distressed” – Rabbi Pinḥas in the name of Rabbi Reuven: The Holy One blessed be He made a promise to two people, but they were afraid; the chosen of the patriarchs, and the chosen of the prophets. The chosen of the patriarchs – this is Jacob, as it is stated: “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself” (Psalms 135:4). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Behold, I am with you” (Genesis 28:15), but ultimately he was afraid, as it is stated: “Jacob was…frightened.” The chosen of the prophets – this is Moses, as it is stated; “Were it not for Moses, His chosen” (Psalms 106:23). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: “For I will be with you” (Exodus 3:12), but ultimately, he was afraid: “The Lord said to Moses: Do not fear him” (Numbers 21:34). He says: ‘Do not fear’ only to one who is afraid. Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Ḥelbo in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rabbi Natan: Israel would have been worthy of elimination in the days of Haman, had they not based their mindset on the mindset of their ancestor. (The midrash states that in the days of Haman, the Jews should not have been terrified, since they had already been given a Divine promise that the Jewish people would not be eliminated. However, since this mindset of fearing annihilation despite a Divine promise existed already, with Jacob, it was forgiveable.) They said: ‘If our patriarch Jacob, to whom the Holy One blessed be He promised and said: “Behold, I am with you,” (Genesis 28:15) was afraid, we, all the more so.’ That is what the prophet criticizes Israel: “You forgot the Lord your Maker, who spread the heavens and laid the foundation of the earth” (Isaiah 51:13). He said to them: ‘You have forgotten what He said to you: “So said the Lord: If the heavens above can be measured [and the foundations of the earth below probed, I too will spurn all the descendants of Israel because of everything that they did]” (Jeremiah 31:36) – if you see the heavens fall and the earth collapse. (Just as the heavens cannot be measured and the foundations of the earth probed, so I will never spurn you.) Should you not have learned from the spread of the heavens and the earth? (You should have learned from the fact that the heaven and earth did not collapse, but rather, the heavens remained spread over the earth.) Instead, “you feared continuously all day”’ (Isaiah 51:13).
Another matter, “Jacob was very frightened and distressed” – Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Ilai said: The fright and the distress are not the same. (It would have been enough to write one of them. One who fears, is in distress.) Rather, he was frightened lest he kill, and distressed lest he be killed. He said: ‘If he overcomes me, he will kill me, and if I overcome him, I will kill him.’ That is: He was frightened lest he kill, and distressed lest he be killed. He said: ‘All these years, he [Esau] has been residing in the Land of Israel; say that he comes against me (Maybe he will be able to overcome me.) by virtue of his residence in the Land of Israel. All these years, he has been residing and honoring his parents; say that he comes against me by virtue of his honoring father and mother, as so he said: “The days of mourning for my father will approach” (Genesis 27:41). Say that this old man died and he will come against me to kill me.’ (This is another explanation for the distress of Jacob. The fear was of Esau, the distress was from the thought that maybe his father had died.) Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: This is what the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Return to the land of your fathers, to the land of your birth” (Genesis 31:3). Say that the stipulations (The stipulations that Jacob made when he departed for Padan Aram. See Genesis 28:20–22.) were until here: “And He will protect me on this path” (Genesis 28:20), and not beyond that. (Maybe the promise for protection ended when he reached the land of his fathers.) Rabbi Yudan said: The Omnipresent said to him: “Return to the land of your fathers,” but nevertheless, “Jacob was very frightened”? Rather, from here [we learn] that there is no promise to the righteous in this world. (Promises made are conditional on righteous behavior, thus the righteous may fear that they have sinned in such a way that they have lost the guarantee of protection that they received (Etz Yosef).) Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: “Behold, I am with you” (Genesis 28:15); “if God will be with me”? (Genesis 28:20). Rather, from here [we learn] that there is no promise to the righteous in this world. Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: “He said: For I will be with you” (Exodus 3:12) and nothing evil will harm you, (This is implied by the fact that God said that He would be with Moses.) and it is written: “It was on the way, in the lodging, [the Lord encountered him and sought to kill him]” (Exodus 4:24). Rather, there is no promise to the righteous in this world. Rabbi Pinḥas said in the name of Rabbi Ḥanin of Tzippori: “Benayahu son of Yehoyada answered the king and said: “Amen; and so may the Lord, God of my lord the king, say” (I Kings 1:36). (This was said in responsed to David's decree to anoint Solomon as king.) But is it not already stated: “Behold, a son is born to you, he will be a man of rest” (I Chronicles 22:9) (The son mentioned in the verse is Solomon.) – rather, he said: ‘Many adversaries may arise from here to Giḥon.’
“He divided the people” – the Torah taught you proper conduct; that a person should not place all his property in one corner. From whom do you learn this? It is from Jacob, as it is stated: “He divided the people…” Likewise it says: “And hid them, fifty men to a cave” (I Kings 18:4). (Ovadya hid one hundred prophets from Jezebel, fifty in each of two caves, rather than all together in one cave.) “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will survive” (Genesis 32:9). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – these are our brethren in the south; (The Land of Israel.) “the remaining camp will survive” – these are our brethren in the Diaspora. Rabbi Hoshaya said: Even though they survived, they fast on our behalf on Monday and Thursday. (Even though they are not being threatened, they fast and pray on their behalf.)
“He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met? He said: To find favor in the eyes of my lord” (Genesis 33:8). “Esau said: I have plenty, my brother. What is yours shall be yours” (Genesis 33:9). “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” – throughout that night the ministering angels arrayed in groups and companies, and were confronting those of Esau and saying to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said: ‘With Esau.’ They said: ‘Strike them, strike them, let them have it.’ ‘With Abraham’s grandson’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ ‘With Isaac’s son’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ When they said: ‘We are with Jacob’s brother,’ they said: ‘Leave them, as they are from ours.’ In the morning he said to him: “For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met…”? He said to him: ‘Did they say anything to you?’ He said to him: ‘I am broken before them.’ “He said: To find favor…” “Esau said: I have plenty…” – of beatings, “my brother, [what is yours] shall be yours.” (There was a failure to communicate. Jacob thought that Esau was referring to the messengers who brought the gift to Esau. Esau thought that Jacob was referring to the groups of ministering angels that attacked him and his people.) Another matter: “Esau said: I have plenty…” – Rabbi Aivu said: It is because the blessings were dubious for him. Where were they reinforced for him? It is here, from what he said to him: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” Rabbi Elazar said: Ratification of a document is only by its signatories. So that you will not say: Had Jacob our patriarch not deceived his father he would not have taken the blessings, the verse states: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” (Esau thereby ratified the transaction of the blessings.)
It is written: “And set it in the ears of Joshua” (Exodus 17:14), this is one of four righteous people to whom a portent was given; two sensed it and two did not sense it. A portent was given to Moses, but he did not sense it. A portent was given to Jacob, but he did not sense it. A portent was given to David and Mordekhai, and they sensed it. Jacob – the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “I will protect you wherever you go” (Genesis 28:15), and he was frightened. A person to whom the Holy One blessed be He made a promise was frightened, as it is written: “He was frightened” (Genesis 32:8)? Rather, he said: Perhaps when I was in the house of Laban the impure, I became sullied with impurity. Moses – “and set it in the ears of Joshua,” indicating that Joshua will lead Israel into the land. And it is written: “I pleaded with the Lord [… please let me cross over and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan]” (Deuteronomy 3:23-25). However, David and Mordekhai were given a portent and they sensed it. David said: “Your servant has smitten both the lion and the bear” (I Samuel 17:36). David said: Am I so important that I was able to smite these wild beasts? Rather, he said: Perhaps an event is destined to befall Israel, and they are destined to be rescued by me. Mordekhai – “Mordekhai would walk before the courtyard of the harem” (Esther 2:11). He said: Is it possible that this righteous one [Esther] will mary an uncircumcised man? Rather, a great event is destined to befall Israel and they are destined to be rescued by her.
(Numb. 21:34:) BUT THE LORD GOD SAID UNTO MOSES: DO NOT FEAR HIM…. This text is related (to Prov. 28:14): BLESSED IS THE ONE WHO IS ALWAYS AFRAID…. Such is the nature of the righteous. (Tanh., Numb. 6:25.) Although the Holy One assures them, they do not cast off fear. And so it is written about Jacob (in Gen. 32:8 [7]): AND JACOB WAS AFRAID. Why was he afraid? He said: Perhaps I was tainted by something at Laban's, since it is written (in Deut. 23:15 [14]): SO IS NOT TO SEE ANYTHING INDECENT AMONG YOU AND TURN AWAY FROM YOU. Thus the Holy One may have forsaken me. Moses also acquired fear in the manner of his ancestor. Why was he afraid? He said perhaps Israel sinned in the war with Sihon or became tainted by a transgression. He said to him (in Numb. 34:21): DO NOT FEAR HIM, because a warrior more formidable than himself has never arisen in the world. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 3:11): FOR ONLY KING OG OF BASHAN . Now he had been left from the warriors whom Amraphel and his colleagues (Gen. 14:1, 9) had slain, as stated (in Gen. 14:5): AND SMOTE THE REPHAIM…. But this man was their refuse, like hard olives that come out as survivors from the bottom of the olive waste. It is so stated (in Gen. 14:13): THEN THE SURVIVOR CAME (about Lot's capture). (Tanh., Numb. 6:15, specifically identifies the survivor by adding here: “This was Og.”) It was this man's intention that Abraham would go out and be killed. The Holy One gave him a reward for his feet , in that he lived all those years, until he fell at the hand of < Abraham's> children. When Moses came to wage war with him, he was afraid of him. He said: I am a hundred and twenty years old, while he is five hundred years old. If he did not have merit, he would not have lived all these years. The Holy One said (in Numb. 21:34 = Deut. 3:2:) DO NOT FEAR HIM. {(Deut. 3:6:) AND WE SHALL UTTERLY DESTROY THEM…. } [(Numb. 21:34 = Deut. 3:2, cont.:) AND YOU SHALL DO TO HIM AS YOU DID TO SIHON….] Moreover, is it not written (in Deut. 3:7): BUT ALL THE CATTLE AND THE BOOTY OF THE TOWNS WE TOOK AS BOOTY FOR OURSELVES? The simple conclusion is that they utterly destroyed his body so as to leave none of it.
(Gen. 32:7 [6]:) AND THE MESSENGERS RETURNED < UNTO JACOB, SAYING >: WE CAME UNTO YOUR BROTHER ESAU. What do you think about him? < Is he > your brother? He is Esau. (Cf. Rashi, ad loc.: You used to say: He is my brother, but he acts toward you like Esau the Wicked.) (Ibid., cont.:) HE ALSO IS COMING TO MEET YOU. He is on the go all day, AND (ibid., cont.) FOUR HUNDRED PEOPLE ARE WITH HIM. What do you think about < the meaning of > AND FOUR HUNDRED PEOPLE ARE WITH HIM? R. Samuel bar Nahmani said: Each and every one of them was appointed over four hundred people. (The interpretation comes from the words WITH HIM, which are understood to mean, “like him.” Thus, as Esau commanded four hundred, so did each of them command four hundred. So Gen. R. 75:7.) As soon as Jacob heard that, what is written (in Gen. 32:8 [7])? AND JACOB WAS < GREATLY > AFRAID.
Another interpretation (of Gen. 32:8 [7]): AND JACOB WAS < GREATLY > AFRAID. Our masters have said: His body became like wax. (See Gen. R. 44:3; 65:19.) Moreover, the Holy Spirit cries out (in Prov. 24:10): IF YOU ARE INDOLENT IN THE DAY OF DISTRESS (TsRH), YOUR STRENGTH IS WANTING (TsR). At that time the Holy One said to him (in Is. 41:10): FEAR NOT, FOR I AM WITH YOU; BE NOT DISMAYED, FOR I AM YOUR GOD. I STRENGTHEN YOU, I HELP YOU…. I STRENGTHEN YOU through Michael; I HELP YOU through Gabriel. (Ibid., cont.:) AND I ALSO UPHOLD YOU THROUGH MY VICTORIOUS RIGHT HAND. (Gen. 28:15:) SEE, I AM WITH YOU. At that time (according to Gen. 32:8 [7]) HE DIVIDED THE PEOPLE WHO WERE WITH HIM. What did he do? He armed them within and clothed them with linen without. He prepared himself in three things: in prayer, with a gift, (Gk.: doron.) and for war. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > with a gift? (In Gen. 32:22 [21]:) AND SO THE GIFT (MNHH) PASSED ON BEFORE HIM…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > for war? (In Gen. 32:9 [8]:) IF ESAU SHOULD COME < TO ONE CAMP (MHNH) AND DESTROY IT >…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > in prayer? (In Gen. 32:10 [9]:) THEN JACOB SAID: O GOD OF MY FATHER ABRAHAM, AND GOD OF MY FATHER ISAAC…. What is written after that (in vss. 11-12 [10-111])? I AM UNWORTHY OF ALL THE KINDNESSES AND ALL THE FIDELITY…. PLEASE DELIVER ME FROM THE HAND OF MY BROTHER, FROM THE HAND OF ESAU. The Holy One said to him: You have called to me. By your life, I will save you, according to what is stated (in Ps. 89:27 [26]): HE SHALL CRY TO ME, YOU ARE MY FATHER, MY GOD, AND THE ROCK OF MY SALVATION.
(Numb. 22:20:) “Then God came unto Balaam at night.” This text is related (to Exod. 12:42), “That was for the Lord a night of vigil.” All miracles which were done for Israel and which involved exacting retribution for them from the wicked took place at night: (Numb. R. 20:12.) (Gen. 31:24:) “And God came unto Laban the Aramean in a dream at night.” And it is written (in Gen. 20:3:) “But God came unto Abimelech in a dream at night.” And it is written (in (Gen. 14:15), “And he deployed at night.” And it is written (in Exod. 12:29), “And it came to pass in the middle of the night.” And so [it was with] all of them. Another interpretation: Why did he reveal himself to Balaam by night? He was not worthy of [receiving] the holy spirit [except at night]. Since He speaks at night with all the prophets of the nations, as stated (in Job 4:13), “In opinions from night visions.” And so Eliphaz says (in Job 4:13), “In a dream, a vision of the night,” about [Balaam’s] speaking with him at night. (Numb. 22:20, cont.:) “If these men have come to invite you, arise and go with them.” From here you learn that in the way that a man wants to go, in it is he driven. As at first it was said to him (in Numb. 22:12), “Do not go with them.” As soon as he had become defiant, he went. As so is it written about him (in Numb. 22:22), “But God's anger was kindled because he was going.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “I do not desire the death of the wicked. [But] in as much as you want to be obliterated from the world, ‘arise and go with them.’” And it is written (in Numb. 22:20, cont.), “but only the thing [that I tell you are you to do].” [These words are] to teach you that he went with a warning. Immediately he got up early in the morning, as stated (in vs. 21), “So Balaam arose early in the morning, saddled his she-ass, [and went with the princes of Moab].” Did he not have a male or female slave [to saddle his donkey]? It was simply that his hatred for Israel was so great that he beat [his servant] to it and arose quickly all by himself. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “You wicked man! Their ancestor Abraham has already anticipated you at the binding of his son Isaac,” as stated (in Gen. 22:3), “So Abraham arose early in the morning, saddled his he-ass.” (Numb. 22:21, cont.:) “And went with the princes of Moab.” [These words are] to teach you that he was as glad at the tribulation of Israel as they were. (Numb. 22:22:) “But God's anger was kindled because he was going, and the angel of the Lord took a stand [in the road as his adversary (satan)].” (A good example of this Hebrew word when it is not used as a proper noun.) He was an angel of mercy, but to [Balaam] he had become an adversary (satan). (Numb. R. 20:13.) And so he said [unto] Balaam, “You have caused me to practice a craft that is not my own, as stated (Numb. 22:32), “here I have come out as an adversary (satan).” (Numb. 22:22, cont.:) “And two of his servant boys were with him.” This is customary for one going out on the road. It is necessary for two to attend him. Then in turn they attend each other. (Numb. 22:23:) “Now the she-ass saw the angel of the Lord and a sword was drawn in his hand.” Was not the angel able to breathe on him and take away his spirit unless he drew his sword? And look at what is written about Sennacherib (in II Kings 19:35 = Is. 37:36 // II Chron. 32:21.), “the angel of the Lord went out and smote [one hundred and eighty-five thousand] in the camp of Assyria.” [It is also written (in Is. 40:24),] “he blows on them and they wither.” However, he said to him, “[Skill with] the mouth was given to Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 27:22), ‘The voice is the voice of Jacob.’ And [skill with] the hands to Esau, as stated (in Gen. 27:40), ‘Upon your sword shall you live.’ All the nations all live by the sword. Now you are trading off your craft and coming against them with their [craft]. I also am coming against you with your own [craft].” (Numb. 22:24:) “Then the angel of the Lord stood in a lane between the vineyards.” Could he not have gone after him into the field? (Numb. R. 20:14.) It is simply that this is the nature of the Holy One, blessed be He. When a king of flesh and blood sends an executioner (Lat.: speculator (“examiner”).) to kill a particular person, he goes after him for many days, so that this person who has incurred the penalty of death [continues] eating and drinking, while the executioner goes after him from place to place. With the Holy One, blessed be He, however, it is not like that. Rather the executioner is in his place and whoever has incurred the penalty of death comes to him of his own accord. So that the angel would not be bothered with going after Balaam, he simply went ahead of him on the road, for it is so written (ibid.), “Then the angel of the Lord stood in a lane between the vineyards.” He said to him, “Shall the vineyards (i.e., Israel) be given over to the foxes?” (Cf. the parallel text in Numb. R. 20:14, which has “like foxes.”) (Numb. 22:24, cont.:) “With a wall on one side and a wall on the other side.” You cannot prevail against them, because in their hand (according to Exod. 32:15) are tablets of stone, written [on both their sides], on the one side and on the other side they are written. (Numb. 22:25-26:) “When the she-ass saw the angel of the Lord, she was pressed [against the wall and pressed Balaam's foot against the wall; so he struck it again]. Then the angel of the Lord moved forward again [and stood in a place so narrow that there was no room to turn aside to the right or to the left].” What reason did he have to go ahead of him three times? He showed him here symbols of the [three] patriarchs. When he stood before him the first time, there was space on one side and on the other, [as stated] (in Numb. 22:23), “so the she-ass turned aside from the road.” On the second occasion she could only move to one side. On the third occasion (according to Numb. 22:26) “there was no room to turn aside to the right or to the left.” So what do the symbols mean? If he ever sought to curse the Children of Abraham, he would find the Children of Ishmael and the Children of Keturah on one side and on the other. [If] he sought to curse the Children of Isaac, he would find the Children of Esau on one side, and (according to Numb. 22:25) “she was pressed against the (one) wall.” In the case of the Children of Jacob, however, he found among them no residue through which to touch them. It is therefore written about the third occasion (in vs. 26), “in a narrow (‘zar) place.” This is Jacob, as stated (in Genesis 32:8), “Jacob was very frightened and [it] distressed (ye‘zer) him.” (Numb. 22:26:) “There was no room to turn aside to the right or to the left.” As there was no residue in any of his sons. (Numb. 22:27:) “When the she-ass saw the angel of the Lord, she lay down under Balaam, [so Balaam's anger was kindled, and he struck the she-ass with a stick (mql)],” because of the shame with which she had shamed him. (Both the noun and verb, translated here as SHAME, come from the root, BZH; but the interpretation may have been suggested by a word with a similar meaning, namely MQLH, which means “putting to shame.” This word could have implied the relation between shame and MQL as used in Numb. 22:27.)
(Numb. 21:34:) “But the Lord God said unto Moses, ‘Do not fear him.’” This text is related (to Prov. 28:14), “Fortunate is the one who is always afraid […].” Such is the nature of the righteous. Although the Holy One, blessed be He, assures them, they do not cast off fear. And so it is written about Jacob (in Gen. 32:8]), “And Jacob was [greatly] afraid.” Why was he afraid? He said, “Perhaps I was tainted by something at Laban's,” since it is written (in Deut. 23:15), “so [the Lord] is not to see anything indecent among you and turn away from you.” Thus the Holy One, blessed be He, may have forsaken me. Moses also acquired fear in the manner of his ancestor. Why was he afraid? He said, “Perhaps Israel sinned in the war with Sihon or became tainted by a transgression.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (in Numb. 34:21), “’Do not fear,’ as they all fulfilled [their actions] with justice. ‘Do not fear him,’ [even though] a warrior more formidable than himself has never arisen in the world [since his time].” Thus it is stated (in Deut. 3:11), “For only Og King of Bashan was left over from the remaining Rephaim.” (According to Deut. 2:11, 20-21, together with Numb. 13:33, the Rephaim were a race of giants.) Now he had been left from the warriors whom Amraphel and his colleagues (Gen. 14:1, 9) had slain, as stated (in Gen. 14:5), “and they smote the Rephaim […].” But this [man] was their refuse, like olive pits that come out as survivors from the bottom of the oil press. It is so stated (in Gen. 14:13), “Then the survivor came and told Abram (about Lot's capture).” This was Og. And here [Scripture] made him into leftovers, as stated (in Josh. 13:12), “he was left over from the remaining Rephaim.” It was his intention that Abraham would go out [to war] and be killed. The Holy One, blessed be He, gave him a reward for [what] his feet had earned [for the good that ended up resulting]; in that he lived all those years until he fell at the hand of [Abraham's] children. When Moses came to wage war with him, he was afraid of him. He said, “I am a hundred and twenty years old, while he is five hundred years old.” If he did not have merit, he would not have lived all these years. The Holy One, blessed be He, said (in Numb. 21:34 = Deut. 3:2:) “Do not fear him, for I have given him into your hand,’ you with your hand shall kill him, (Numb. 21:34 = Deut. 3:2, cont.) ‘and you shall do to him as you did to Sihon….’” (Deut. 3:6:) “And we shall utterly destroy it […].” But is it not written (in Deut. 3:7), “But all the cattle and the booty of the towns we took as booty for ourselves?” It is simply that they utterly destroyed their bodies, so as not to benefit from any of them at all. (Numb. 21:35:) “So they smote him, his sons [and all his people].” The written text (ketiv) [reads] “his son,” (Cf. a similar verse about Sihon, Deut. 2:33, where HIS SON is the undoubted reading.) because he had a son more formidable than himself. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “In this world you destroy the nations little by little, but in the world to come, I will remove them from the world at a single stroke. It is so stated (in Is. 33:12), “And the people shall become burnings of lime, thorns cut down that are burned in the fire.” Amen, may it be His will!
This is the meaning of the verse, “And Mordechai knew” (Esther 4:1). That is, he knew the essence of the matter — that the decree had been issued on account of the great harm they had done to the Shechinah when they benefited from the feast of that evildoer. Therefore it states, “And Mordechai donned sackcloth and ashes and cried out with a great and bitter cry.” “And he donned sackcloth” — This was to atone for the sin and to weaken the power of the “four hundred men” who accompanied Eisav when he came to meet his brother Yaakov. For it is stated concerning this event, “And Yaakov was very afraid” (Bereishis 32:8). That is, he was afraid of the four hundred impure husks and destroyers that accompanied Eisav. This is why Mordechai donned sackcloth, because the numerical value of the word “sackcloth” [שׂק] is 400. Thus his intention was to weaken the power of the wicked Eisav. Then Mordechai informed also Esther of the great harm that had been done at the feast of Achashveirosh. Therefore it states immediately after this, “And Esther donned ‘kingship’” (Esther 5:1). That is, she donned the spirit of prophecy (Megillah 14b). Esther then proposed that they fast for three days and three nights in order to counteract the filth that Haman and Achashveirosh had injected into them by means of their feast. In this way the power of the filth that had sullied them through that eating and drinking would be enfeebled, for it was weakened through their fasting, thereby enabling the collective soul of Israel to shine as before.
And do not cross the toll-collectors (Vilna, Zilber ed.: המכסים. (this could be read as מֹכֵּסִים, tax collectors). Moriah, Me'ah She'arim: הַמֻּכְסָנִין. Heb. unc. According to Jastrow, revenue farmers, publicans, custom-collectors are considered robbers by Jewish law.) and get arrested (Vilna: ותתּפש ותשת. Zilber ed.: ותשת , Hebrew unclear. Moriah, Me'ah She'arim, וְתִתָּפֵשׂ וְתָשִׂים , "and get arrested and put...") and put your dignity and your life at risk. (יראתך ונפשך על קרן הצבי. Lit, "your fear and your soul upon the horn of the deer." I.e., following Jastrow, put them where they cannot be reclaimed. (See M. Kethubot 13:2). Apparently tax farmers were feared above all other brigands. It is related to יראה as well.) You shall not stand in a place of danger and rely upon a miracle, but always fear lest it cause you to sin. But remember our father Jacob, "Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed…" (Gen. 32:8). Do not annoy [even] a gentile child for the gentiles (All four eds.: גוי קטן...הגוים. None uses a euphemism here.) bear grudges. (Makor ha-Yirah: BT Pesachim 114. "Do not stand…" BT Shabbat 32a. "Do not harass…" BT Pesachim 113a.)
את עמדיו ואת אדניה, “its pillars and its sockets.” Anything which is not a living creature is sometimes referred to in the masculine mode and other times in the feminine mode. The following examples are proof of this rule: המחנה האחת והכהו, “one of the camps, and he smites it” (Genesis 32,8) המחנה הנשאר, “the remaining camp;” (same verse) רוח גדולה וחזק, “a great and powerful wind,” (Kings I 19,11). והרים ממנו מקמצו מסולת המנחה; our author quotes more examples; he adds that on occasion even living creatures are referred to sometimes as feminine and sometimes as masculine; example: אם בהמה אשר יקריבו ממנה כל אשר יתן ממנו, “and if the beast (feminine) from which he will offer parts as a sacrifice, every part that he will give from it (masculine), etc.” (Leviticus27.9) . An alternate explanation of our verse: the word: עמודיו refers to the posts supporting the קלעים, ‘the hangings” around the courtyards, and the word: אדניה, refers to the courtyard itself, the חצר, that word being feminine, (as we know from Kings I 6,36)
As I was writing this essay in the summer of 2014, Israel was engaged in a bitter struggle with Hamas in Gaza in which many people died. The State of Israel had no more desire to be engaged in this kind of warfare than did our ancestor Jacob. Throughout the campaign I found myself recalling the words earlier in Parashat Vayishlaḥ about Jacob’s feelings prior to his meeting with Esau: “Jacob was very afraid and distressed” (Gen. 32:8), about which the sages said, “Afraid, lest he be killed, distressed lest he be forced to kill” (quoted by Rashi ad loc.). What the episode of Dina tells us is not that Jacob, or Simeon and Levi, were right, but rather that there can be situations in which there is no simple right course of action. Whatever you do will be considered wrong; every option will involve the compromise of some moral principle.
Accordingly, Abraham’s words “whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it” were as if he had said, “Lord God, | on several occasions you have promised me that ‘this land will I give unto you,’ but I do not know if this future decree is necessary or contingent, and therefore I am in doubt and afraid. (109. Elsewhere (MK II 289, AK II 51) Kaspi explains that a prophet might be uncertain of the meaning of a divine statement, for a prophet has only the word-characters (mahut ha-millot) to go by. Here God’s words do not indicate whether the promise is necessary or contingent, so Abraham is unsure.) Explain this to me.” The Lord then fulfilled Abraham’s desire through the making of the covenant, which informed Abraham that (the promise) was a necessary one. It was for this reason that Abraham said “how shall I know” and did not say “how shall I believe” or “how shall I think” or “how is it possible,” as had been said earlier in regard to the two earlier promises, i.e., the promise of seed, and that of———. (110. Here the MS is unclear, with the word devaro inserted.) In this regard, Maimonides explained ’emunah (“faith”) and ha’amanah (“the act of believing”) in the Guide I:50. In the Posterior Analytics it has been explained that what is not known by means of a necessary proof is considered a “justifiable conception,” or a thought that is right and just. (111. In the Posterior Analytics I, 33, 88b, Aristotle says: “opinion may be concerned with that which is true or false, and can be otherwise: opinion is in fact the grasp of a premise which is immediate but not necessary … (on the other hand scientific knowledge) is universal, and proceeds by necessary connections, and that which is necessary cannot be otherwise.”) It is similar with the mode of prophecy, for that which is not known with certainty, as the knowledge of the future rising of the sun, is described in these terms (i.e., “belief”). Therefore earlier it states, “And He counted it to him for righteousness” (i.e., Abraham’s acceptance of the promise of seed), for God had not informed Abraham that it was a necessary promise, and Abraham did not ask for such (assurance) except in this case (of the land), for whatever reason. It was only after Abraham did well in the binding of Isaac that the Lord, of His own accord, provided Abraham the necessary knowledge, i.e., the (necessary) great multiplication of his seed, in the words “by myself have I sworn.” (112. Gen. 22:16.) Had the Lord made (such) a covenant with Jacob, or sworn on the words “I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude,” (113. Gen. 32:13.) then Jacob would not have feared on account of Esau. (114. Gen. 32:8.) (His fear) was not because Jacob was foolish, he merely followed Abraham’s thinking (in not asking for such a covenant regarding seed), for Abraham did not ask “how shall I know …” in relation to the promise of his personal benefits, or of the multiplication of his seed. Those things were close in time to being fulfilled, as well as close in reality, for they were naturally probable. (This is) enough on this subject.
[However regarding] the matter of Yaakov's fear after the Holy One, blessed be He, promised Him good proclamations; as it is stated (Genesis 28:15), "'Behold, I am with you: I will protect you wherever you go,'” and [yet] he feared lest he die, as it is stated (Genesis 32:8), "Yaakov was greatly frightened and he was distressed" – the sages, may their memory be blessed, said about this matter that he was afraid of iniquity, lest it would cause him death. And that is what they said (Berakhot 4a), "He reasoned, 'Lest sin cause it.'"
AND ABRAM SAID, O LORD ETERNAL, WHAT WILT THOU GIVE ME? “Behold, Thou hast saved me from the kings, but Thou hast not assured me against extinction. Thou hast only said that Thou wilt give me great reward, but what can my reward be without children?” Now it had not occurred to Abraham that this great reward would be in the World to Come for there is no necessity for such a promise; every servant of G-d will find life in the hereafter before him. But in this world there are righteous men, unto whom it happened according to the work of the wicked. (Ecclesiastes 8:14.) It is for this reason that the righteous have need of assurance. Moreover, very great (Thy reward shall be ‘very great.’) implies that he will merit both worlds (“Both worlds,” literally “two tables,” a Rabbinic figure of speech (Berachoth 5 b) signifying access to the best of this world and also of the hereafter.) with all the best therein without any punishment whatever as befits the really righteous people. Moreover, an assurance is given for that which a person fears. [Hence, he needed no assurance concerning the hereafter. But he feared being childless; therefore G-d] rejoined and explained that His assurance included that he should not fear this either, as He will make his children as the stars of heaven for multitude. (Deuteronomy 1:10.) You may ask: Has it not been told to Abraham already, For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth, (Above, 13:15-16.) and so, how could Abraham now say, Since I go childless…lo, my household slave will be mine heir? (Verses 2-3 here.) And why did he not believe in the first prophecy, as he would believe in this [second one which G-d will now relate to him?] The answer is that the righteous ones have no trust in themselves, fearing they might have sinned in error. Thus it is written At one instant I may speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and plant it; but if that nation turn and do evil before Me, then I repent of the good. (Jeremiah 18:7-10, with some changes.) Now when Abraham saw himself advanced in years and the first prophecy concerning him had not yet been fulfilled, he thought that his sins had withheld that good from him. (See ibid., 5:25.) And perhaps he now feared that he would be punished for the people that he killed in the war, as our Rabbis have said. (Bereshith Rabbah 44:5.) They have expressed a similar thought in Bereshith Rabbah: (Ibid., 76:2.) “Then Jacob was greatly afraid and was distressed. (Genesis 32:8.) From this we derive the principle that there is no assurance for the righteous ones in this world, etc.”
WITHOUT THOUGHT OF RECEIVING PAY. A different version of our mishna has the text “intending not to receive pay”. I cannot understand that version, for it is impossible that one should serve only on condition that he not receive pay, for the implication is that should he receive pay, he will not serve. Midrash Shmuel writes that the case in the first version is one who serves without declaring that he is doing so specificaly to receive pay; he is still aware that the pay will come, and does have hopes of reward. On the other hand, one who serves intending not to receive pay is one who explicitly serves not in order to receive pay but out of love alone. While this is improves matters exegetically, it doesn’t fit the language of that other version well. As for his criticism of the first version, that even one who serves out of love alone still knows that the reward will eventually come, I would not call such a one someone who serves out of love; in fact, he is the archetypal servant who serves for reward! One who serves out of love alone is he who constantly finds his service insufficient and, because of his great love of G-d, feels that he has not served properly. As Hillel says in mishna 14, “And I for myself, what am I?”, according to Rav's commentary ad loc. (Rav there: even if I have accrued merit for myself, what is this merit and what is it worth when considered against what I am truly obligated to do? ) Not only does he hold no anticipation of reward, he fears for his soul lest he sin by falling short in his service, which is what the tanna intends by his last words, “and the fear of heaven should be upon you”, as I will explain. This was the way of the patriarchs. Although our father Abraham was promised seed he afterwards said, “and I remain childless” (Genesis 15:2). (The author is most likely recalling Ramban’s commentary on that verse, which points out that although Abraham had already been promised offspring, he feared that his sins might have annulled the promise.) This is why G-d was called “the fear of Isaac” (Genesis 31: 42), (I.e., the one before whom Isaac feared the consequences of his sins.) and Jacob likewise feared that perhaps he had been sullied by sin. (As per the Talmud’s exegesis in Berachot 4a on Genesis 32:8.) This is the portion and these are the thoughts of the servants of G-d who serve out of love alone; there is no anticipation of reward whatsoever. And so the version before us is correct—so it seems to me.
"Verses would contradict each other!" [Problem:] Even though we find many items that are in grammatical male and female, as it is written "Hand sent (fem.) to me and there was in it (masc.) a scroll" (Ezekiel 2:9), "The sun sets (fem.)" (Genesis 15:17) "The sun rises (masc.)" (Genesis 19:23), "The one (fem.) camp and he struck it (masc.) (Genesis 32:8); and so too in the language of Hazal we find, "A lamp that goes out (fem.) is not required for it" (Shabbat 21a) "Lamp that goes out (masc.)" (Shabbat 44a), "Your donkey left (fem.) Tarfon" (Sanhedrin 33a) "One who rents a donkey and she breaks off and goes to the mountain" (Baba Metzia 78a) "but before the owner of the cow could pull the donkey, the donkey died (masc.)", and so in many places. Solution: Whenever it is possible to teach [something interesting from the use of grammatical gender], we teach, and also with verses if there is a derashah. Alternatively: Because the mishnayot that teach their terminology after the biblical period, [Hazal] wanted to give them reason and specificity [to the biblical use of grammatical gender].
Bahya writes. The Torah portion teaches us how we Israelites should behave in the exile, with Esau. Just as Jacob prepared himself with three things, for war, for prayer and with presents, so too, should we do in the exile. We must give presents to the nations and must speak kind words to them. We must pray to the Holy One. However, waging war is not possible, as the verse says, “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem” [Song of Songs 2:7]. This means, I adjure you Israel that you should not wage war with the nations. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:8.)
“Jacob was greatly frightened and anxious” [32:8]. Jacob was very frightened that they should not kill him and he was also afraid that he should not kill other people, as Rashi writes. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:8.)
The Gemara cites a proof that there is room for one to fear lest he commit a transgression in the future in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi, as Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi raised a contradiction between two verses. It is written that God told Jacob in his vision of the ladder: “Behold, I am with you and I guard you wherever you go” (Genesis 28:15), yet when Jacob returned to Canaan and realized that Esau was coming to greet him, it is written: “And Jacob became very afraid, and he was pained” (Genesis 32:8). Why did Jacob not rely on God’s promise? Jacob had concerns and said to himself: Lest a transgression that I might have committed after God made His promise to me will cause God to revoke His promise of protection.
Rabba said to him: I am concerned lest sin cause me to suffer the pain despite the Torah study and the good deeds in which I engage, in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi. As Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi raises a contradiction. It is written that God said to Jacob: “And I am with you, and will keep you wherever you go” (Genesis 28:15), and it is written: “And Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed” (Genesis 32:8). If God assured Jacob that He would keep him, why was he concerned?
Yaakov’s reaction to the news is immediate and intense: “Then Yaakov was greatly afraid and distressed” (Bereshit 32:8). His fear is understandable, but the Torah’s description of his response is also puzzling. Why use two verbs that are similar in meaning? What is the difference between fear and distress?
Yaakov was very frightened, and distressed. He divided the people that were with him, along with the sheep, cattle and camels, into two camps.
And Jakob was greatly afraid, because for twenty years he had not been mindful of the glory of his father: and he had anxiety; and he divided the people who were with him, the sheep, and oxen, and camels, into three troops, for a portion. to Leah, and a portion to Rahel.
| וַיֹּ֕אמֶר אִם־יָב֥וֹא עֵשָׂ֛ו אֶל־הַמַּחֲנֶ֥ה הָאַחַ֖ת וְהִכָּ֑הוּ וְהָיָ֛ה הַמַּחֲנֶ֥ה הַנִּשְׁאָ֖ר לִפְלֵיטָֽה׃ | 9 J | thinking, “If Esau comes to the one camp and attacks it, the other camp may yet escape.” |
In the pasuk "And Yaakov said, 'The G-d of my father...'" (Bereishis 32:9), the word "said" is used instead of a typical term for prayer, indicating that Yaakov was always in a state of constant prayer and connection to Hashem. This is reflected in his establishment of the arvit (evening prayer), which, unlike shachris and mincha, has no fixed time and is considered optional (רשות), suitable for someone truly free, like Yaakov. Despite being "fearful and concerned," Yaakov's "saying" was a form of prayer. The darkness and opposition he faced did not distance him from prayer, exemplifying the essence of the arvit prayer, spoken in the night. This shows Yaakov's unwavering connection to Hashem, even in distress.
אל המחנה האחת, “to one of the camps;” some commentators understand the word האחת here, as a reference to the camp containing the matriarchs and their children. והיה המחנה הנשאר לפלטה, “this will afford the people in the remaining camp to escape.” [Presumably Esau will not be aware that there are two camps, so that he will not bother to search for it. Ed.] An alternate explanation of Yaakov’s strategy: while Esau will battle with the people making up the first camp, there will be time enough for the people making up the second camp to flee and escape destruction.
CAMP. The word for camp (machaneh) can be either masculine or feminine (I.E. makes the point because the word is found in both the masculine and the feminine in our verse. Machaneh ha-achat (one camp) is feminine. However, the suffix of ve-hikkahu (smite it) is masculine, as is machanah ha-nishar (the camp which is left).) like the word for house (bayit) and place (makom).
THEN THE CAMP WHICH IS LEFT SHALL ESCAPE. Perhaps (The point is that the vav of ve-hayah does not indicate certainty, for how could Jacob be certain one camp would escape? Its meaning is perhaps. Thus rather than translating our verse: then the camp which is left shall escape, it should he rendered: perhaps the camp that is left shall escape.) the camp that is left shall flee, or perhaps my brother’s anger shall be assuaged after smiting one of the camps, or perhaps God will send them relief and deliverance. If the Arameans be too strong for me, then thou shalt save me (II Sam. 10:11) is similar. (Here, too, there was no certainty. What Joab said was, if the Arameans be too strong for me perhaps you will be able to save me. Thus ve-hayita li li-shu’ah (II Sam. 10:11) does not mean, then thou shalt save me.) Rabbi Solomon’s (Rashi.) comment, to the effect that then the camp that is left shall escape means that the camp will be saved despite Esau’s intention, is Midrashic. (Rashi apparently interpreted ve-hayah as indicating certainty, then (ve-hayah) the camp that is left shall escape, i.e., despite Esau’s will, it shall be saved. I.E. claims that this is not the literal meaning of the verse (Cherez).) Although God promised Jacob, And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth (Gen. 28:14), (This verse indicates that Jacob’s children would not be destroyed. I.E. now argues that one cannot substantiate Rashi’s interpretation that Jacob was certain, on the basis of God’s promise to him in Gen. 28:14, that at least one of his camps would escape (Cherez).) Jacob did not know whether it referred to the children he now had, or to children he would have in the future. (How could Jacob be sure that one camp would escape, since the promise may not have applied to the children he now had (Cherez).) A prophet does not know hidden things unless God reveals them to him. (The fact that Jacob was a prophet does not mean that he knew that God’s promise recorded in Gen 28:14 applied to his present children.) Jacob was alive when Joseph was sold into slavery and yet was unaware of it. (He thought Joseph was dead and was unaware that he had been sold into slavery.) Similarly Elisha said, and the Lord hath hid it from me (II Kings 4:27). The above also answers those who ask, why was Jacob afraid considering that God promised that he would protect him, viz., God’s assurance, and I will be with thee (Gen. 31:3)? The latter is also the promise referred to by Jacob when he said, And thou saidest I will surely do thee good (v. 13). (We do not find God saying, I will surely do thee good. Hence when Jacob said, And Thou saidest: I will surely do thee good, he was restating, and I will be with thee.) Jacob was afraid because of the possibility that he alone would escape. Furthermore, we know that the personality of the individual is taken into account when his sins are considered, be they major or minor transgressions. Therefore, a minor sin committed by a great personality is considered a major transgression. Jacob was afraid that he may have sinned or inadvertently transgressed in his mind and as a result of this God no longer would be with him. Do not be amazed at what I write, for behold, Moses the greatest of men, whom God himself sent to bring Israel out of Egypt erred and God sent an angel to kill him. (Moses erred in not immediately circumcising his son. As a result God sent an angel to kill him (Ex. 4:24-26). God acted in this manner because a minor sin committed by a man of Moses’ stature was considered by the Almighty to be a major transgression. Similarly Jacob was afraid that he might have committed a minor sin resulting in God’s removal of His divine protection, hence his anxiety.)
ויאמר אם יבא עשו, He said: "If Esau were to come to the one camp, etc." In the event Esau would come upon the first camp and defeat it, the second camp which he had prepared for battle would help even the first camp not to be annihilated since as soon as Esau's hostile intentions were obvious the second camp would engage him. Jacob did all this in order to save G'd the trouble of performing a miracle.
אם יבא עשו אל המחנה האחת והכהו, “if Esau comes to one of the camps and defeats it, etc.” The first camp Esau was to encounter was that which contained Zilpah and Bilhah and their respective children. If he were to kill the people in that camp —
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה, “then the remaining camp would survive.” The second camp contained Rachel, Leah, and their respective children. In order to explain this verse completely, we have to understand it as follows: “Yaakov divided the children to Rachel and Leah respectively and to the two maid-servants and their children respectively in order for them to survive attempted murder by Esau.” The expression לפליטה occurs in that sense in Jeremiah 51,50 פליטים מחרב, “fugitives from the sword.” This verse is also the source which taught the prophet Ovadiah to divide the fledgling prophets whom he hid by separating them into two groups, each in a different cave. This is why Jeremiah wrote in Kings I 18,13 quoting Ovadiah: “I have hidden 100 of the Lord’s prophets, 50 each per cave; and I have fed them bread and provided them with water.” Our sages in Baba Metzia, basing themselves on our verse, made the rule that a person is well advised to diversify his wealth into three types of investments. 1) land. 2) commerce; 3) ready cash or easily convertible and immediately accessible assets. They also base this on Deut. 28,8 “G’d will command His blessing for you in your storehouses.” The “storehouses” are a reference to warehouses serving as the place where the merchant keeps his stock-in-trade. The next words in that verse ובכל משלח ידיך, “and your every undertaking,“ are understood as a reference to ready cash or otherwise easily cashable assets. The last expression in the above verse, i.e. וברכך בארץ, “and He will bless you on the land,” refers to G’d blessing one’s investment in land (for agriculture). The Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 76,3 sees in the line “if he will come to he one camp and smite it,” a reference to our brethren in the South, meaning if the Jews who reside in the South [either of the land of Israel under foreign occupation, or the Jews in Yemen? Ed.] will be smitten, at least the ones in exile under various other host countries will be safe. What these sages had in mind was that Yaakov knew for certain that in the future one part of the Jewish people would be saved. No matter what efforts Esau or his descendants would make to annihilate all the descendants of Yaakov, one part of the nation would always survive. Yaakov wanted to facilitate the survival of part of the Jewish people by demonstrating already now that the best way to ensure this was not to have all of them in the same camp, i.e. the same location. In fact, there is an allusion here to the historical truth that whenever a Kingdom or Empire expelled all its Jews, there was some other country willing to grant these exiles refuge and opportunities to establish themselves anew.
ויאמר, the meaning is clear, i.e. he said this to himself.
המחנה, the word is both masculine and feminine, the adjective האחת being feminine, whereas the adjective הנשאר is in the masculine mode.
THEN THE CAMP WHICH IS LEFT SHALL ESCAPE. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture, Jacob stated this as a possibility. He said that perhaps one camp shall escape, for during the time he [Esau] smites one, the other will flee, or perhaps his anger will subside or deliverance will come to them from G-d. And so the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah, (76:2.) “The Torah teaches you proper conduct: a man should not leave all his money in one corner.” And Rashi wrote: “‘Then the camp which is left shall escape in spite of him for I will fight against him.’ He prepared himself for three things: for prayer, for giving Esau a gift, and for war.” And I have seen in the Midrash: (Tanchuma, Buber, Vayishlach 6.) “What did Jacob do? He armed his people underneath, and clothed them in white from outside, and he prepared himself for three things.” And this is the most correct [interpretation, in line with Rashi and the Midrash, who say that he prepared himself also for war, as opposed to the simple meaning first mentioned]. The intent of this is that Jacob knew that all his seed would not fall into Esau’s hands. Therefore, in any case, one camp would be saved. This also implies that the children of Esau will not formulate a decree against us designed to obliterate our name entirely, but they will do evil to some of us in some of their countries. One of their kings will formulate a decree in his country against our wealth or our persons while simultaneously another king will show compassion in his place and save the refugees. (A clear echo of Ramban’s times is hereby heard. While waves of persecution, expulsions and massacres were a steady feature of Jewish life in most European countries, refuge was always found in some country. At the time of Ramban, Spain was a place of relative relief for Jews from France and Germany.) And so the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah, (76:3.) “If Esau come to the one camp, and smite it — these are our brethren in the south. Then the camp which is left shall escape — these are our brethren in the Diaspora.” Our Rabbis thus saw that this chapter alludes also to the future generations.
לפלטה. The two camps were positioned quite a distance one from the other, so that if it would become obvious that disaster struck one camp the other would have a chance to flee.
המחנה האחת, a feminine mode, as occurs also in Psalms 27,3 אם תחנה עלי מחנה, “should an army besiege me.”
הנשאר, now we have the masculine mode. This is one of many instances in which a noun appears sometimes in the masculine mode and sometimes in the feminine mode. Well known examples are Genesis 19,23 השמש יצא על הארץ (where the word שמש is treated as masculine), and Jonah 4,8 ' where it is treated as feminine, i.e. ותך השמש. (whereas in the beginning of the same verse it is treated as masculine, i.e. ויזרח). Compare also Psalms 148,8 and Job 1,19.
המחנה האחת והכהו TO THE ONE CAMP AND SMITE IT — The word מחנה is treated grammatically as masculine or feminine: in (Psalms 27:3) “Though a camp should encamp (תחנה) against me” it is feminine; in (Genesis 33:8) “this (הזה) camp” it is masculine. Similarly there are other words treated grammatically as both masculine and feminine. For example, the word שמש in (Genesis 19:23) “The sun was risen (יצא) upon the earth” and in (Psalms 19:7) “His (the sun’s) going forth (מוצאו) is from the end of the heaven”; here it is masculine, but in (2 Kings 3:22) “and the sun shone (זרחה) upon the water” it is feminine. Similarly with רוח: in (Job 1:19) “and behold there came (באה) a great wind” it is feminine, and in the same verse “and smote (ויגע) the four corners of the house” it is masculine; in (1 Kings 19:11) “and a great (גדולה) and strong (וחזק) wind rent (מפרק) the mountains” it is both masculine and feminine. So also in the case of אש: in (Numbers 16:35) “and fire came forth (יצאה) from the Lord” it is feminine, and in (Psalms 104:4) “The flaming (להט) fire” it is masculine.
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה THEN THE REMAINING CAMP MAY ESCAPE in spite of him, for I will fight against him He prepared himself for three things: to give him a present — as it states (Genesis 32:22) “So, the present passed before him”; for prayer — as it states (Genesis 32:10), “And he said, ‘O God of my father Abraham”; for war — as it states in this verse, “then the remaining camp may escape”, for I will fight against him (Tanchuma Yashan 1:8:6).
Hier steht ein kleines Wörtchen, das die ganze Innigkeit ausdrückt, die man sonst vermissen würde. Es sind ja fühlende Wesen, von deren erbarmungslosem Niedermetzeln sich nicht so trocken sprechen lässt. מחנה ist in der Regel männlich und tritt ja hier auch, ,הנשאר והכהו, nur männlich auf. Indem Jakob sich aber dessen Untergang denkt, nennt er es weiblich: אם יבא עשו אל המחנה האחת, in diesem אחת ist der Seufzer hörbar, der dabei sich Jakobs Brust entrang: wenn Esau zu dem einen "armen" Lager kommt.
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפלטה, while he will be busy gorging himself on the loot captured in the first camp the second camp will be able to make good its escape, or will have prepared itself for battle.
Against his will, because I will do battle with him. I.e., while I will do battle with him, the second camp surely will have time to escape. Maharshal writes that Rashi inferred this because it is not written, “Perhaps the remaining camp will survive,” but, “The remaining camp will survive.” This implies, “Against his will, because I will do battle....” Rashi said all this, based on Scriptural inferences, to support Chazal’s teaching that Yaakov prepared himself for three things. [Rashi says “against his will,” i.e., it surely will be.] This is because the verse cannot mean “perhaps” [the remaining camp will survive]. If so, it would be more logical to gather everyone in one camp to fight Eisov—for maybe they will win due to greater numbers. However if the remaining camp will [surely] survive, against Eisov’s will, it is proper for Yaakov to have divided them into two camps. For it is better to act in a manner that will surely save one camp, even if it places the other camp in greater danger, than to put them in a situation in which they are not sure whether they all will be lost or saved. (Nachalas Yaakov)
He prepared himself for three things. All three are derived from Scripture [see Pesikta D’Rav Kahana 19:3]. And “war” is derived from, “The remaining camp will survive,” showing that this phrase refers to war. Thus Rashi explains it as, “I will do battle with him.”
Jacob then prayed, and said: God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, Lord, who says to me: Return to your land, and to the land of your birth, and I will benefit you. I turn to You now because You commanded me to return home.
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה, “so that the remaining camp may escape.” Some believe that the plain meaning of the verse is that Yaakov hoped that if the first camp that would be attacked by Esau would be defeated, then the people in the second camp might be able to save themselves through fleeing in time, or Esau’s anger might have spent itself so that he would not give pursuit, or that help might materialize through Divine intervention. Rashi explains that the words mean that the second camp would definitely survive as Yaakov himself would engage Esau in battle. Personally, I think that Yaakov’s certainty was based on the fact that he knew that not all his offspring would fall victim into Esau’s hands at anyone time. This was also to be a sign for his sons to remember that the descendants of Esau will never be able to obliterate all the Jewish people. Whenever, during the long years of our exile, one king or government would issue harsh decrees against us, another king somewhere would be prepared to offer refuge and shelter.
“The other camp may yet escape” [32:9]. Jacob divided his group into two sides. He said: if Esau will overcome one side, he and his people will be exhausted and weak. When he will come to the other side, they will be fresh and strong and Esau will be weak from the first side. So write Toldot Yizhak and Hizkuni. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 32:8; Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:9.) Bahya writes. The Torah portion teaches us how we Israelites should behave in the exile, with Esau. Just as Jacob prepared himself with three things, for war, for prayer and with presents, so too, should we do in the exile. We must give presents to the nations and must speak kind words to them. We must pray to the Holy One. However, waging war is not possible, as the verse says, “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem” [Song of Songs 2:7]. This means, I adjure you Israel that you should not wage war with the nations. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:8.) From this Torah portion we also learn that our sages said: “A person should always divide his assets into thirds; a third in land, a third in goods, and a third in hand.” (B. Baba Mezia, 42a.) This means, that the person should divide his assets into three parts. One third should be in land and houses; one third should be in merchandise; and one third should be money in hand, as the verse says. “The Lord will ordain blessings for you upon your barns” [Deuteronomy 28:8]. This means, merchandise. “Upon all your undertakings” [Deuteronomy, 28:8]. This means, money in your hand. “He will bless you in the land” [Deuteronomy, 28:8]. This means, land. The Torah portion also teaches us, “the other camp may yet escape” [32:9]. If, heaven forbid, an evil king arises who wants to do evil to Israel, and expels Israel, the Holy One sends a good king, in the expectation that Israel should remain in the world. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:9.)
[Sec. 17] 39. [The beginner] must also know that the [sefirah] Neẓaḥ, during the six days of creation, derived sustenance from the side of Gevurah, (In the “normative” sefirotic order, Neẓaḥ is found on the “side” of Gedulah (Ḥesed), while Hod is on the side of Gevurah.) and Hod from [the side of] Ḥesed, in the mystery of the mingling of the Qualities. Since because of [Adam’s] sin the [sefirotic] connections have been confused, (This is an expression of the idea that sin on the earthly plane causes “disruption” in the order of the sefirot on high.) none of the men of valor were able to repair this defect until the righteous one, Jacob our father, [took] Judgment upon himself, saying, If Esau comes below and his [angelic] “minister” above (Cf. Rashi on Gen. 32:25.) to arouse Judgment on the one camp (Gen. 32:9), [namely,] the female Hod. ([She is called] the captain of the hosts, [since] camp and hosts are the same. Thus the fact that Hod’s strength was weak like a woman[’s] is not difficult [to comprehend].) Now [we understand] and strikes it [in the sense that “Esau”] weakened the strength of the [sefirotic] stature in general. This is hinted at by [the additional letter] vav in the name [of Jacob in the verse] truth unto Jacob (Mic. 7:20). Thus he destroyed his mercy. And the remaining camp, which is Neẓaḥ, strengthens itself as a remnant to grasp on to the quality of Ḥesed. Thus it was that the minister of Esau touched the thigh of Jacob and immediately the order of nourishment was changed and Hod returned, influenced from the side of Gevurah (The “touching” apparently restored the sefirotic state of “confusion.” Cf. n. 4 above.) in the mystery of My comeliness was turned in me into corruption (Dan. 10:8). Neẓaḥ was [thus] weakened until King David, peace upon him, came and repaired it with his melodies (The psalms.) so that it might derive nourishment from the side of Ḥesed. This is the mystery of [the verse] in Your right hand is bliss forevermore (neẓaḥ) (Ps. 16:11).
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“He divided the people” – the Torah taught you proper conduct; that a person should not place all his property in one corner. From whom do you learn this? It is from Jacob, as it is stated: “He divided the people…” Likewise it says: “And hid them, fifty men to a cave” (I Kings 18:4). (Ovadya hid one hundred prophets from Jezebel, fifty in each of two caves, rather than all together in one cave.) “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will survive” (Genesis 32:9). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – these are our brethren in the south; (The Land of Israel.) “the remaining camp will survive” – these are our brethren in the Diaspora. Rabbi Hoshaya said: Even though they survived, they fast on our behalf on Monday and Thursday. (Even though they are not being threatened, they fast and pray on their behalf.)
“He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met? He said: To find favor in the eyes of my lord” (Genesis 33:8). “Esau said: I have plenty, my brother. What is yours shall be yours” (Genesis 33:9). “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” – throughout that night the ministering angels arrayed in groups and companies, and were confronting those of Esau and saying to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said: ‘With Esau.’ They said: ‘Strike them, strike them, let them have it.’ ‘With Abraham’s grandson’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ ‘With Isaac’s son’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ When they said: ‘We are with Jacob’s brother,’ they said: ‘Leave them, as they are from ours.’ In the morning he said to him: “For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met…”? He said to him: ‘Did they say anything to you?’ He said to him: ‘I am broken before them.’ “He said: To find favor…” “Esau said: I have plenty…” – of beatings, “my brother, [what is yours] shall be yours.” (There was a failure to communicate. Jacob thought that Esau was referring to the messengers who brought the gift to Esau. Esau thought that Jacob was referring to the groups of ministering angels that attacked him and his people.) Another matter: “Esau said: I have plenty…” – Rabbi Aivu said: It is because the blessings were dubious for him. Where were they reinforced for him? It is here, from what he said to him: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” Rabbi Elazar said: Ratification of a document is only by its signatories. So that you will not say: Had Jacob our patriarch not deceived his father he would not have taken the blessings, the verse states: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” (Esau thereby ratified the transaction of the blessings.)
“Jacob arrived intact” – intact in his body. Because it is written: “He was limping because of his hip” (Genesis 32:32); nevertheless, intact in his body. Intact in his children; because it is written in his regard: “If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will survive” (Genesis 32:9); nevertheless, here, intact in his children. Intact in his wealth; although, Rabbi Avun said in the name of Rav Aḥa: Our patriarch Jacob would give Esau that same gift (See Genesis 32:14–16.) for nine years; nevertheless, here, intact in his wealth. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Intact in his studies, but Joseph forgot, as it is stated: “As God has made me forget all my toil” (Genesis 41:51). Elsewhere it says: “The toiling soul toils for itself” (Proverbs 16:26). (The toil of the soul is Torah study.)
(I Kings 18, 3) And Achab called Obadiah, who was the superintendent of the house. Now Obadiah feared the Lord greatly. What was their discussion? R. Isaac said: "Achab said to Obadiah: "Concerning Jacob, it is written (Gen. 30, 27) The Lord hath blessed me for thy sake, and concerning Joseph it is written (Ib. 39, 5) The Lord blessed the Egyptian's house for the sake of Joseph. I, however, keep thee in my house, yet I am not blessed for thy sake. Perhaps thou art not fearing God?" Thereupon a heavenly voice was heard, saying: "Obadiah fears the Lord greatly, but the house of Achab is not destined for blessings." Raba said: "What is said of Obadiah is of greater signifieanee than what is said of Abraliam, for about Abraham it is not written 'greatly,' and about Obadiah 'greatly' is added." R. Isaac said: Why did Obadiah merit to be rewarded with prophecy? Because he hid one hundred prophets in a cave, as it is written (I Kings, 8, 4) And it happened when Isabel cut off the prophets of the Lord that Obadiah took a hundred prophets, and hid them fifty in one cave, and provided them with bread and water." Why fifty?" R. Elazar said: "He learned this from Jacob, as it is said (Gen. 32, 9) Then the other band which is left may escape." R. Abahu, however, said: "Because the cave could not hold more than fifty."
Another interpretation (of Gen. 32:8 [7]): AND JACOB WAS < GREATLY > AFRAID. Our masters have said: His body became like wax. (See Gen. R. 44:3; 65:19.) Moreover, the Holy Spirit cries out (in Prov. 24:10): IF YOU ARE INDOLENT IN THE DAY OF DISTRESS (TsRH), YOUR STRENGTH IS WANTING (TsR). At that time the Holy One said to him (in Is. 41:10): FEAR NOT, FOR I AM WITH YOU; BE NOT DISMAYED, FOR I AM YOUR GOD. I STRENGTHEN YOU, I HELP YOU…. I STRENGTHEN YOU through Michael; I HELP YOU through Gabriel. (Ibid., cont.:) AND I ALSO UPHOLD YOU THROUGH MY VICTORIOUS RIGHT HAND. (Gen. 28:15:) SEE, I AM WITH YOU. At that time (according to Gen. 32:8 [7]) HE DIVIDED THE PEOPLE WHO WERE WITH HIM. What did he do? He armed them within and clothed them with linen without. He prepared himself in three things: in prayer, with a gift, (Gk.: doron.) and for war. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > with a gift? (In Gen. 32:22 [21]:) AND SO THE GIFT (MNHH) PASSED ON BEFORE HIM…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > for war? (In Gen. 32:9 [8]:) IF ESAU SHOULD COME < TO ONE CAMP (MHNH) AND DESTROY IT >…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > in prayer? (In Gen. 32:10 [9]:) THEN JACOB SAID: O GOD OF MY FATHER ABRAHAM, AND GOD OF MY FATHER ISAAC…. What is written after that (in vss. 11-12 [10-111])? I AM UNWORTHY OF ALL THE KINDNESSES AND ALL THE FIDELITY…. PLEASE DELIVER ME FROM THE HAND OF MY BROTHER, FROM THE HAND OF ESAU. The Holy One said to him: You have called to me. By your life, I will save you, according to what is stated (in Ps. 89:27 [26]): HE SHALL CRY TO ME, YOU ARE MY FATHER, MY GOD, AND THE ROCK OF MY SALVATION.
אשר כמוהו לא נהיתה, “the like of which had never occurred and will never occur again.” [The following is a comment on the grammatical incongruity in this verse where masculine and feminine constructions have been used inconsistently. Ed.] We find this kind of incongruity not only here but also in Leviticus 6,9: והרים ממנו בקומצו, as well as in Leviticus 27,9. Compare also Genesis 32,9. A different explanation: the word כמוהו, does not refer to the outcry of the Egyptians but to the night, לילה, which is masculine also. In chapter 11 verse 4, G-d had said that He would go out during that night. In our verse here the reference is to that night.
AND THE ANGELS OF G-D MET HIM. Rashi comments: “The angels who minister in the Land of Israel came to meet him. And he called the name of that place Mahanaim: the plural form implies two camps, one consisting of the angels ministering outside of the Land of Israel who had accompanied him thus far, the other consisting of those ministering in the Land of Israel who had come forth to meet him.” But I wonder at this, for Jacob had not yet reached the Land of Israel and was still distant from there for he sent messengers to Esau from afar. And then it says there, And he passed over the ford of the Jabbok, (Further, 32:23.) which is the river Jabbok which is the border of the children of Ammon. (Deuteronomy 3:16.) This is to the southeast of the Land of Israel, and he still had to pass the boundary of the children of Ammon and Moab, and then the land of Edom, and his first entry into the Land was at Shechem, as it is said, And Jacob came in peace to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. (Further 33:18. This poses a difficulty to Rashi’s interpretation of “Mahanaim.”) Instead, we must say this vision came to Jacob as he arrived in enemy territory in order to inform him that “they that are with him are more than they that are with them.” (See II Kings 6:16.) And the name of the place was called “Mahanaim” in the plural, for such is the way of Scripture with names. (For a single event or person, a plural name is given, as for example, “Mitzraim”.) It may be that “Mahanaim” refers to His camp and the camp of the higher beings, (In that case the plural in the word Mahanaim is naturally justified.) that is to say that His camp on earth is as the camp of the angels, all of them being camps of G-d, blessing Him and confessing His Unity, may His name be blessed forever. Vayishlach This section was written in order to inform us that the Holy One, blessed be He, delivered His servant, and He redeemed him from the hand of him that is stronger than he, (Jeremiah 31:11.) and he sent an angel (Numbers 20:16.) and saved him, and in order to further teach us that Jacob did not place his trust in his righteousness and that he strove for delivery with all his might. There is yet in this section a hint for future generations, for everything that happened to our father with his brother Esau will constantly occur to us with Esau’s children, and it is proper for us to adhere to the way of the righteous (See Job 17:9.) by preparing ourselves in the three things for which he prepared himself: for prayer, for giving him a present, and for rescue by methods of warfare, to flee and to be saved. Our Rabbis have already derived this hint from this section, as I shall mention.
אשר כמוהו לא נהייתה, although we have a mixture of masculine and feminine construction here, this is only one of many such examples in the Torah. Genesis 32,9 המחנה האחת והכהו is just one such example which is well known.
and behold, etc. Some things adopt both masculine and feminine gender, such as (Gen. 19:23): “The sun had risen (יָצָא) [msc.] over the earth, etc.”; (Mal. 3:20), “And for you who fear My name, shall the sun of mercy rise (וְזָרְחָה) [fem.]), etc.” [Likewise] (Gen. 32:9), “If Esau comes to the one camp (הָאַחַת) [fem.] and strikes it (וְהִכָּהוּ) [msc.].
Rabbi Yitzḥak says: For what reason did Obadiah merit prophecy? It is because he concealed one hundred prophets in a cave, as it is stated: “It was so, when Jezebel cut off the prophets of the Lord, that Obadiah took one hundred prophets, and hid them, fifty men in a cave, and fed them with bread and water” (I Kings 18:4). The Gemara asks: What is different, i.e., why did he decide, to conceal fifty men in each of two caves and not conceal them all together in one cave? Rabbi Elazar says: He learned from the behavior of Jacob to do so, as it is stated: “And he said: If Esau comes to the one camp and smites it, then the camp that is left shall escape” (Genesis 32:9). Obadiah learned from this to divide the prophets and thereby lessen the danger. Rabbi Abbahu says: It is because there is no cave big enough to contain more than fifty people.
He said, If Eisov comes to one camp and attacks it, the remaining camp will survive.
And he said, If Esau come to the one troop of them and smite it, the remaining troop may escape.
| וַיֹּ֘אמֶר֮ יַעֲקֹב֒ אֱלֹהֵי֙ אָבִ֣י אַבְרָהָ֔ם וֵאלֹהֵ֖י אָבִ֣י יִצְחָ֑ק יְהֹוָ֞ה הָאֹמֵ֣ר אֵלַ֗י שׁ֧וּב לְאַרְצְךָ֛ וּלְמוֹלַדְתְּךָ֖ וְאֵיטִ֥יבָה עִמָּֽךְ׃ | 10 J | Then Jacob said, “O God of my father Abraham’s [house] and God of my father Isaac’s [house], O יהוה, who said to me, ‘Return to your native land and I will deal bountifully with you’! |
Yaakov says, "I have become small from all the kindness that You have done to Your servant" (Bereishis 32:10), implying he did not earn anything and it was all through Hashem's kindness. We have explained that Yaakov's humility led him to feel that any level he attained was solely due to Hashem's kindness, and his entire life was a supernatural experience beyond human effort. Hashem reciprocates based on our attitude towards Him; hence, by not attributing any merit to himself, Yaakov ensured that his merits were passed on to his descendants for generations.
"I have become small (humbled) by all the kindness and truth that You have done to your servant” (Bereishis 32:10). The Rebbe of Lublin taught that even Yaakov's humility itself is part of the truth and kindness bestowed upon him by Hashem. This means that Yaakov recognized his own smallness and understood it as a divine gift, a result of Hashem's benevolence. We can further explain that “I have become small” reflects Yaakov's fear in a dangerous situation, yet he strengthened his faith, understanding that even his descent into a low and spiritually perilous place was a kindness from Hashem. The proof for Yaakov was that he crossed the Jordan with his staff, a sign that Hashem was with him. This realization made Yaakov certain that his trials were not absolute downturns but part of Hashem's greater plan for good. This understanding gave him confidence that everything Hashem does is ultimately for the best.
ויאמר יעקב, “Yaakov said (in his prayer to G-d); according to Rashi on verse 10, in 31,42 Yaakov avoided referring to his father’s G-d by His name in connection with Him, but had used a euphemism, i.e. פחד יצחק, whereas now he speaks of אלוקי אבי יצחק, without using any euphemism. He answers that Yaakov here refers to the promise of G-d in his dream with the ladder, in which he quotes G-d as having described Himself as the אלוקי יצחק, “the G-d of Yitzchok.” In 31,3, G-d had asked him to return to the land of his fathers. In recalling these instructions from G-d which he had complied with, he sees the justification for appealing to G-d to save him from Esau while he is on the way to fulfill G-d’s commandment.
God of my father. Yaakov mentions two reasons why he should not have been afraid: 1) because of the merits of his fathers, and 2) because of Hashem’s promise. And since neither involved his own merit, even sin should not have been a cause for concern.
אלוקי אבי אברהם, “the G’d of my father Avraham, etc.” It would have appeared more appropriate for Yaakov to first mention the Ineffable Name (as he did later in the same verse). He should have said ה' אלוקי אבי אברהם. This should have been followed by אלוקי אבי יצחק האומר אלי.
According to a kabbalistic approach, if Yaakov had done as we have just suggested, the Ineffable Name would have been perceived as an allusion to repentance, i.e. as if it represented the attribute of Justice. [Rabbi Chavell, quoting האזרח בישראל, as well as תורת חיים, explains that the emanations are perceived as proceeding from the highest to the lowest. In a descending order we have כתר, חכמה, בינה,, (the latter being symbolic of repentance). It is followed by חסד -גבורה- תפארת and their branches. Had Yaakov used the Ineffable Name in connection with Avraham, that name would have alluded to the emanation בינה. [Our sages want Avraham to be associated primarily with the attribute of חסד, akin to “Mercy,” and when we begin to pray we first mention the patriarch Avraham as a symbol of that attribute. Ed.] We also conclude the benediction with a reference to Avraham in order to stress that we rely primarily on the attribute of Mercy when addressing our prayers, i.e. our requests to G’d. Yaakov also used that attribute last and that is why the attribute appears next to Yitzchak, though Yitzchak represents a higher attribute as we have pointed out elsewhere. You will note that when G’d spoke to Yaakov earlier when He told him to return to the land of birth (31,3), He also employed first the Ineffable Name.
You are aware that the sages in Bereshit Rabbah 82, have already stipulated that the patriarchs are the true מרכבה, “carriers of the Presence and glory of G’d.” You are also aware that based on Ezekiel’s vision in chapter one of Ezekiel, as interpreted in Berachot 16 that there were only three patriarchs, i.e. Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. Four such carriers are needed. But only three people have qualified as “patriarchs” (compare Berachot 16). We know this because G’d describes Himself only as אלוקי אברהם, אלוקי יצחק, ואלוקי יעקב (Exodus 3,15). We do not find that the prophets such as Moses or Jonah ever qualified for G’d calling Himself: “the G’d of Moses, or the G’d of Jonah.” Although we find that Moses is described as imploring his G’d in Exodus 32,11 (ויחל משה את פני ה' אלוקיו) and something similar in the case of Jonah, this does not mean that these prophets qualified as being part of the מרכבה, the Divine entourage, or “chariot.” There is not a single instance in which G’d associates His name in an exclusive manner with either of these two prophets. On the other hand, we do find G’d saying to Chiskiyah in Kings II 20,5 אלוקי דוד אביך, “the G’d of your father David.” This verse caused the senior Kabbalist in Spain הרב יצחק בן הרב אברהם to say in his prayers אלוקי דוד ובונה ירושלים, "G’d of David and the builder of Jerusalem.” He did so in order that he should be able to mention a מרכבה of G’d consisting of the required minimum of four carriers and that these carriers should all be human beings. However, Elisha’s question in Kings II 2,14 איה ה' אלוקי אליהו, “where is the Lord, the G’d of Elijah?” is not of the same category. This was a prayer and the wording is to be considered as merely rhetorical. This leaves us with the question why our sages never included David in the list of the patriarchs or as one of the pillars of the מרכבה at all. Our sages were concerned with the vision of Ezekiel in the first chapter of his Book. There we find the מרכבה consisting of four phenomena of which only three are assigned a specific location. The text reads: ודמות פניהם פני אדם, ופני אריה אל הימין לארבעתם ופני שור מהשמאל לארבעתם ופני נשר לארבעתם. (Ezekiel 1,10) “Each of them had a human face (at the front). The meaning of the words that “each of them had a human face,” is this was the face facing the prophet. The face on the right was that of a lion, whereas the face on the left was that of an ox. The prophet did not describe the location of the face of the eagle, such as saying that it was facing the back, for instance. The reason is that this was an attribute of G’d which deserved to remain hidden. Keeping this in mind, the Kabbalists followed this approach and did not include David in the regular number of the pillars of the מרכבה. [There is an interesting Midrash in which David implored G’d to become one of the patriarchs, meaning that when we commence the daily עמידה prayer we should begin with the words “G’d of Avraham, G’d of Yitzchak, G’d of Yaakov and G’d of David.” G’d explained to David that the three patriarchs had attained their stature due to their having successfully passed tests G’d had subjected them to. When David heard this he begged to be tested also. Although G’d warned him not to take such a chance, David insisted and was subjected to the test with Bat Sheva. We all know that he failed this test and this is why he did not join the ranks of the patriarchs. I do not recall the source of this Midrash at the moment. Ed.]
Yaakov included all the 13 attributes G’d revealed to Moses in Exodus 34, 6-7 in his prayer here. The words אלקי אברהם ואלוקי יצחק represented the first two of G’d’s attributes, i.e. “mercy and justice.” The words שוב לארצך G’d had said and which Yaakov quotes, refer to the third attribute, the one called רחום in Exodus. The words ואטיבה עמך correspond to the attribute חנון in Exodus, i.e. loving kindness totally unearned by the recipient. The words ארך אפים in the list given to Moses is represented in Yaakov’s prayer by the word קטונתי. Yaakov meant that but for G’d’s long lasting patience, he could not have endured. The word is reminiscent of the line in Amos 7,5 חדל נא מי יקום יעקב כי קטן הוא, “Oh Lord, refrain! How will Yaakov survive, he is so small!”
The words מכל החסדים ומכל האמת correspond to the words ורב חסד ואמת in the list of G’d’s attributes in Exodus. The words ועתה הייתי לשני מחנות in our verse correspond to the words נוצר חסד לאלפים in the parallel paragraph in Exodus. G’d has preserved the חסד performed by both Avraham and Yitzchok to be credited to the account of their grandson Yaakov. The words אלפים (plural), correspond to שני מחנות, 2 camps.
הצילני נא מיד אחי, these words correspond to the words נושא עון in Exodus, meaning that the sin has not caused Yaakov’s downfall.
מיד עשו, a reference to a sin of a far more serious nature than עון, described as פשע in the list of attributes in Exodus.
כי ירא אנכי, these words correspond to the word וחטאה in the list of attributes in Exodus. It is a minor type of sin, the one committed inadvertently.
ואתה אמרת, these words and their continuation correspond to the word ונקה in the list of G’d’s attributes revealed to Moses in Exodus 34,7.
ויאמר יעקב אלוקי אבי אברהם ואלוקי אבי יצחק, “You are the One Who has assured me when I left my father’s house that due to the merit of my fathers You would assist and protect me. (28,13). Now I turn to You in prayer relying on their merit in hoping that You will keep Your promise. Secondly, it was You Who has told me while I was in Charan to go back to the land of my fathers since their country was my country.
ואטיבה עמך, You also added that You would be good to me and would remain on my side. We have already explained that when the Torah repeats something we must relate to the message and not to the minor changes in the words chosen to express the same thought a second time. (compare our comments on 21,2 and 24,39).
אלוקי אבי אברהם ואלוקי אבי יצחק, Who has made me promises using these words to identify Himself to me when I had departed from Beer Sheva. (28,13.)
ואלהי אבי יצחק AND GOD OF MY FATHER ISAAC — But in another place (Genesis 31:42) he said, “And the Dread of Isaac”! Then also why did he again mention the Proper Name of God (first invoking him as God of Abraham, God of Isaac, and then continuing “O Lord, who saidst unto me”)? It should have been written “O God of Abraham and God of Isaac (omitting ‘O Lord’) who saidst unto me, “Return unto thy country” etc. But the explanation is as follows: Jacob said to the Holy One, blessed be He, “You made me two promises. One was when I left my father’s house at Beersheba when You said to me (Genesis 28:3) “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham thy father and the God of Isaac”, and on that occasion you promised me (Genesis 28:15) “and I will keep thee whithersoever thou goest”. Then again in Laban’s house You said to me (Genesis 31:3) “Return unto the land of thy fathers and to thy kindred and I will be with thee”. There You revealed Yourself to me by Your Proper Name alone, as it is said (Genesis 31:3) “And the Lord said unto Jacob “Return unto the land of thy fathers etc.” Relying upon these two promises I now come before You invoking you as “the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac” and also simply as “the Lord” under which names You made me these two promises respectively.
In mir vererbt sich ja das, was durch dich dem Abraham und Jizchak geworden, und du bist ja auch mir selber nahe getreten; wenn ich jetzt heimkehre, so folge ich ja deinem Geheiße; —
אלוקי אבי אברהם, Yaakov first listed the praises of the Lord, acknowledging His deeds of loving kindness, before coming to the point of pleading for His help in his hour of need. When the sages of the Great Assembly formulated our daily prayers they followed the example set by Yaakov here in devoting the first three benedictions to praising the Lord and acknowledging both His power and His Holiness, before launching into listing our requests from Him.
Return to the Land of your father and to your birthplace, and I will be with you... Yaakov was saying: Since You promised to be with me when I come to the Land of my fathers, if I die on the way, it will turn out that Your promise to me was not fulfilled.
Despite the dangers he faces, Jacob begins his prayer with thanksgiving: I am unworthy of all the kindnesses and of all the truth that You have performed for Your servant; for with my staff alone I crossed this Jordan River when I fled from Canaan. I was by myself and I had nothing, and now I have become two camps. I am therefore grateful.
“Take the Levites” – that is what the verse said: “The Lord assesses the righteous, but He hates the wicked and the lover of villainy” (Psalms 11:5). “The Lord assesses the righteous” – the Holy One blessed be He does not elevate a person to a position of authority until he first assesses and examines him. When he passes His ordeal, He elevates him to a position of authority. Likewise, you find regarding Abraham our patriarch. The Holy One blessed be He subjected him to ten ordeals and he passed them. Then He blessed him: “The Lord blessed Abraham with everything” (Genesis 24:1). Likewise, Isaac, He subjected him to the ordeal of Avimelekh, and he passed the ordeal. Then He blessed him, as it is stated: “Isaac sowed in that land and found in that year one hundredfold, and the Lord blessed him” (Genesis 26:12). Likewise, Jacob our patriarch, He subjected him to an ordeal with all those travails; with Esau, with Rachel, with Dina, with Joseph, and how he left his father’s house: “For with my staff I crossed this Jordan” (Genesis 32:11). And He blessed him: “God appeared to Jacob again, already upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). Likewise, Joseph with the wife of Potifera; he was incarcerated for twelve years and became king because he passed his ordeals. That is, “the Lord assesses the righteous.” The tribe of Levi, too, devoted their lives for sanctification of the name of the Holy One blessed be He. When Israel was in Egypt, they rejected the Torah and circumcision, as Ezekiel rebukes them: “So said the Lord God: On the day that I chose Israel, I raised My hand to the descendants of the house of Jacob and made Myself known to them in the land of Egypt” (Ezekiel 20:5). What is ultimately written thereafter? “They defied Me and did not want to heed Me…and I said to pour My fury upon them” (Ezekiel 20:8). What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He brought darkness upon the Egyptians for three days, during which he killed all the wicked of Israel, as it says: “I will purge the rebels and the transgressors against Me from among you” (Ezekiel 20:38). Likewise it says: “The fig tree formed its unripe figs” (Song of Songs 2:13), these are the wicked who were among Israel. “And the vines, budding, emitted fragrance” (Song of Songs 2:13), the survivors who repented were accepted. “Arise, my love, my fair one, and go” (Song of Songs 2:13), as the time of the redemption has arrived. But the tribe of Levi, all of them were righteous, and all of them would perform the Torah, as it is stated: “For they observed Your saying, and Your covenant they upheld” (Deuteronomy 33:9); this is circumcision. Moreover, when Israel crafted the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate, as it is stated: “Moses stood at the gate of the camp…and all the sons of Levi gathered to him” (Exodus 32:26). When Moses said to them: “Each man, place his sword upon his thigh” (Exodus 32:27), what did they do? They placed it and showed no favor. Likewise, Moses said in his blessing: “Who said of his father and of his mother: I have not seen him” (Deuteronomy 33:9). When the Holy One blessed be He saw that they were all righteous, he subjected them to an ordeal and they passed the ordeal, as it is stated: “Whom you subjected to an ordeal at Masa” (Deuteronomy 33:8). Immediately, He said: “The Levites shall be Mine” (Numbers 8:14), to realize what is stated: “The Lord assesses the righteous” (Psalms 11:5). But the wicked, it is written in their regard: “But He hates the wicked and the lover of villainy” (Psalms 11:5). David said: “Happy is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways” (Psalms 128:1).
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“Jacob said: God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac, Lord, who says to me: Return to your land, and to the land of your birth, and I will benefit you” (Genesis 32:10). “Jacob said: God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac” – but not of Esau? It is, rather, that [God says:] ‘One who chooses their path and performs actions like theirs, I affirm My presence over him; one who does not choose their path and does not perform actions like theirs, I do not affirm My presence over him.’ Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: Who was close to David; was it not Aḥaz? But he leaves Aḥaz and says to Hezekiah: “So said the Lord, God of David, your father” (II Kings 20:5). It is, rather, that [God says:] ‘One who chooses their path and performs actions like theirs, I affirm My presence over him; one who does not choose their path and does not perform actions like theirs, I do not affirm My presence over him.’
(Gemara) What is the reason for such punishment for Niddah? R. Isaac said: "Because she committed corruption in the inner part of her womb, therefore should she be beaten in the inner part of her womb." This may be true regarding Niddah, but what is the reason for Challa and the lighting of the candles? It is as a certain Galilean expounded before R. Chisda: Thus said the Holy One, praised be He! "One fourth of a Log of blood did I put in your body; concerning blood (menstruation) have I warned thee. (Fol. 32a) I have called ye the first product and have charged ye concerning the first of your dough; the soul which I have put in you is called Ner (light) and I have charged ye concerning Ner (the Sabbath light); if you observe these things then it is well, but if not I shall take your souls." And why just at the time of childbirth? Rabba said: "When the ox has already fallen down, sharpen the knife for him." Abaye said: "Let the maid continue her rebellion, it will go under one rod." R. Chisda said: "Leave the intoxicant alone, he will fall by himself." Mar Ukba said: "The shepherd is lame and the goats are running away swiftly. [When they appear] at the gate of the fold, there are words (bargaining), but in the stalls (where the sheep are delivered), strict account is taken." R. Pappa said: "At the gate of business [you have] many friends, but at the gate of disgrace, no friend." And when are the sins of men investigated? Resh Lakish said: "When they pass over a bridge." A bridge and nothing else? But he intended to say all dangerous places like a bridge. Rab would not embark on a ferry where there were any heathen; he said: "His time to be punished may happen to be due [while on the boat] and I may be seized with him." Samuel [on the contrary] would not embark on a ferry unless there was also a heathen abroad, for he said: "Satan has no power over two persons of different nationalities." R. Janai always examined the ferry first and then he embarked on it. For R. Janai followed his own principle, and he said: "A man should never expose himself to danger expecting that a miracle will be wrought for him; for it may be that such a miracle will not be wrought, and even if a miracle be wrought for him, it will be deducted from the rewards due him for his merits." R. Chanin said: "What is the Biblical passage for this? I am not worthy of all the kindness, and of all the truthfulness that Thou hath done unto thy servant. (Gen. 32, 11)." R. Zeira never walked under date-trees on a day when the Shutha wind blew. Our Rabbis taught: "For three sins women die of childbirth." R. Elazar says: "Women die prematurely" [instead of child birth]. R. Acha said: "For the sin of washing the dirt of their children on the Sabbath"; and others say, "Because they call the holy ark. The chest." We are "taught that R. Ishmael b. Elazar says: "For two sins common people die; because they call the ark, The chest, and because they call the synagogue The people's house.'" We are taught that R. Jose says: "Three breaches through which death enters were created for a woman. Others say three causes of premature death were created for woman; Niddah, Challa and lighting the lamps." One is in accordance with the opinion of R. Elazar and the other is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis.
(reversion to what precedes:) Jacob was given a hint and he did not take it, it being written (Genesis 28:15) "And, behold, I am with you, and I shall keep you wherever you go," yet he was frightened and he feared, as it is written (Ibid. 32:8) "And Jacob feared greatly and he was distressed." A man whom the Holy One Blessed be He had assured feared and was frightened? (How can that be?) Our father Jacob thought: Woe unto me; perhaps my sins will cause (the abrogation of the assurance.)
Another interpretation (of Gen. 32:8 [7]): AND JACOB WAS < GREATLY > AFRAID. Our masters have said: His body became like wax. (See Gen. R. 44:3; 65:19.) Moreover, the Holy Spirit cries out (in Prov. 24:10): IF YOU ARE INDOLENT IN THE DAY OF DISTRESS (TsRH), YOUR STRENGTH IS WANTING (TsR). At that time the Holy One said to him (in Is. 41:10): FEAR NOT, FOR I AM WITH YOU; BE NOT DISMAYED, FOR I AM YOUR GOD. I STRENGTHEN YOU, I HELP YOU…. I STRENGTHEN YOU through Michael; I HELP YOU through Gabriel. (Ibid., cont.:) AND I ALSO UPHOLD YOU THROUGH MY VICTORIOUS RIGHT HAND. (Gen. 28:15:) SEE, I AM WITH YOU. At that time (according to Gen. 32:8 [7]) HE DIVIDED THE PEOPLE WHO WERE WITH HIM. What did he do? He armed them within and clothed them with linen without. He prepared himself in three things: in prayer, with a gift, (Gk.: doron.) and for war. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > with a gift? (In Gen. 32:22 [21]:) AND SO THE GIFT (MNHH) PASSED ON BEFORE HIM…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > for war? (In Gen. 32:9 [8]:) IF ESAU SHOULD COME < TO ONE CAMP (MHNH) AND DESTROY IT >…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > in prayer? (In Gen. 32:10 [9]:) THEN JACOB SAID: O GOD OF MY FATHER ABRAHAM, AND GOD OF MY FATHER ISAAC…. What is written after that (in vss. 11-12 [10-111])? I AM UNWORTHY OF ALL THE KINDNESSES AND ALL THE FIDELITY…. PLEASE DELIVER ME FROM THE HAND OF MY BROTHER, FROM THE HAND OF ESAU. The Holy One said to him: You have called to me. By your life, I will save you, according to what is stated (in Ps. 89:27 [26]): HE SHALL CRY TO ME, YOU ARE MY FATHER, MY GOD, AND THE ROCK OF MY SALVATION.
(Numb. 2:2:) “Each with his standard.” This text is related (to Deut. 32:10), “He found him (i.e., Jacob) in a desert land.” [It was] a great find, [when] the Holy One, blessed be He, found Israel. (Numb. R. 2:6.) [He was] like a person who, when traveling in the desert, finds grapes there. So did the Holy One, blessed be He, find Israel, as stated (in Hos. 9:10), “I found Israel like grapes in the desert.” It is therefore stated (in Deut. 32:10), “He found him in a desert land.” The world was a desert, before Israel came forth from Egypt. (Ibid., cont.,) “And in the void was a wailing desolation.” The world was void and wailing, before Israel received the Torah. But when Israel came forth from Egypt and received the Torah, [the Holy One, blessed be He,] enlightened the world, as stated (in Prov. 6:23), “For the commandment is a lamp, and Torah is a light.” [(Deut. 32:10, cont.,) “He encircled him, He watched over him, and He protected him as the pupil of His eye.”] What is the meaning of “He encircled him?” That he encompassed them with clouds of glory. “He watched over (rt.: byn) him,” in that He taught (rt.: byn) them the words of Torah. “He protected him.” Blessed are the ears that have heard to what extent did He cherish them, to what extent did He keep them, to what extent did He protect them. As much, as it were, “as the pupil of His eye.” See how He cherished them, kept them, and protected them. It is as the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Tell them to make a tabernacle, and I will dwell among them. I am, as it were, leaving the heavenly beings and coming down to dwell among them. And not only that, but I will make them standards for My name. Why? Because they are My children, as stated (in Deut. 14:1), ‘You are children of the Lord your God.’ Also they are my hosts, as stated (in Exod. 7:4), ‘and I will bring forth my hosts, [my people the Children of Israel,] from the Land of Egypt.’” Therefore, he made those standards for My name, as stated (in Numb. 2:2), “each with his standard.”
Let Israel say, "It is not becoming for a person to say that he is good about himself, unless others testify to his goodness." And who testifies to the goodness of the Lord? Jacob said, "The kindness you have shown me is not for a day or a year, but for eternity," as it is written, "I am unworthy of all the kindness and faithfulness you have shown your servant" (Genesis 32:11). They asked him, "How many kindnesses has He done for you?" He replied, "They have no measure," as it is written, "God has shepherded me" (Genesis 48:15). Let Israel say, "What did I do to them in Egypt? And what did I pay them in the desert?" (Exodus 13:8) "And the Lord goes before them by day." (Exodus 13:21) "And what did they do to me at Sinai?" (Exodus 24:7) "All that the Lord has spoken, we will do and obey." At that moment, it was said, "I remember the kindness of your youth." (Jeremiah 2:2) Let Israel say, "Let the house of Aaron say, 'God is good, for His kindness is eternal.'" This can be compared to a homeowner who treated his workers well, but at the time of accounting, he did not scrutinize their work. At the time of threshing, he would serve them the best wine, but they did not know what was going on behind the scenes. Who knows his servants and his palace attendants? And who are the servants of the Lord? The sons of Aaron, who offer sacrifices to Him at all times.
Rabbi Levi said: That rod which was created in the twilight was delivered to the first man out of the garden of Eden. Adam delivered it to Enoch, and Enoch delivered it to Noah, and Noah [handed it on] to Shem. Shem passed it on to Abraham, Abraham [transmitted it] to Isaac, and Isaac [gave it over] to Jacob, and Jacob brought it down into Egypt and passed it on to his son Joseph, and when Joseph died and they pillaged his household goods, it was placed in the palace of Pharaoh. And Jethro was one of the magicians of Egypt, and he saw the rod and the letters which were upon it, and he desired in his heart (to have it), and he took it and brought it, and planted it in the midst of the garden of his house. No one was able to approach it any more.
Rabbi Huna interpreted the verse regarding the Jordan. “Your hair is like a flock of goats” (Song of Songs 4:1) – the flocks that crossed the Jordan crossed only due to the merit of Jacob our patriarch. That is what is written: “You shall inform your children, saying: Israel crossed [this Jordan] on dry land” (Joshua 4:22). Rabbi Huna said: Israel the patriarch. (The fact that the verse mentions Israel instead of the more common term for the nation, “children of Israel,” is meant to hint to the fact that they crossed in the merit of Israel, i.e., Jacob.) Rabbi Yudan [said] in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: We find in three places, in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings, that Israel crossed the Jordan due only to the merit of Jacob our patriarch. In the Torah: “For with my staff I crossed this Jordan” (Genesis 32:11); in the Prophets: “You shall inform your children, saying: Israel crossed this Jordan on dry land” (Joshua 4:22) – Israel the patriarch; in the Writings: “What is it, sea, that makes you flee? The Jordan, [that you turn back?]” (Psalms 114:5). [It retreats] “from before the God of Jacob” (Psalms 114:7). “That streams down [shegaleshu] from Mount Gilad” (Song of Songs 4:1) – the mountain from whose midst you took away [shegelashten], I rendered it a memorial for the nations of the world. Which is this? This is the Jordan. What is it that you took away from its midst? “Your teeth are like a flock of ordered ewes” (Song of Songs 4:2) – the plunder of Siḥon and Og. (The midrash understands the reference to ordered ewes as referring to the rows of soldiers who fought against Siḥon and Og (Etz Yosef). This occurred before the Israelites crossed the Jordan.) “That have come up from bathing” (Song of Songs 4:2) – Rabbi Elazar said: The land of Canaan was conquered with sixty thousand. (Commentaries struggle to explain how this is derived from the phrase of the verse cited here. Some suggest that the text should read “like a flock of ordered ewes” (Song of Songs 4:2). Rabbi Elazar then states that if this is an allusion to the army that conquered Canaan, they must have been sixty thousand, because if there were more they would not have been “ordered” and organized (Yefei Kol).) This is the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said: Every war that involves more than sixty thousand is a war of pandemonium. Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Ḥizkiya: Wherever it states about ten, about twenty, about thirty, about forty, it is saying either more or less. There it is stated: “About forty thousand, the vanguard of the army” (Joshua 4:13), and here it is stated: “Forty-four thousand seven hundred and sixty” (I Chronicles 5:18). Rabbi Aḥa said: They were complete thousands, and the rest perished on the way. (Forty-five thousand soldiers actually went out to battle, but forty-four thousand seven hundred and sixty returned. The verse in Joshua refers to this number as forty thousand.) Those fifteen thousand, where are they? (The total number that went out to battle was forty-five thousand, whereas Rabbi Elazar said they would go out with sixty thousand.) [Rabbi Elazar] said to them: They were guards of the equipment, and the verse did not include them in the tally. “That are all paired [matimot]” (Song of Songs 4:2) – as they were in the middle [metuamim] between the vanguard and the rearguard. That is what is written: “And the vanguard goes […and the rearguard goes]” (Joshua 6:9). “And there is none missing among them” (Song of Songs 4:2) – that not one of them was harmed. “Your lips are like a scarlet thread” (Song of Songs 4:3) – when they said to Joshua: “Everything that you commanded us we will perform…” (Joshua 1:16). “Your speech is lovely” (Song of Songs 4:3) – as they said to him: “Anyone who will defy your word…will die” (Joshua 1:18). At that moment, Joshua began praising them: “Your temple [rakatekh] is like a pomegranate slice” (Song of Songs 4:3) – even the empty [hareikan] among you is packed with Torahs like this pomegranate. It goes without saying: “Behind your braid [letzamatekh]” (Song of Songs 4:3) – regarding the modest and the fervent [metzumatin] among you. “Your neck is like the tower of [kemigdal] David” – how did David elevate [gidel] you in his book: “Who smote great kings” (Psalms 136:17)! “Built magnificently [letalpiyot]” – a book that was stated by many mouths [piyot]. “One thousand bucklers” – all those thousands and tens of thousands who crossed the Jordan and I defended them. I defended them only because of the merit of the one who came after one thousand generations. (Moses) You relied not only upon him, but rather, “all the shields of the mighty” – anyone who arises and controls and overcomes his inclination, like Moses in his time, David in his time, Ezra in his time; their entire generation depends upon them. Due to whom did Israel cross the Jordan? It was due to “your two breasts” (Song of Songs 4:5) – these are Joshua and Elazar.
Afterwards (32, 10) Jacob prayed to the "G–d of my father Abraham and the G–d of my father Isaac who has said to me: 'return to your country and birthplace, etc.'" Rashi mentions that G–d had given Jacob two assurances, one at the time he had left his father's home at Beer Sheva, and the second when He told Jacob to return home and that He would be with him. On the latter occasion, G–d appeared to him using only the four-lettered ineffable name י-ה-ו-ה. The first assurance was clearly meant to reassure Jacob concerning his dealings with Laban and Esau, whereas the latter was to fortify Jacob against the fear of Samael. The very use of this name by G–d meant that Jacob had access to a dimension of G–d not available to the Gentile nations whose fate is guided by the attribute אל-הים, meaning agents or deputies of G–d such as the שרים. Jacob pointedly referred to both these assurances in his prayer.
[29. AND MOSES SAID UNTO HOBAB, THE SON OF REUEL.] We find Scripture telling us that Zipporah was the daughter of Reuel, for it is written, and he [Reuel] gave Moses Zipporah his daughter (Ex. 2:21). Furthermore, Scripture states, to water their father’s flock (The reference is to Reuel’s daughters, that is, Zipporah and her sisters.) (Ex. 2:16), and to Reuel their (Zipporah and her sisters.) father (Ex. 2:18). Now Hobab was the son of Reuel. (This is stated in our verse.) Thus Hobab (The son of Reuel.) was the brother of Zipporah. (The daughter of Reuel.) According to a rational analysis of Scripture, Hobab is to be identified with Jethro, because the Torah states, as thou [Hobab] knowest how we are to encamp in the wilderness (v. 31) and it states with regard to Jethro when he came to the wilderness, into the wilderness where he was encamped (Ex. 18:5). Should one disagree (With the identification of Hobab with Jethro.) and argue that Scripture refers to Jethro as choten mosheh (Moses’ father-in-law) (Ex. 18:1), then one can respond that it is the way of Scripture to refer to the father and the brother of a young woman by the term choten (father-in-law). (Thus according to I.E. the word choten means a father or brother-in-law.) Unto Hobab, the son of Reuel…choten mosheh (Moses’ father-in-law) (Our verse.) is proof of the aforementioned. For it has already been made clear to you that Hobab was the brother of Zipporah, and Scripture calls him choten mosheh (Moses’ father-in-law). Should one argue that choten mosheh (Moses’ father-in-law) is not connected to Hobab but to Reuel, then the response is, Scripture explicitly states Hobab choten mosheh (the father-in-law of Moses) (Jud. 4:11). Many say that Hobab and Jethro are one and the same. They maintain that Jethro/Hobab was the father of Zipporah and that Reuel was the grandfather of Zipporah. They argue that Scripture says, to Reuel their father (Ex. 2:18) (The father of Zipporah and her sister.) in the same manner that Jacob said, O God of my father Abraham (Gen. 32:10). (Isaac, not Abraham, was Jacob’s father. Thus father is used for grandfather. Similarly, in Ex. 2:18 father refers to grandfather.) Scripture similarly refers to Zipporah as Reuel’s daughter in the same manner that it refers to Belshazzar as Nebuchadnezzar’s son, (See Dan. 5:2; 18:22.) when in fact he was Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson. Our sages say that Jethro had seven names. (Mekhilta,Va-yishma Yitro 1.) There are seventy faces to the Torah. (A quote from Otiyyot de-Rabbi Akiva, a late aggadic Midrash on the alphabet composed sometime between 700-900 C.E. Some manuscripts read, there are seven faces to the Torah. According to the rabbis, Jethro, Hobab, and Reuel are one and the same person (see Rashi on Ex. 18:1 where he quotes all seven names). Hence I.E.’s comment.)
ויאמר משה לחובב, “Moses said to Chovav, etc.” Nachmanides writes that the Chovav mentioned here is identical with Yitro, Moses’- father-in-law. He was given a new name when he converted to Judaism. It is customary to give converts a new name when they are accepted into the Jewish religion. This is what happened to Tzipporah’s father. Her grandfather’s name was Reu-el. This is based on Isaiah 65,15 that “His servants will be known by another name.” This is the meaning of Exodus 2,18: “the said to Reu-el their father,” i.e. to their grandfather. The reference to a grandfather as a “father” is not unusual; we have seen this already in Genesis 32,1 where Yaakov speaks about “the G’d of my father Avraham.” We also find that Belshazzar was described as the son of Nevuchadnezzar although he was the grandson of Nevuchadnezzar (Daniel 5,2). On the other hand, our sages in the Mechilta at the beginning of Parshat Yitro claim that Yitro had seven different names. When Yitro said in verse 30: “I will not go but I will return to my country and my birthplace I will go,” Moses had turned to him without specific proposals just saying the Jewish people would treat him well (verse 29). Yitro understood this remark in terms of the Israelites giving him money, that they were going to let him share in the loot to be gained as a result of the conquest of the land of the Canaanites. He did not think that Moses’ promise would include land in the conquered country. This is why he declined the offer. He pointed out that in his own country he was better of, owning inalienable pieces of land, enjoying prestige, etc. When Moses became aware of this he told him: “please do not abandon us, etc.” He implied that Yitro’s knowledge of the desert etc., made him invaluable to the Jewish people. He assured him that he would share in all the advantages that would accrue to the Jewish people. He hinted that there would be a proper heritage for Yitro and his family in Eretz Yisrael in return for his assistance in conquering the land. I believe that Yitro agreed to this proposal. Thus far the commentary of Nachmanides.
You ought to appreciate that this paragraph contains an explanation of what exactly did happen to Yaakov as a result of his encounter with Esau. There is also a hint of what would be a correct form of relationship between the respective descendants of Esau and Yaakov during the long course of Jewish history. It is worth our while to consider Yaakov’s preparations for his fateful encounter with Esau as something to use as a model for ourselves in our dealings with the descendants of Esau. Basically, Yaakov used a three-pronged approach. 1) He prepared to wage war if it were forced upon him. 2) He prayed to G’d for deliverance. 3) He prepared gifts to soften the mood of his adversary. The first stage of his preparation, mobilising for war, is described in our paragraph in verse eight when the Torah writes that he divided the camp in two to give himself the maximum chance for at least one camp to escape unharmed. He then engaged in prayer when he appealed to G’d, saying (verse 12) “please save me from my brother, from Esau.” The third part of his preparation, i.e.. sending gifts (or bribes if you will), is found in verses 14-21. A great Jewish King, the King Chiskiyah learned from Yaakov when Jerusalem was under siege when he faced Sancheriv, [who during his time was the foremost conqueror of the world who had already liquidated the Northern Kingdom and exiled the Ten Tribes, Ed.]. We read in Kings II 18,15 that Chiskiyah gave all the silver that was in the treasury of the Temple and in his own vaults to Sancheriv in accordance with that King’s demands. He also readied what few forces remained at his disposal for war (Chronicles II 32,6). Finally, he prayed (Kings II 19,15) asking G’d to demonstrate His power to the world at large by saving the Kingdom of Yehudah. We have to act similarly whenever we find ourselves threatened by hostile Gentile forces. However, nowadays when G’d’s displeasure with us has become manifest seeing we are still in exile, we must not provoke war against our enemies as is evident from Song of Songs 2,7 השבעתי אתכם בנות ירושלים וגו', “I have made you take an oath o daughters of Jerusalem, etc.” One opinion in the Talmud Ketuvot 111 understands the oath as an undertaking by Jews in exile not to rebel against the local rulers and try and recapture the land of Israel by force of arms.
NOW THE PRIEST OF MIDIAN HAD SEVEN DAUGHTERS. Scripture does not mention him by name for he is not known [to the reader], but rather epithetically mentions that he was the honored one in his priesthood. This was Jethro, for after he became related to Moses it is written, And Moses went and returned to Jether his father-in-law, (Further, 4:18.) and there it is written, And Jethro said to Moses: Go in peace. (Further, 4:18.) [This proves that Jether and Jethro are the same person], just as Eliyah and Eliyahu, (Eliyah (II Kings 1:3), Eliyahu (I Kings 17:1).) Yirmiyah and Yirmiyahu. (Yirmiyah (Jeremiah 27:1), Yirmiyahu (ibid., 1:1).) After he became a proselyte to Judaism, he was called Hobab, as it is written, from the children of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, (Judges 4:11.) for it is the way of all who become converts to Judaism that they be called another name in Israel. And he [Jethro or Hobab] was the son of Reuel, for it is written, And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Reuel the Midianite. (Numbers 10:29.) The verse here stating, And they came to Reuel their father, (Verse 18.) means “their father’s father,” just as [Jacob had said], O G-d of my father Abraham, (Genesis 32:10.) [and Abraham was his father’s father], and [when speaking of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, Scripture says], Nebuchadnezzar his father, (Daniel 5:2.) [while he was his father’s father]. (Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, ruled after Nebuchadnezzar (see II Kings 25:27), and he was followed by Belshazzar (see Megillah 11a). Nebuchadnezzar was thus Belshazzar’s grandfather, and yet Scripture (Daniel 5:2) speaks of him as his father.) Similarly: Know ye Laban the son of Nahor? (Genesis 29:5. But Laban was really the son of Bethuel, for he was the brother of Rebekah (ibid., 24:29), and of Rebekah it is written that her father was Bethuel (ibid., Verse 15). Bethuel’s father was Nahor (ibid., 22:20-22). Yet Jacob asked, Know ye Laban the son of Nahor? It is because a grandfather is called “father.”) And Mephibosheth the son of Saul. (II Samuel 19:25. Mephibosheth was the son of Jonathan (ibid., 4:4), who was the son of Saul.) There are many other such verses. [Jethro’s daughters came and told Reuel their grandfather of how Moses came to their aid — as is related in Verses 18-19 — and did not tell Jethro] because the priest was not found in the house since he was preoccupied with the ministry in his temple, and so they came to the grandfather. It is possible that the verse, And Moses was content to dwell with the man, (Verse 21.) refers to the priest mentioned above [in Verse 16 — namely, Jethro] (The intent of Ramban’s words is as follows: According to the above-mentioned interpretation that Jethro was not to be found in his home and that consequently his daughters told Reuel, his father, what had happened (as stated in Verses 18-20), it should follow that the expression, And Moses was content to dwell with ‘the man’ (Verse 21) refers to Reuel, and it was Reuel who gave Moses Zipporah his granddaughter as a wife. But, continues Ramban, it is possible that “the man” in Verse 21 refers back to “the priest” in Verse 16, and so it was Jethro who gave Moses his daughter in marriage.) — for it was he who gave Moses Zipporah his daughter.
AND HE OFFERED SACRIFICES UNTO THE G-D OF HIS FATHER ISAAC. The duty of honoring one’s father is more imperative than that of honoring one’s grandfather. Therefore the sacrifices are associated with the name of Isaac, and not with that of Abraham. Thus the language of Rashi. But this is not sufficient, for it would have been proper for Scripture to say, “and he offered sacrifices unto the G-d of his fathers,” without singling out any one person, just as Jacob said, The G-d before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk; (Further 48:15.) and in his prayer he said, O G-d of my father Abraham, and G-d of my father Isaac. (Above, 32:10.) Or Scripture should have said, “and he offered sacrifices to the Eternal,” just as it says in the case of Abraham, And he built there an altar unto the Eternal. (Ibid., 12:7.) And what need was there to explain it further? However, this verse contains a secret, which the Rabbis revealed to us there in Bereshith Rabbah: (94:5.) When Jacob was about to go down to Egypt he saw that the exile was beginning for him and his children, and he feared it, and so he offered many sacrifices to the Fear of his father Isaac (Above, 31:53.) in order that Divine judgment should not be aimed against him. This he did in Beer-sheba which was a place of prayer for his father, and from there he had taken permission when he went to Haran. (See Ramban above, 28:17.) Now Scripture uses the word z’vachim, [a term connoting peace-offerings], to inform us that they were not burnt-offerings as were his fathers’, as Abraham offered burnt-offerings. Our Rabbis have said (Zebachim 116a.) that Noachides (See Note 148 in Seder Vayishlach, also Note 222 in Seder Bereshith.) did not offer peace-offerings; they offered burnt-offerings. And concerning Noah it is clearly written, And he offered burnt-offerings on the altar. (Above 8:20.) But on account of his fear of the Eternal, Jacob offered peace-offerings in order to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him, even as the Rabbis have expounded: (Torath Kohanim Vayikra 16:1.) “They are called sh’lamim (peace-offerings) because they bring shalom (peace) into the world.” Now his original intent was directed at the Divine attribute of power, this being nearest to Isaac. This is the explanation of that which the Rabbis mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah, (94:5.) i.e., that the duty of honoring one’s father is more imperative than that of honoring one’s grandfather. This explanation applies to that which the Rabbis have said there in yet another form: “First you greet the pupil and afterward you greet the Rabbi.” (The case refers to a procession of a Rabbi and his pupils on the road. Since the pupils travel in advance of the Rabbi, a person coming from the opposite direction would first meet the pupils and then the Rabbi. Similarly, Isaac is the pupil and Abraham is the Rabbi. Hence Jacob offered sacrifices to the G-d of his father Isaac.) I have seen this text in the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah: (Sefer Habahir, 135. See Note 42 in Seder Bereshith.) “And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac. (Above, 31:53.) Is there any one who swears by the belief of the Fear of his father? However, it was because Jacob was not yet given strength, and so he swore by the power given to his father, as it is said, And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac. (Above, 31:53.) And what is this? It is this concerning which Scripture writes, Then the fire of the Eternal fell, and consumed the burnt-offering, (I Kings 18:38.) and it is further written, For the Eternal thy G-d is a devouring fire, etc.” (Deuteronomy 4:24.) Thus far the Midrash. From the words of the Rabbis of this Midrash, we learn that it was for this reason that it does not say here, “and he offered sacrifices to the Eternal,” [but instead it says, “to the G-d of his father Isaac],” because now in Beer-sheba Jacob had already become privileged to possess his own portion [and needed only to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him], (The words in the brackets are from the Commentary of Lvush to the Rekanati on the Torah, who quotes these words of Ramban.) as it is said, Thou wilt give truth to Jacob, mercy to Abraham, as Thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old. (Micah 7:20.) It was therefore necessary to explain it now. Thus by the merit of the sacrifices, the G-d of his father Isaac appeared to him in the visions of the night (Verse 2 here.) with an ameliorated Divine attribute of justice. It is this which Scripture says concerning them, in the visions of the night, complementing that which He said, I am G-d, the G-d of thy father, (Verse 3 here.) for He is the G-d of Beth-el Who said to him in Haran, I am the G-d of Beth-el, where thou didst anoint a pillar; (Above, 31:13.) it is He Who is the G-d of thy father. This is the Name and this is the attribute. And He assured him that he should have no fear in Egypt for he will be found righteous in Divine judgment, and he will be redeemed after the affliction. This is the meaning of the Divine promise, And I will also surely bring thee up again. (Verse 4 here.) Now the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] has written in the twenty-seventh chapter of the first part of the Moreh Nebuchim (Guide of the Perplexed) concerning Onkelos’ translation of the verse, I will go down with thee into Egypt, and I will also surely bring thee up again, (Verse 4 here.) [which Onkelos rendered here literally]: “I will go down with thee…and I will bring thee up.” And the Rabbi was amazed at the opinion of Onkelos, [namely, that the literal translation should be used], saying that Onkelos had exerted all his effort to remove any implication of G-d’s corporeality from all narratives in the Torah. Accordingly, in the case of any expression found in the Torah implying any mode of motion that refers to G-d, Onkelos ascribed the action to a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, or a manifestation of Divine Providence. Thus he translated And G-d came down (Exodus 19:20.) as “and G-d manifested Himself;” I will go down now and see (Above, 18:21.) as “I will manifest Myself now and see.” And if so, why did Onkelos here translate literally, “I will go down”? And so the Rabbi explained that since Scripture said at the outset of the matter, And G-d spoke unto Israel in the visions of the night, (Verse 2 here.) thus indicating that it is an account of what Jacob was told and not what actually took place, Onkelos therefore did not hesitate to literally translate the words as they were addressed to Jacob in the visions of the night, for the words in question represent an account of what Jacob was told, not what actually took place. There is thus a great difference between a communication transmitted in a dream or a vision of the night, or a communication designated as having been made in a vision or manifestation, and a communication given clearly, [not in a dream, such as communications introduced by phrases like these]: “And the word of the Eternal came unto me, saying,” or “And the Eternal spoke unto me, saying.” These are the words of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon. Similarly he said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 48.) that Onkelos never translated expressions of “hearing” literally [when the Scriptural references were to G-d], but instead explained them as expressing that a certain matter reached the Creator, or that He accepted a prayer. Thus Onkelos translated the Eternal heard (Above, 29:33.) as “it was heard before the Eternal;” he translated the verse, I will surely hear his crying (Exodus 22:22.) as “I will surely accept his complaint.” But if the matter is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said, why does Onkelos shun literal translations of expressions of movement, and also avoid literal expressions of hearing due to his fear that they might indicate corporeality, but he does not in any place shy away from literally expressing “saying,” “speaking” or “calling,” whether the communication was in a dream or manifestation or overt speech, for in every case he translates: “and G-d said,” “G-d spoke,” “and G-d called unto Moses”? These expressions likewise signify corporeality, and Onkelos should have translated, “and it was said from before G-d,” or “and the glory of G-d said,” or “and G-d willed,” as is appropriate in each case, just as the Rabbi has explained (Moreh Nebuchim I, 65.) with reference to the terms “speaking” and “saying” when they refer to G-d. And why did Onkelos avoid literal translation in the case of “hearing” and did not do so with respect to “seeing,” which he translated as: “and the Eternal saw”? (Above, 6:5.) And that which the Rabbi has said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 48.) that “seeing” indicates mental perception as well as the sensation of sight, this applies all the more to “hearing” for it is employed in many places to indicate mental perception and will, such as: And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai; (Above 16:2.) Hear the voice of my supplications; (Psalms 28:2.) Yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; (Isaiah 1:15.) And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Eternal thy G-d. (Deuteronomy 28:1.) And so also, leiv shomei’ah (I Kings 3:9.) (literally: a hearing heart, an understanding heart), and so also in the case of most of [the verses cited by Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon]. So Onkelos should not have been apprehensive of expressions of “hearing” as they only indicate acceptance of a matter by G-d and His being pleased with it, for he does not avoid literal translations of expressions of sight any place, but translates it literally in all cases even when seeing alone is involved. However, where a matter is not conceived by sight alone, but requires attention and discernment, Onkelos renders it as befits the subject. For example, when Scripture says, Because the Eternal hath looked upon my affliction, (Above, 29:32.) [Onkelos rendered it as, “because my affliction is manifested before the Eternal”]. The verse, I have surely seen the affliction of My people, (Exodus 3:7.) [was rendered by Onkelos as, “the enslavement of my people is manifest before me,” and the verse], And G-d saw the children of Israel, (Ibid., 2:25.) [he rendered as, “and the enslavement of the children of Israel was manifest before G-d],” since His seeing them was not just as a matter of perceiving their bodies but of His attention to their situation and His knowledge thereof. This is Onkelos’ method throughout the Torah, and not as the Rabbi’s opinion would have it, as a consquence of which opinion he had to declare [our version of Targum Onkelos] erroneous (Ramban refers here to Chapter 48 of the first part of the Moreh Nebuchim mentioned above, in which Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam) sets forth the theory that Onkelos always renders “seeing” literally except where it is connected with wrong, injury or violence, in which cases he expresses it as “It was manifest before the Eternal.” Onkelos is thus consistent with the prophetic phrase, Thou canst not look on iniquity (Habakkuk 1:13). However, Rambam mentions that he found three passages which contradict his theory. One is the verse, And the Eternal saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, (above, 6:5), and the other two are mentioned in the following note. In these three cases which are connected with wrong and violence, Onkelos should have expressed “seeing” in the form of “being manifest before the Eternal,” and yet he translated them literally! Rambam then concludes that our version of Onkelos is inaccurate in those three cases! It is this conclusion of Rambam with which Ramban takes issue in the text before us.) in [the following three places: the verse mentioned above, namely, And the Eternal saw], (Above, 6:5.) and two other verses, (And G-d saw the earth, and behold it was corrupt, (above, 6:12). And the Eternal saw that Leah was hated, (above, 29:31).) which Onkelos translated as, “and He saw,” since these translations do not fit his theory. With reference to expressions of “passing” Onkelos paraphrased and thus translated the expression, And the Eternal passed by before him, (Exodus 34:6.) as, “and He caused His Presence to pass before his [Moses’] face.” He did this so that the passing object would be, in accordance with Onkelos’ opinion, something created, as he would not ascribe any expression of motion to the Creator in accordance with what the Rabbi has mentioned. (Moreh Nebuchim I, 21.) But if this is so, why did Onkelos literally translate the verse, The Eternal thy G-d, He will go over before thee? (Deuteronomy 31:3. In our version of Onkelos, the text reads, “His word will go over.” Ramban’s objection is thus removed.) This is a form of motion occurring in a narrative (As opposed to “the visions of the night.” See the beginning of the section where Ramban explains this distinction which Rambam makes.) and yet Onkelos was not apprehensive about it! Similarly, Onkelos translated the verse, And Israel saw the great hand, (Exodus 14:31.) as, “and Israel saw the power of the great hand.” He added the term “power” due to the subsequent expression, that the Eternal did, (Exodus 14:31.) yet he left intact the expression, “the great hand” and was not apprehensive and fearful of the term “hand” being ascribed to G-d and did not paraphrase it at all! He did the same in literally translating, written with the finger of G-d. (Ibid., 31:18.) The Rabbi’s answer (Moreh Nebuchim I, 66.) that Onkelos thought that “the finger” was a created instrument which, by the will of the Creator, engraved the writing on the tablets, is not the truth. There is the verse, At His right hand was a fiery law unto them, (Deuteronomy 33:2.) in translation of which Onkelos wrote, “His right hand,” and he was not apprehensive of “the right hand writing,” that is lest it indicate corporeality, and such is the case also with “the finger” as mentioned above. He furthermore literally translated: Thou stretchest forth Thy right hand (Exodus 15:12.) as, “Thou raisest Thy right hand.” So also the verses: Thy right hand, O Eternal, dasheth in pieces the enemy; (Ibid., Verse 6.) Thy strong hand; (Deuteronomy 3:24.) By a mighty hand, and by an outstretched arm; (Ibid., 4:34.) And My hand take hold on judgment; (Ibid., 32:41.) The eyes of the Eternal thy G-d are always upon it. (Ibid., 11:12.) [Onkelos literally translated all of these verses without fear that the terms “hand” and “eyes” might indicate corporeality.] Now in the case of Jacob, the Scriptural narrative begins, And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, etc., and yet Onkelos, fearing corporeality, translated [the verse, And, behold, the Eternal stood beside him], (Above, 28:12-13.) as “and, behold, the Glory of G-d stood beside him,” and he did not translate literally, “and, behold, the Eternal” although it was in a dream. (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon’s thesis is that the reason Onkelos did not paraphrase the verse, I will go down with thee into Egypt, but translated it literally, is that the narrative begins with a statement that it was in a vision of the night. Ramban questions this thesis, for in the story of the ladder, which is also introduced as a dream, Onkelos avoided possible indications of corporeality, and accordingly he paraphrased the verses.) He further translated the expression, And, behold, I am with thee, (Above, 28:15.) as “and, behold, My word will be in thy help,” and did not say literally, “and, behold, I am with thee,” just as he literally translated, “I will go down with thee,” even though the story of the ladder is a statement of what Jacob was told, [not a narrative of what took place], and is completely analogous to the narrative of the dream here. Again, Onkelos literally translated the expression, And I will be with thy mouth, (Exodus 4:12.) [even though the story there is not introduced as a vision of the night or a dream], and on the other hand he translated the verse, And He said, Certainly I will be with thee, and this shall be the token unto thee, (Ibid., 3:12.) as “behold, My word will be with thee.” Furthermore, Onkelos does not always translate literally in the case of dreams. Thus he rendered the verses, And G-d came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, (Above, 20:3.) And G-d came to Laban in a dream, (Ibid., 41:22.) as “and the word came from before G-d.” Should you say that Onkelos paraphrased it there because he was concerned lest one think that G-d came to them before the dream, and one might thus think that G-d’s appearance actually took place, [this would still not justify his using the expression, “and the word came,”] for in the case of Solomon it is written, In Gibeon the Eternal appeared to Solomon in a dream, (I Kings 3:5.) and yet Jonathan ben Uziel (See Note 152 in Seder Noach.) translated it as, “G-d revealed Himself to Solomon,” even though, according to Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, a narrative introduced as a dream is rendered by Onkelos and Jonathan as it was actually said. They find no difficulty in translating such a statement literally, even though the expression connotes corporeality, because since it occurs in a dream, they understand that it is inexact. Thus in the case of Solomon, since the Eternal appeared to him in a dream, it was proper for Jonathan to give a literal account of the occurrence, for since Scripture relates that it was in a dream by night, (I Kings 3:5.) one would himself infer that it was not real but only a dream in which the person dreaming imagined it to be so. [Now since Jonathan did not paraphrase the account of Solomon’s dream, although Onkelos did so in the case of the dreams of Abimelech and Laban, it thus helps to disprove the thesis of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon that accounts of what occurred in man’s imagination are not paraphrased by the Targum.] Now do not think that Jonathan ben Uziel did this because the term “seeing” in reference to dreams is not found in Aramaic — for the verse, And I saw in my dream, (Above, 41:22.) is indeed translated [in Targum Onkelos] as “I saw,” and in the case of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, it likewise says in Aramaic, Thou O King, sawest. (Daniel 2:31.) And so did Onkelos translate the verse, Your murmurings are not against us, but against the Eternal, (Exodus 16:8.) as “but against the word of G-d.” Onkelos thus paraphrased here even though there is no fear or apprehension of corporeality connoted by literal translation. Likewise, he translated And the people spoke against G-d, and against Moses (Numbers 21:5.) as, “and the people murmured against the word of G-d.” So also the verses, Between Me and you, (Above, 9:12.) and Between G-d and every living creature, (Ibid., Verse 16.) were translated by Onkelos as: “between My word and you,” “between the word of G-d and every living creature.” There are many similar examples [of verses which he paraphrased in spite of the fact that there would have been no apprehension of intimating corporeality had he translated literally]. And so also he translated The Eternal watch (Ibid., 31:49.) as “the word of G-d watch;” G-d is witness (Ibid., Verse 50.) as “the word of G-d is witness.” Yet there would be no apprehension of corporeality had those expressions been literally translated. Besides, what sense is conveyed here by the expression, “the word of G-d’ watch or witness”? Similarly the verse, Swear unto me here by G-d, (Ibid., 21:23.) is rendered by Onkelos as “swear unto me by the word of G-d,” although people who swear do not mention, “I swear by the word of G-d.” There are many other such cases in Onkelos, and their secret meaning is known to the learned students [of the mystic lore of the Torah]. Likewise, with respect to the term “standing” when applied to G-d, the Rabbi said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 28.) that Jonathan ben Uziel’s intent was to explain it as meaning “to endure permanently,” and therefore he translated the expression, And His feet shall stand, (Zechariah 14:4.) as “and He will appear in His might.” So also all expressions denoting contact and motion were rendered by him as “the might of G-d.” Yet Onkelos had no apprehension of the term “standing.” and he translated it literally: Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock. (Exodus 17:6.) And concerning that which the Rabbi has said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) that all expressions denoting any mode of motion are rendered by Onkelos as the revelation of the Divine Presence, or the manifestation of a certain Glory that had been created for the occasion, now Onkelos avoids even literal translation of verses which mention “seeing” the Glory [of G-d, and would certainly oppose using it to denote expressions of motion]. Thus he translates the verse, And the glory of the Eternal appeared unto all the congregation, (Numbers 16:19.) as “and the glory of G-d was manifested,” just as he said in translation of the verse, And the Eternal came down, (Exodus 19:20.) “and the Eternal manifested Himself,” and did not translate it literally as “and the glory of the Eternal appeared.” He also likewise translates “seeing,” when referring to angels, as “and he manifested himself.” (Onkelos, ibid., 3:2.) Now if it is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) that in the case of angels, or manifestation of a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, Onkelos does not hesitate to literally translate expressions denoting corporeality, it would have been proper for him not to avoid expressions of literal “seeing” of angels by man, and should there translate it as “and he appeared,” just as he has literally rendered the verse, For I have seen ‘Elokim’ face to face, (Above, Verse 32.) as “for I have seen an angel of G-d.” Heaven forbid that the Divine Presence or the Glory created for the occasion be anything except the glorious Divine Name, blessed be He, as the Rabbi has expressed himself here (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) and in many chapters of his book. Thus Onkelos translated the expression, If Thy face go not, (Exodus 33:15.) as “if Thy Divine Presence go not among us.” Now, other than the glorious Divine Name, blessed be He, Moses did not want a special Glory created to go with him, since the Holy One, blessed be He, had already told him, Behold Mine angel shall go before thee, (Ibid., 32:34.) and Moses was not pleased with it. He instead wanted that G-d in His own glory should go with him. Also, after G-d heard his plea and told him, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken, (Ibid., 33:17.) Moses said, Let the Lord, I pray thee, go in the midst of us, (Ibid., 34:9.) and this Onkelos rendered as “let now G-d’s Divine Presence go among us.” (We thus see that even here, where it is clear from the context that the verse refers to G-d and not an angel, Onkelos does not hesitate to translate “going” literally.) He similarly translated the expression, Thou canst not see My face, (Ibid., 33:20.) “thou cannot see the face of My Divine Presence, for man shall not see Me.” [In translating the verse in the book of Ezekiel, Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from His place,] (Ezekiel 3:12.) Jonathan ben Uziel said, “Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from the region of His Divine abode.” Now if by this “Glory,” [which is mentioned in the book of Ezekiel] Scripture refers to the Creator in His true essence, analogous to the verse, Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory, (Exodus 33:18.) which the Rabbi has indeed so interpreted, (Moreh Nebuchim I, 54 and 64.) then how did [Jonathan ben Uziel] in translating the verse mention “the region of His Divine abode” [when the terms “region,” “abode,” etc., indicate corporeality]? And if one would say that the verse in Ezekiel refers to a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, as is the opinion of the Rabbi with respect to the verse, And the glory of the Eternal filled the tabernacle, (Exodus 40:35. Moreh Nebuchim I, 64.) and other similar verses, then how did the angels direct their words, “Blessed, etc.,” towards it when he who blesses and prays to a glory created for an occasion is as he who worshipped idols? The teachings of our Rabbis also contain many texts which indicate that the name Shechinah (Divine Presence) is identical with G-d, blessed be He. But all these subjects, [some of which are rendered literally and some of which are paraphrased, are not influenced by a fear of using terms denoting corporeality but rather by secrets] of the Cabala (See Note 56 in Introduction to Sefer Bereshith.) known to Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uziel, and the secrets thereof are revealed to those who know the mystic lore of the Torah. Thus in the Revelation on Mount Sinai, wherever Elokim is mentioned in that section, Onkelos renders it as “the Glory” or “the Word of G-d,” but when Scripture mentions the Tetragrammaton he does not so render it. All this is done by Onkelos with extraordinary care and wisdom, and I will yet mention (See Ramban on Exodus 20:19.) this with the help of G-d, blessed be He. Now the reason that Onkelos literally translated the verse, And ‘Elokim’ spoke all these words, saying, (Ibid., 20:1.) [rather than render it, “and the Glory of G-d spoke,” as he usually does wherever Elokim is mentioned], is that it is said, Face to face the Eternal spoke (Deuteronomy 5:4.) unto your whole assembly. (Ibid., Verse 19.) The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand. However, the reason why Onkelos here literally translated, I will go down with thee to Egypt, [and did not paraphrase it as “My Glory will go down with thee],” is that he wanted to allude to that which the Rabbis have said: (Mechilta Shirah 3. See also Megillah 29a.) “When they were exiled to Egypt, the Divine Presence went with them, as it is said, I will go down with thee to Egypt. When they were exiled to Elam, the Divine Presence went down with them, as it is said, And I will set My throne in Elam.” (Jeremiah 49:38.) Thus both the verse which speaks of G-d “saying” [namely, And He said, I am G-d, the G-d of thy father, etc.], (Verse 3 here.) and [the verse which speaks of G-d] “going down,” [namely, I will go down with thee], are alike [for they both refer to the Creator in His true essence], as I have explained above, and therefore he could not, under any circumstances, have translated in any other way, as I have hinted. But there in the case of Jacob’s dream, Onkelos could not have literally translated, “and behold I am with thee,” [and was forced to paraphrase it as, “and My word will be in thy help],” (Above, 28:15.) because it is written there, And, behold, the Eternal stood beside him. (28:13. Since the Tetragrammaton (“the Eternal”) represents the attribute of mercy, had Onkelos literally translated Verse 15, “and, behold, I am with thee,” it would have indicated that this attribute would follow Jacob into exile since at the outset of this matter in Verse 13, Scripture uses the Tetragrammaton. Hence Onkelos translated Verse 15 as, ‘and My word will be in thy help,’ which is a reference to the attribute of judgment. (Bei’ur Ha’lvush to Rekanati on the Torah, who quotes the words of Ramban.)) The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand. And due to the fact that Onkelos found the meaning of this verse not to be in line with its plain meaning, he therefore spurned [literally translating the rest of the verse, and rendered it as referring to assistance], and thus he said, “My word will be in thy help,” instead of saying “My word will be with you,” as he said in the case of Moses. (Ibid., 3:12.) And may G-d show us wonders in His Torah.
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה THEN THE REMAINING CAMP MAY ESCAPE in spite of him, for I will fight against him He prepared himself for three things: to give him a present — as it states (Genesis 32:22) “So, the present passed before him”; for prayer — as it states (Genesis 32:10), “And he said, ‘O God of my father Abraham”; for war — as it states in this verse, “then the remaining camp may escape”, for I will fight against him (Tanchuma Yashan 1:8:6).
אעבדך שבע שנים ברחל, there can be no question that a righteous man such as Yaakov would not have the audacity to marry a woman and to found a family unless he were able to support her and to provide her with the requirements specified in Exodus 21,10 as spelled out in Yevamot 19. “a man is allowed to marry several wives provided he can look after them financially.” There is therefore no reason to believe that Lavan, who was himself a man of means, would give his daughters to sons-in-law who were unable to provide for them in the manner they had been accustomed to. If all this is so, how do we explain Yaakov’s referring to the time when he crossed the river Yabbok on his way to his uncle as having only his walking staff? (Genesis 32,10)? What Yaakov meant when he said this was that at the time he referred to he had not owned any livestock, nor any profession with which to earn his livelihood. The reason he offered to work for Lavan for 7 years was to use his work in lieu of a cash dowry he would pay her father for her hand in marriage, something that was customary in those days. Lavan’s daughters themselves referred to their father having sold them into marriage in Genesis 31,15. They were modest enough to know that Lavan had taken advantage of Yaakov by demanding an exorbitantly huge amount as dowry from him. We know also from Exodus 22,16 that a father used his daughter as a source of augmenting his income and when the value of such “merchandise” had been reduced through rape or seduction of the daughter (loss of virginity) he is entitled to financial compensation by the man who seduced his daughter (when he refuses to give her to the seducer in marriage in exchange for a regular dowry).
They were afraid, essentially, of their mission. Moses kept telling God at the burning bush: Who am I? They won’t believe in me. I am not a man of words. Jonah was reluctant to deliver a message from God to Israel’s enemies. And Jacob had just said to God, “I am unworthy of all the kindness and faith that You have shown me” (Gen. 32:10).
[89] How should one come to believe God? By learning that all other things change but He is unchangeable. Therefore God asks the wise man what there is in his hand or in the active life of his soul, for the hand represents activity; and he answers, “Schooling,” giving it the name of a rod. So Jacob also, the supplanter of the passions, says, “For in my rod I crossed this Jordan” (Gen. 32:10). The meaning of Jordan is “descent” or “coming down.” And to the nature that is down below, earthly, corruptible, belongs all that is done under the impulse of vice and passion. Over these Mind, the disciplined One, crosses in schooling himself. To take the words to mean that he crossed the river with a staff in his hand would be tame.
Yaakov said, God of my father Avraham, and God of my father Yitzchok, Adonoy Who said to me, Return to your land, to your birthplace, and I will do good with you.
And Jakob said, God of my father Abraham, Thou, the God of my father Izhak, the Lord, who saidst to me, Return to thy country and to thy kindred, and I wilt do thee good:
| קָטֹ֜נְתִּי מִכֹּ֤ל הַחֲסָדִים֙ וּמִכׇּל־הָ֣אֱמֶ֔ת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשִׂ֖יתָ אֶת־עַבְדֶּ֑ךָ כִּ֣י בְמַקְלִ֗י עָבַ֙רְתִּי֙ אֶת־הַיַּרְדֵּ֣ן הַזֶּ֔ה וְעַתָּ֥ה הָיִ֖יתִי לִשְׁנֵ֥י מַחֲנֽוֹת׃ | 11 J | I am unworthy of all the kindness that You have so steadfastly shown Your servant: with my staff alone I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps. |
Genesis 32,11. “please save me from my brother, i.e. from Esau;” Esau represents the negative side of the emanations, Satan, the angel of death, the evil urge within us. Yaakov prays that his brother should not turn out to be a Satan in disguise, just as the evil urge sometimes portrays something sinful as if it were a good deed, a מצוה, so as to enable us to salvage our conscience when following his advice.
My grandfather, my teacher of blessed memory, recounted in the name of the Rabbi of Lublin the interpretation of the phrase "I am unworthy of all the kindnesses" (Genesis 32:11). He explained that even the feeling of being small in one's own eyes is also a kindness from Hashem. It can further be said that through the kindnesses that Hashem has done for him, a person recognizes his own smallness. This is because, through the greatness of Hashem's kindness, a person comes to understand his own insignificance. I believe this has now been published in the book *Zikaron Zot*.
TWO. “I have become small from all the favors and from all….” (Genesis 32:11.) This means that by every favor (chesed) that G–d bestows upon man, (man) is to become very humble. For “chesed (Grace, favor, kindness.) is the right arm,” (In the “man-image” of the sefirot (cf. Addendum, Mystical Concepts in Chassidism).—Tikkunei Zohar, Introduction 17a.) and “His right arm embraces me” (Song of Songs 2:6.) —which refers to the state of G–d actually bringing him close (to Himself), far more intensely than before. And whoever is close to G–d, with ever exceeding uplifting and elevation, must be ever more humble—to the lowliest plane, (See Kitzurim V’Hearot L’Sefer Likkutei Amarim, ed. Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (Kehot, 1948; 1989), pp. 40 and 149.) as it is written: “From afar the L–rd has appeared to me.” (Jeremiah 31:2.) And as known, “All that are before Him are esteemed as nothing.” (Zohar I:11b (emphasis is the author’s).) Hence, whoever is more “before Him” is that much more as nothing, naught, and nonexistent.
And this is the rank of the “right side” of holiness and of “chesed to Abraham” (Micah 7:20. Abraham signifies the attribute of chesed; see Sefer Habahir 48 (131); Zohar I:41a, II:51b; Zohar Chadash 27a; et passim.—The “right side,” too, signifies chesed; see Addendum, Mystical Concepts in Chassidism.) who said: (Genesis 18:27.) “And I am dust and ashes.” (Cf. Chullin 89a.) This (humility) is also the trait of Jacob, and therewith he justified himself for his fear of Esau and did not rely on the promise given to him—“And, behold, I am with you….” (Genesis 28:6.) (That is), because Jacob regarded himself as utterly insignificant (Lit., was very, very small in his (own) esteem.) [because of the multitude of favors, “for with my staff…” (Genesis 32:11.) ], and as unfit and unworthy to be saved…and as the saying of our Sages, of blessed memory, “maybe sin will cause…,” for it appeared to him that he had sinned. (Berachot 4a.)
קטונתי מכל החסדים, “I have not been worthy of all the acts of kindness;” Yaakov explains what prompts him to be so fearful; he says that G-d has already done more for him than he could have expected, seeing that he did not feel worthy of it. As a result of his unworthiness he was afraid thatEsau who had performed the commandment of honouring his father and mother all the years when he had been absent, had accumulated sufficient merits to emerge victorious in a military confrontation with him. [After all, his father had blessed him with being successful with his sword. Ed.] Whenever the expression חסד and אמת occur in the Scriptures (together), they refer to someone having performed kind deeds, beyond the call of duty. Examples Genesis 49,29, when Yaakov asks his son Joseph to transport his remains to the land of Canaan and for him to be buried next to his wife Leah, although he had buried Joseph’s mother on the roadside where she had died. We find another example in Samuel II 15,20, where David excuses Gittai, from Gat, a gentile, from endangering himself while remaining in his company while he has to flee from his own son Avshalom.
And of all the truth: Onkelos translates it as, "and from all the good," which is not like his translation in every [other] place, which is "truth." And see Ramban, who explains that lasting kindnesses are called truth. And such is [also] the language of Scripture: "And the Lord is a true God, a living God and the eternal King" (Jeremiah 10:10). And in Vayikra Rabbah 26:1 (Parshat Emor), it explains that the end of the verse explains what is a true God: "Because He is 'a [living] God and the eternal King.'" [That is] to say, because He is everlasting. And [this is] like the remark in the Talmud (Shabbat 104a), "Truth is lasting." And so too is the good that is everlasting called truth. And so [Ya'akov said] that "You have done two goodnesses for me" - meaning "the kindnesses," which are the wealth; and "all the truth," which is that He chose him, such that a chosen nation will come from him and his offspring, to be everlasting. And it is for this very reason that Onkelos translated it as, "and of all the good."
I AM NOT WORTHY. Katonti (I am not worthy) is vocalized like yakholti (I have prevailed) in gam yakholti (Gen. 30:8). (A kal in the perfect is usually vocalized with a pattach beneath the middle root letter. However, katonti and yacholti are vocalized with a cholam.) The meaning of our verse is: I am insignificant and of little worth for you to have done all these merciful deeds for me. (The verse literally reads: I am small. I.E. interprets this to mean I am insignificant. Cf. Bereshit Rabbah 76:4: Katonti. Rabbi Abba says, “This means I am not worthy.”) I have already explained the meaning of mercy and truth. (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 24:49.)
קטונתי מכל החסדים, "I am not worthy of all the kindnesses, etc." Jacob first mentioned חסדים, kindness, and then אמת, divine assistance, which he felt he had qualified for. Actually, Jacob should have mentioned the אמת before mentioning the חסדים, something he was not even entitled to. He mentioned the חסדים first because they are something that it is impossible for man to repay to G'd. He called it אמת because man is incapable of requiting these acts of kindness. We know this from Job 35,7: אם צדקת מה תתן לו, "even assuming that you were righteous, what can you possibly give to Him?" This is why services rendered for the dead are called חסד של אמת, seeing that the dead cannot repay us (Bereshit Rabbah 96,5).
Jacob also wanted to mention separately two kinds of favours that G'd had done for him. The first was the kindness that He displayed for him by providing Jacob with an abundance of material wealth. The second was the fact that G'd had enabled Jacob to hold on to his gains and that G'd did not allow Laban to steal them from him forcibly and thereby displayed His truth. You must appreciate that there are occasions when G'd does show a person kindness whereas that person is subsequently deprived of his gains by outsiders exercising their free will. G'd in turn compensates the person who has suffered such a robbery. In such instances the person in question has experienced partial comfort only. He would have felt much better if he had not been robbed of what G'd had granted him in the first place. He will never forget that he had once become the victim of a robbery. He will imagine that if he had not been robbed he would now be still better off, not realising that G'd had only compensated him for what he had been robbed of. Secondly, the fact that G'd did not interfere with the robber will continue to bother such a person. He would have felt completely at ease had G'd restored to him the very goods the robber had taken. Jacob had experienced this latter kind of personal supervision by G'd as we know from 31,9, where Jacob described how G'd had saved his cattle from Laban and restored them to him. When Jacob spoke about "all of G'd's truth," this is the kind of interference by G'd which he had in mind.
קטנתי מכל החסדים, “I am not worthy of all the kind acts You have performed for me.” This teaches us that when a person engages in prayer that he should emphasize his own inadequacies and extol the power of the One to whom he addresses his prayer. Yaakov made this point plain by describing his relationship with G’d as “your servant.” One must also mention the manifold and varied kind deeds which G’d had already performed for the supplicant. This is what King David did in Psalms 16,2 when he said אתה טובתי בל -עליך, “You are my Lord, my benefactor; there is none above You.” He meant that the experience he had had of G’d’s kind deeds had convinced him that there is no one equal to Him as a master. A master’s kindness vis-a-vis his servant is something entirely voluntary. Similarly, all the acts of kindness performed by G’d are not rooted in any claim man has upon G’d, but are totally spontaneous. Only after having expressed such sentiments as an introduction to one’s prayer does one proceed to ask for one’s specific needs. At this point Yaakov asked: “please save me!” As to the meaning of the words ומכל האמת, “and of all the truth,” This suggests at first glance as if G’d acted out of a sense of obligation, i.e. attribute of Justice when performing these kind deeds. Onkelos, aware of our being apt to misconstrue the meaning of the word אמת in this instance, changed the meaning of the words when he translated them as מכל טבוון instead of as קשוט. The plain meaning of the word אמת in our verse is: “seeing giving the land of Canaan to Yaakov was fulfillment of a long-standing promise by G’d to both Avraham, Yitzchak and himself, the fulfillment of that promise was not so much an act of kindness as an act of truth.” This is also the plain meaning of the verse in Micha 7,20 תתן אמת ליעקב חסד לישראל, “You give as an act of truth to Yaakov something that You promised to Avraham as an act of pure kindness.” G’d had not been under any obligation to promise the land of Israel to Avraham; He was, however, under an obligation to fulfill His promise to Avraham in Yaakov’s time.
כי במקלי, “for with my staff, etc.” this teaches that one must remember the days of starvation during the time one has prospered in order not to forget the fact that one is so much better off now than then. Solomon also taught us this in Kohelet 7,14: ביום טובה היה בטוב, וביום רעה ראה, “in a time of good fortune enjoy the good fortune; and in a time of misfortune reflect.” What Solomon meant was: “reflect on the time when you suffered misfortune now that you enjoy good fortune.”
The words מכל החסדים ומכל האמת correspond to the words ורב חסד ואמת in the list of G’d’s attributes in Exodus. The words ועתה הייתי לשני מחנות in our verse correspond to the words נוצר חסד לאלפים in the parallel paragraph in Exodus. G’d has preserved the חסד performed by both Avraham and Yitzchok to be credited to the account of their grandson Yaakov. The words אלפים (plural), correspond to שני מחנות, 2 camps.
קטנתי, I am not asking You G’d to help me in a manner commensurate with my merits, as I am perfectly aware that these are utterly inadequate. כל החסדים וכל האמת אשר עשית את עבדך, Yaakov described as חסד the acts of unearned love G’d had performed for him, whereas he described as אמת, “truth,” i.e. deserved compensation, that G’d would keep His promise to him. (“Here, I am going to be with you, etc.” 28,15) He feels entitled to expect G’d to keep His promises when these are of a positive nature. When G’d had said to him that He would protect him wherever he would go, this had not been a conditional promise, dependent on Yaakov being worthy of such protection. He is aware that he may have sinned, but expects the promise to be kept for the sake of his father and grandfather both of whom G’d Himself had invoked in association with this promise. He feels that he deserves such protection, having heard that Esau is an unreformed sinner, still relating to him with hostility.
‘KATONTI’ OF ALL THE MERCIES, AND OF ALL THE TRUTH. “My merits have diminished as a consequence of all the kindness and truth which You have already shown me. For this reason I am afraid lest I have become depraved by sin since the time You made these promises to me, and this may cause me to be delivered into the hand of Esau.” This is Rashi’s language. But it is not a correct interpretation because it does not fit into the language of the verse, [for katan refers to size, not quantity]. Furthermore, Jacob said afterwards, And Thou saidst: I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, (Verse 13 here.) but of what efficacy would this promise be if subsequent sin caused him to be deprived of it? Moreover, Jacob mentioned two promises which the Holy One, blessed be He, had made him — one in Beth-el, (Above, 28:15.) and one in Haran (Ibid., 31:3.) — and he first stated the promise given to him in Haran, O Eternal, who saidst unto me: Return unto thy country, and to thy kindred, and I will do to thee good, (Verse 10 here.) this being what was said to him when he was about to leave the house of Laban: Return unto the land of thy fathers, and to thy kindred, and I will be with thee. (Ibid., 31:3.) Now following this promise, G-d did not bestow good upon Jacob to account for all these mercies and truths of which Jacob mentioned that his merits should be diminished on account of them. The word katonti rather means that he is too small to have been worthy of all the mercies which He had done for him. Likewise, How shall Jacob stand? for he is small, (Amos 7:2.) that is, too small to be able to bear all that was decreed against him. And so the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah, (76:4.) “Katonti. Rabbi Abba said that it means ‘I am not worthy.’” Now hachasadim (the mercies) are the kindnesses which G-d did for him without having vowed to do them, and ha’emeth (the truth) is the kindness which He promised him and fulfilled. Jacob thus said that he was unworthy of G-d’s promising him and performing those kindnesses which He promised him, nor was he worthy of those other many kindnesses which He did for him without having promised to do them. But I have not understood the opinion of Onkelos who translated, “from all the mercies and all the good,” when he is accustomed to translate chesed ve’emeth as “mercy and truth.” Perhaps Onkelos is rendering chasadim here as referring to Jacob’s rescue, that is, the many times He had saved him from his troubles. Onkelos rendered emeth as referring to all this good which Jacob possessed, for G-d had given him sons and daughters, wealth and belongings, and honor. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that long-lasting kindnesses such as children and wealth are called emeth, which is from the root of emunah (faith), just as: ‘Vene’eman’ (and confirmed shall be) thy house and thy kingdom forever, (II Samuel 7:16. This was said to David, whose kingdom was assured of existence.) which connotes assured existence; His bread shall be given, his waters ‘ne’emanim’ (shall be sure), (Isaiah 33:16.) just as the prophet said, Wilt thou indeed be unto me as a deceitful brook as waters that are not ‘ne’emanu’ (sure)? (Jeremiah 15:18.)
קטנתי מכל, from qualifying for all the
החסדים, the loving kindness as expressed by promises. We have a parallel to this in Kings I 8,64. Seeing that You have performed for me both חסדים and אמת, although I have not yet redeemed my vow to establish an altar at Beyt El and to sacrifice to You there, I am now afraid in spite of the assurances You have given me. I am aware that You do not judge man according to his good intentions but according to his carrying out such intentions, and I have been remiss in this respect. We find in connection with Chizkiyah, King of Yehudah in Kings I 20,1 that when the prophet had told him: “you will die and not live,” that the king prayed to G’d and was granted an additional 15 years of life on earth. [he was given this extension as in his prayer he had enumerated his merits, although G’d justified the extension with reference to King David, Chizkiyah’s ancestor. Ed.]
קטנתי מכל החסדים I AM TOO UNWORTHY OF ALL THE MERCIES (This may be rendered “I am small — unworthy — because of all the kindnesses) — My merits are diminished in consequence of all the kindness and truth which You have already shown me. For this reason I am afraid: perhaps, since You made these promises to me, I have become depraved (נתקלקלתי) by sin (another version of Rashi has נתלכלכתי, I have become defiled by sin) and this may cause me to be delivered unto Esau’s power (Shabbat 32a).
ומכל האמת [my merits are diminished in consequence] OF ALL THE TRUTH — of the true fulfillment (אמיתת) of Your promises — because You have already kept all the promises You made me
כי במקלי FOR WITH MY STAFF — I had with me neither silver nor gold nor cattle — only this staff of mine. The Midrashic explanation is, that he had placed his staff in the Jordan and Jordan had divided for him to pass over.
für mich freilich bete und bitte ich nicht, ich habe bereits so viel von dir erhalten, daß ich bereits dem mit meiner Dankespflicht nicht genügen kann, bin durch die Fülle deiner Wohltaten ja schon ganz klein geworden. Denn nicht die absolute, sondern die aus dem Verhältnis zu dem Empfangenen sich ergebende relative Größe der Leistungen macht die Größe des Menschen aus. Wir laufen alle Gefahr, um so geringer zu sein, je mehr wir haben; —
קטונתי מכל החסדים, I was not worthy of all the acts of kindness I have experienced at Your hands.
ומכל האמת, the good You did for me on account of the merit of my father and grandfather. Seeing that You have already seen fit to treat me well beyond my deserts, I beg of You to continue to do so. Our regular prayers reflect this sentiment when we use the expression כגודל חסדך, “in accordance with the greatness of Your kindness.” Moses used this expression in Numbers 14,19 when praying for forgiveness of the people after the debacle with the spies.
My merits have diminished because of the kindnesses and truth... מכל החסדים means because of the kindnesses. ואת עבדך means, “That you have done with me.” Rashi is explaining that [in this verse,] את means “with.”
Lest from the time You made me the promises, I have become tainted by sin... For the reason of diminished merits alone, Yaakov would not have feared, as there is no death without sin and no suffering without iniquity (Shabbos 55a). Thus Rashi brings also the reason of “tainted by sin.” And for the reason of “tainted by sin” alone, we might think that Yaakov still need not have feared, as his merits would outweigh his sins. Thus Rashi brings also the reason of diminished merits. Due to both of these reasons, Yaakov was frightened.
“Making Your words come true...” Rashi is answering the question: Just because Hashem spoke [true promises], should Yaakov’s merits diminish? For Rashi said above, “My merits have diminished.” [Therefore Rashi explains, “You have kept all the promises.”] And why did Rashi say, “You have kept,” rather than, “You have done,” as the verse says? Because [the fulfillment of] what one says is not called עשייה, but שמירה. I.e., “keeping” it is the same as “doing” it.
The Midrashic explanation is: He placed his staff into the Jordan [River] and the Jordan split. According to this, [Yaakov is saying that] Hashem did him two good deeds: the splitting the Jordan, and the [dividing into] two camps. But according to the simple meaning, there is only one kindness.
However, I am now in trouble: Deliver me please from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau; for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother and children alike. He is liable to kill all of us.
I am unworthy, etc. - (Shabbat 32a): [Rabbi Yannai] said, "A person should never stand in a place of danger saying that they [on High] will perform a miracle for him, lest they do not perform a miracle for him. And [even] if they do perform a miracle for him, they will deduct it from his merits." Rabbi Ḥanin said, "What is the verse [that alludes to this]? When Jacob said, 'Katonti (I am not worthy) of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which You have shown unto Your servant'" (Genesis 32:11). ( He explains "katonti," as my merits have become small. But ostensibly, this requires [further] study - as note that Ya'akov [only] used this expression out of modesty. So there is no hint here to the diminution of merits. And see Ramban and Maharsha, who have [already] pointed this out. But it appears to me that [its understanding] is according to that which is written in Bava Kamma 50b, "Anyone who says that the Holy One, blessed be He, is a Relinquisher will have his life relinquished." And if so, once Ya'akov said that he was not worthy of all the goodnesses; if so, they could not be done for him for free, but rather his merits [must have been] diminished.)
קטונתי מכל החסדים, “I am unworthy of all the acts of love and kindness, etc.” According to Rashi, Yaakov means that each act of kindness performed on his behalf by G’d diminished the sum total of his remaining merit balance. Nachmanides does not accept this interpretation as linguistically correct, seeing that the words “small” and “big” are appropriate for bodies but not for concepts such as merits. These concepts are measured according to quality not according to quantity. The correct interpretation therefore is that Yaakov did not consider himself worthy of the kind deeds G’d had seen fit to perform in his interest. The difference between the חסדים and the אמת lies in deeds performed for his sake even without the benefit of his having vowed to give tithes and to build a Temple, They refer to the promises G’d had made him prior to his having made any vow whatsoever. The word אמת is a reference to assurances given to Yaakov by G’d, and these having been fulfilled (in his lifetime). They are named thus as man is entitled to expect G’d to make good on His promises. (unless he had done something to forfeit the claim these assurances were based on)
כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן הזה, “for when I previously crossed this river Jordan, all I possessed was my walking staff.” I used to have a problem with the expression “this river Jordan,” seeing that Yaakov’s route was far distant from the river Jordan. The Jordan constitutes the eastern boundary of the land of Israel! My brother Rabbi Yehudah answered my question by pointing out that actually it was not Yaakov who crossed the Jordan but his staff, which by splitting the Jordan (as per tradition of our sages) enabled Yaakov to cross the river. [the meaning of the prefix ב in the word במקלי is not “with” but “by means of.”] The use of the word זה, “this,” for something not at hand, is not unique. We encounter it, for instance in the line כי זה משה האיש, “for this man Moses,” (Exodus 32,1) as a reference to Moses who, at that time, was on Mount Sinai, far from the camp of the Israelites.
“I am unworthy of all the kindness” [32:11]. Jacob said: my merits have been reduced. That is to say, Jacob said: I have accepted goodness from the Holy One. He will not do any more kindness, since I am not worthy to receive kindness from the Holy One. Even though the Holy One promised me to do kindness, who can know if my sins are not too numerous? (Rashi, Genesis, 32:11.)
“With my staff alone I crossed” [32:11]. Jacob said: I had nothing of my own when I ran away from Esau, except for my staff. Now I have become two groups of people, with goods and animals. The Midrash (Tanhuma, ed. Buber, Vayetze, 3.) writes, “With my staff alone I crossed” [32:11], means that Jacob took his staff and hit the Jordan, which spilt the water, and he crossed on dry land. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:11.) Bahya writes. From this Torah portion we learn that when things go well for a person, he should also think about the day when things went poorly for him, in the expectation that he should praise the Holy One, who helped him out of the great need and poverty and to wealth. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:11.)
There is a great deal of difference between a sin committed under the influence of the evil urge, and a sin committed as a result of calculated deliberation, the result of rationalisation. The sinner of the first category will easily feel shame and remorse, leading to complete repentance. The Talmud Berachot 12, says that whoever commits a sin and feels ashamed of it, will have all his sins forgiven. Proof of this is cited from Ezekiel 16,63, "that you may remember and feel shame, and have no more excuse because of your humiliation, when I have forgiven all you have done." The reason is, that the sins committed under the influence of the evil urge do not generally remove the sinner from society. This is why the Talmud Sanhedrin 104, includes king Achaz as belonging to the group of righteous kings. The king, who had subjected his own son to Moloch rites, an extreme abomination, who sold temple treasures in order to bribe the king of Ashur, and who even made a replica of an altar he had seen in an idolatrous temple in Damascus, nevertheless qualified for the description "righteous!"! This was due to the fact that the Talmud interprets Isaiah 7,3, as evidence that king Achaz displayed shame in the presence of the prophet. The idea seems to be that the shame displayed proved that his sins had been due to impulses, not to deliberate attempts to flout G-d’s laws. When the Talmud Sukkah 52, states that anyone who is greater than his fellow man also has greater urges than his fellow man, this may well mean that he who deliberates before committing a sin, may well find that eventually the impulses urging him to sin will overpower him. This is also the meaning of the Talmudic statement (Yuma 29) that "the deliberations leading to sin are worse than the sin itself." This is nothing else than saying "when the sin has become the result of careful deliberation, such sin is especially weighty." The whole matter is well illustrated in the dialogue between Rav Ashi and king Menashe reported in Sanhedrin 102. The former had announced to his students that on the morrow he would lecture on the three kings who had forfeited their share in the hereafter, including his colleague king Menashe. During the night, king Menashe appeared to Rav Ashi in a dream, demanding to know why Rav Ashi had had the arrogance to describe himself as his colleague. He asked Rav Ashi from which end of a loaf of bread one has to cut first when reciting the benediction of hamotzi. Rav Ashi did not know. Thereupon king Menashe said to Rav Ashi "if you do not know the answer to such a simple question, how can you describe yourself as my "colleague?" Rav Ashi asked to be given the answer. King Menashe explained that the part of the loaf that gets brown first during baking, is the part one must cut. Thereupon Rav Ashi wanted to know how it was possible that a man who had been such a talmid chacham, great scholar, could have been so deeply involved in idol worship and all the atrocities described in the book of kings. The king replied that if Rav Ashi had lived during that period he would have served those same idols with much greater fervour even. Menashe who approached things from an intellectual level, knew that it is logical to cut the bread at the point where it first started to become bread, i.e. in accordance with natural processes. Menashe's idol worship was based on reason, logic and his knowledge of the operation of natural law. Such sinfulness is almost impossible to reverse unless one is granted an act of clear hashgachah peratit, personal Providence by G-d. In the latter's case, the afflictions he suffered while imprisoned by the king of Ashur, proved to be such a catalyst and made him into a baal teshuvah, repentant sinner. Rav Ashi who applied Torah reasoning only, would have been even more vulnerable to the arguments of the philosophers of that time, had he been exposed to them. Therefore, in the estimation of Menashe, he would have embraced idol worship with even greater fervour. Menashe is used as an example of the errors that the pursuit of philosophy and natural sciences, when a primary occupation, can lead to. Menashe and his group had persuaded themselves that G-d had abandoned the earth, hence they went their own way, did not feel beholden to anyone. As a result of their conduct, their philosophy became a self fulfilling prophecy, since G-d was forced to withdraw in view of their blasphemous behaviour. The wickedness of Israel at that time exceeded anything that had ever occurred before. G-d’s withdrawal however, was secondary, i.e. effect not cause. Once Menashe had been captured, humiliated, etc., he began to view his personal fate consistently not as accidental, but as a sign from heaven that he was being punished. This paved the way for his teshuvah. G-d hearkened to his prayer, and he was restored to his throne in Jerusalem. (Chronicles II 33.) Menashe's teshuvah could hardly have occurred had he not known where bread begins to bake, i.e. that natural processes all have an ultimate Cause, i.e. the Creator. The study of cause and effect, i.e. natural science, had finally led him to the realisation that there had to be an ultimate Cause. Belief in miracles is only sensible once there is the conviction that He who occasionally employs the supernatural, is in fact Master of the natural, its guiding force. Menashe's deliverance proved to him the superiority of personal experience of "the hand of G-d" to all theories about religion that had preceded it. Even a Moses had erred similarly, as long as he had assumed that logic and reason would dictate success in his dealings with Pharaoh. Rachav and her people were impressed with the supernatural, (splitting the sea, crossing of the Jordan, Joshua 2,10-11) The miracles performed by Elijah and Elisha threngthened the belief in G-d as the prime force in our lives. The argument between Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair who was on a mission of raising funds to secure the release of Jewish prisoners, and a river which refused to stop running in order to afford him a chance to cross it, is an interesting example of our point. (Chullin 7) Rabbi Pinchas commanded the river to part, to let him cross in order to perform a mitzvah. The river replied that since it was performing the will of its Creator twenty four hours a day every day, it could not depart from the norms that had been set for it. It added, that since it was certain that it carried out G-d’s will, whereas the success of Rabbi Pinchas' mission was in some doubt, it saw no reason to comply with Rabbi Pinchas' order. Rabbi Pinchas threatened that the river bed would dry up forever unless it responded positively. The river complied. In fact, Rabbi Pinchas even insisted that the river also part for the sake of a fellow traveller who was transporting matzah for use on the Passover. Rav Yoseph commented that Rabbi Pinchas' powers and greatness equalled that of Moses plus six hundred thousand Jews. The argument underlying all this, merits our attention. Rabbi Pinchas was engaged in an endeavour similar to the one Moses had been engaged in at the time of the Exodus. Both were engaged in liberating Jews that had been enslaved by human masters. They were to be freed so that they could serve the Lord. The river's argument was that by following its normal, natural behaviour it was carrying out its destiny, the one decreed by its Creator. Gravity and a tendency towards cohesion of water molecules are part of those natural laws, and must not be tampered with. Man's will, the river argued, is fickle, not anchored in natural law. Sometimes man decides to comply with the Creator's designs and purposes, other times he does not. Such fickle and irregular service of the Lord cannot be granted priority over the constant performance of the Lord's will by rivers such as the one in question. Not true, said Rabbi Pinchas. You and nature as a whole exist only for the sake of enabling man to fulfil his destiny. (Bidmuto u-vetzalmo, in His image was man created, in order to emulate Him) If you fail to facilitate this, you have lost your reason for existence altogether, said Rabbi Pinchas to the river. You would therefore cease to flow altogether. As Bereshit Rabbah 19, puts it "whatever was created before its counterpart, is inferior to its counterpart." (see our chapter 15) It follows that what Rabbi Pinchas said to the river in essence, was, "unless you now perform the specific task allotted to you by me, your existence for the general tasks is pointless." We must understand the Midrash in Shabbat 88, that at the time of creation G-d made an agreement with nature that its continued existence was contingent on the acceptance of the Torah by Israel, in the same spirit. This is also the meaning of the discussion between Joshua and the sun which our Rabbis quoted in the Yalkut Joshua 23. (see chapter 37) Proof of the fact that this principle is correct, is found in the fact that the ordinary Jew carying flour for Matzah on the Passover was deemed worthy of the same miracle as the saintly Rabbi Pinchas.
(The second possibility) is that he will be saved by G-d's help. Then his merits will be annulled and he will lose his reward, as our sages said on this matter (Shabbat 32a): "a man should never put himself in danger thinking that a miracle will be performed for him, because maybe no miracle will be done for him, and even if a miracle is done for him, his merits are reduced". And Yaakov our forefather said "I am not worthy from all Your kindnesses" (Bereishis 32:11), to which the targum explains: "my merits have diminished due to all of Your favors and kindnesses."
Hence, the saints in ancient times, when some good fortune happened to them, were troubled in two respects: First, that they should not fall short in the complete fulfillment of the service and gratitude they owed for this good fortune and that it should not turn into evil for them, as our ancestor Jacob said, "I have diminished from all the mercies, and truth which You have shown unto Your servant" (Gen. 32:11); secondly, that it should not be the Creator's reward for their service, and thus their reward in the world to come would be diminished, as the ancients explained the text, "And repays them that hate Him to their face to destroy them (in the afterlife)" (Deut. 7:10). This will suffice on this theme.
And in Pirkei deRabbi Eliezer (Chapter 48:17), he gave a different reason for the word[s], I have surely visited [pakod pakadati], with which they were redeemed. It said, and this is its language there: Rabbi Eliezer said, "The five letters of the Torah that are of double [shape] are all expressions of redemption. Kaf, kaf, with which our father Abraham was redeemed from Ur of the Chaldees, as it is stated: Go out [lekh lekhah] of your land (Gen. 12:1). Mem, mem, with which our father Isaac was redeemed from the Philistines, as it is stated: Go from us, for you are much mightier than us [mimenu meod] (Genesis 22:16). Nun, nun, with which our father Jacob was redeemed from the hand of Esau, as it is stated, Deliver me, I pray, [hatzileini na] (Genesis 32:11). Peh, peh, with which the Jewish people was redeemed from Egypt, as it is stated: I have surely visited you, [pakod pakadti] (Exodus 3:16, 17). Tzadi, tzadi, with which the Holy One, blessed be He, in the future will redeem the Jewish people at the end of the fourth empire, as it is stated: Tzemach is his name; and he shall grow up [yitzmach] out of his place (Zechariah 6:12). All of them were told to Abraham, and Abraham passed them down to Isaac, and Isaac passed them down to Jacob, and Jacob passed them down to Joseph and his brothers, as it is stated: He will surely visit [pakod yifkod] you (Genesis 50:24). Asher, the son of Jacob, passed down the mystery of the redemption to Serah his daughter. When Moses and Aaron came to the elders of Israel and performed the signs in their sight, the elders of Israel went to Serah, the daughter of Asher, and they said to her, 'A certain man has come, and he has performed such and such signs before us.' She said to them, 'There is no substance to these signs.' They said to her, 'But did he not say, "Pakod yifkod?"' She said to them, 'He is the man who will redeem the Jewish people in the future from Egypt, for so did I hear from father.' As it is stated: And the people were convinced when [...] the Lord had visited [pakad] His people (Exodus 4:31)." To here [is the midrash].
And the mystery of the matter: Cantillation-notes: Shophar (֣) , me-hupakh (֚) , qadmah (֨) , zaqeph qatan (֔) – that of which it is stated: (Gen. 32:11 ) I am made small (qatonti) , from all the kindnesses and from all the truth... It is straightened-up and called: the cantillation-note zaqeph gadol (֕) (great upright) . And there is no truth but Torah. It is this that is written: (Mal. 2:6) The teaching (Torah) of truth was in his mouth...
At that time, the cantillation notes: shophar mehupakh (֚) , qadmah (֨) , zaqeph qatan (֔) : the regime of the nations of the world is to be overturned, and Israel – who are of the seed of him of whom it is stated: (Gen. 32:11) I Jacob have become small from all the kindnesses – will rise and straighten-up.
crossed the Jordan's water. (See Genesis 32:11, Jacob said, “For with my staff, I passed over this Jordan.”)
Remember the one who, carrying his staff, crossed the Jordan's water. (See Genesis 32:11, Jacob said, “For with my staff, I passed over this Jordan.”)
[3] Another interpretation: [Genesis 28:10-11] "And Jacob went out from Beersheba, and went toward Haran. And he lighted upon a certain place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set; and he took one of the stones of that place, and put it under his head, and lay down in that place to sleep." The holy meaning of "He will keep the feet of His holy ones" (1 Samuel 2:9) is that the Holy One, blessed be He, will protect the righteous. This refers to Abraham, who pursued the kings. "Who has stirred up one from the east, whom He calls in righteousness to His feet?" (Isaiah 41:2) And the wicked shall be silent in darkness. These are the eighteen kings whom he slew in darkness, as it is said, "And he divided himself against them by night" (Genesis 14:15). Another explanation of "He will keep the feet of His holy ones" is Jacob, when he went out to go to Haran. For the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "Behold, I am with you, and will keep you wherever you go" (Genesis 28:15). "And the wicked shall be silent in darkness" refers to Esau, as it is written, "All darkness is laid up for his treasures" (Job 20:26). "And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Esau for stubble" (Obadiah 1:18). "And the wicked shall be silent in darkness" - when he went out to pursue Jacob in the tenth hour, and the Holy One, blessed be He, brought in the sun and made the day ten hours long, as it is said, "And he lighted upon the place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set" (Genesis 28:11), and Esau was standing in darkness and silence, not knowing where to go. Therefore, it is said, "For by strength shall no man prevail" (1 Samuel 2:9). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "Perhaps you are strong?" Even in the future, He will do the same for Israel, as it is said, "But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day. The way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know over what they stumble" (Proverbs 4:18-19). If you wonder about this matter, behold, it has already occurred in this world, as it is said, "No man saw his brother" (Exodus 10:23). "May the footsteps of His pious ones be guarded." When Jacob left his father's house, he only took his staff in his hand, as it is stated: "For with my staff, I crossed this Jordan" (Genesis 32:11). The Holy One Blessed be He said to Isaac, "Just as your father Abraham did, so do for yourself. He did not give you all that he had, as it is stated: "And Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac" (Genesis 25:5). And similarly, "And Abraham said to his servant, the elder of his house, who ruled over all that he had" (Genesis 24:2). What is the meaning of "who ruled"? Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak said that he had control over all that Abraham had, and he even said to him, "Even if you lose what I have, take a wife for my son from there." Immediately, the servant took ten camels and all the good things of his master were in his hand (Genesis 24:10). This demonstrates that the halacha was in his hand (as it is stated: "And Abraham gave all that he had," Genesis 25:5), and furthermore, the servant began to distribute gifts. To this (i.e. Abraham's actions) we attribute the blessings, and to this (i.e. Isaac's actions) we attribute the rings. And Solomon cried out: "There is one who scatters and yet increases more" (Proverbs 11:24). May the Holy One Blessed be He be praised, as it is stated: "And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that God blessed Isaac his son" (Genesis 25:11). Look at all that Abraham did for Isaac, but Isaac did not do the same for Jacob. Instead, he sent him away empty-handed. The Holy One Blessed be He said to him, "You have withheld from this poor man, from your own lack." As it is stated: "And yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest; then your poverty will come as a robber, and your want like an armed man" (Proverbs 6:10-11). If Jacob had nothing, the Divine Presence would have departed from him. And he could not speak with him except at the time of his death. Come and see what Esau did to Jacob; he saw him empty-handed and did not have mercy on him. Instead, he said, "Let me go first, and if I cannot pass, then I will kill him." As it is stated: "Thus says the Lord: For three transgressions...because he pursued his brother with the sword" (Amos 1:11). Jacob turned his eyes to the Holy One Blessed be He and performed miracles for him. He placed his staff in the water, and the Jordan River split apart, as it is stated: "With my staff, I crossed this Jordan" (Genesis 32:11). Esau waited on the way, but Jacob did not pass by there. He felt that he had crossed the Jordan. What did Esau do? He pursued him and came ahead to the place of Makhpelah. Jacob said, "I have neither bread nor anything else with me. I will go in and warm my body in this bath." Esau surrounded the bath so that Jacob could not leave. Jacob pretended to be dead so that he would not have to leave. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "You are joined against a wicked man. I said, 'Here I am with you, etc.' " Jacob said to him at that time, "You have done this for your name's sake; I am sure of it." And Jacob went out and encountered the place, and there was no encounter except prayer, as it is said, "Do not pray and do not encounter me" (Jeremiah 7:16). David said, "Behold, He who keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep. The Lord will keep your going out and your coming in" (Psalms 121:4-8).
[2] Another interpretation: "Why do you say, O Jacob?" (Isaiah 40:27). Rabbi Shmuel says, "How can a person mourn over sins of the world? Let him examine his own sins that he has overcome." And Rabbi Shimon says, "How can a person mourn when he is alive and sees this sun? And similarly, Solomon says, 'What advantage does a man have in all his labor under the sun?' (Ecclesiastes 1:3). If it were not enough that he sees the sun, therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob, 'Why do you call out, O Jacob? Why do you say, O Israel?'" As for Rabbi's comment, "The foolishness of man perverts his way" (Proverbs 19:3). Rabbi says there were thirteen types of fragrant plants in the Garden of Eden and ten chambers, as it is said, "In Eden, the garden of God" (Ezekiel 28:13). And God said, "It is not good for man" (Genesis 2:18), he did not need to praise me, but rather he began to complain and say, "The woman You gave me" (Genesis 3:12). And so Abraham went to war and made him king over sixteen kings and I returned their captivity, and he thought it was his reward, so I said to him, "Your reward is very great" (Genesis 15:1). He did not need to thank me, but rather say, "The Lord God, what will You give me?" (Genesis 15:2). And so Jacob said, "With my staff I crossed this Jordan" (Genesis 32:11) and I did all that good for him, and he said to Pharaoh, "Few and evil have been the days of my life" (Genesis 47:9), "I have caused you evil, Jacob, that you speak so." And similarly, the generation of the wilderness, how many good things I did for them, as it is said, "In the wilderness, where you saw" (Deuteronomy 1:31), and they said, "Our souls loathe this light bread" (Numbers 21:5). Thus it is your blasphemy and your complaint. So why do you say, O Jacob?
[2] Another explanation According to our father Jacob, he exclaimed and said, "Greatly have I been afflicted from my youth, let Israel now say" (Psalms 129:1). The Holy One, blessed be He, responded and said, "But in every trouble that entered upon you, was I not with you and saved you? I redeemed you from death in famine (Job 5:20), when Jacob saw that there was grain in Egypt and said, 'Why do you just keep looking at each other?' (Genesis 42:1), and in war from the hand of the sword (Job 5:20), when Esau came with four hundred men, "You will hide from the sword of the tongue" (Job 5:21). When did Jacob hear the words of Laban's sons, etc.? (Genesis 31:1), and "Do not be afraid of sudden terror, nor of trouble from the wicked when it comes" (Proverbs 3:25). When did the people of Shechem come and depart and a terror from God fell upon them? (Genesis 35:5), "You shall laugh at destruction and famine" (Job 5:22). When did he leave his father's house and Esau took his blessings from him? (It seems to be different opinions regarding the interpretation of the beginning of Parshat Vayetze) Nevertheless, the Holy One, blessed be He, did not abandon him, as it is written, "With my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps" (Genesis 32:11), "Do not be afraid of the beasts of the earth" (Job 5:22), for as long as he was a shepherd, not one of the animals touched the flock, as it is written, "I did not bring you animals torn by wild beasts" (Genesis 31:39). "For you have made a covenant with the stones of the field" (Job 5:23). When did he take stones from the place and set them up as a pillar? (Genesis 28:18). "And the wild beast of the field shall be at peace with thee" (Job 5:23), "And Esau ran to meet him" (Genesis 33:4), which is called a "Chayah" (wild animal), as it says, "Shout down the beast of the reeds" [(Yishmael, who is like a swine living among the reeds)] (Psalms 68:31). "And you will know that your tent is in peace" (Job 5:24), "When was it that Israel settled?" (Genesis 33:22), and what is written after that? "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (Genesis 35:22). "And you will lie down, and none shall make you afraid" (Job 11:19), "And Israel shall dwell in safety, alone" (Deuteronomy 33:28), "Many faces have been humbled before you" (Job 40:14), "And many nations shall come" (Isaiah 2:3). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob: "After all these things that I have done for you, you will call me your adversary" (Hosea 12:14). Jacob also said, "Many have been my afflictions from my youth" (Psalms 129:1), and also said, "They have not prevailed against me" (Psalms 129:2). David said to him, "For all these things, I will give you praise," as it says, "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him from them all" (Psalms 34:19).
[4] Another interpretation: "This is about a small city", the house of Joseph, and there are few people there, these are the tribes, as it is said, "Am I not too few for the number of your mercies?" (Genesis 32:11). A great king came to this city, this is Joseph, as it is written "God made me lord" (Genesis 45:8). He built great fortifications around it, and said to them, "You are spies." But a poor and wise man was found in the city, this is Judah, and he was saved, "I will be his surety" (Genesis 43:9). Mankind did not remember him, so they sent a messenger to him, as it is said, "And he sent Judah ahead of him" (Genesis 45:12).
“Take the Levites” – that is what the verse said: “The Lord assesses the righteous, but He hates the wicked and the lover of villainy” (Psalms 11:5). “The Lord assesses the righteous” – the Holy One blessed be He does not elevate a person to a position of authority until he first assesses and examines him. When he passes His ordeal, He elevates him to a position of authority. Likewise, you find regarding Abraham our patriarch. The Holy One blessed be He subjected him to ten ordeals and he passed them. Then He blessed him: “The Lord blessed Abraham with everything” (Genesis 24:1). Likewise, Isaac, He subjected him to the ordeal of Avimelekh, and he passed the ordeal. Then He blessed him, as it is stated: “Isaac sowed in that land and found in that year one hundredfold, and the Lord blessed him” (Genesis 26:12). Likewise, Jacob our patriarch, He subjected him to an ordeal with all those travails; with Esau, with Rachel, with Dina, with Joseph, and how he left his father’s house: “For with my staff I crossed this Jordan” (Genesis 32:11). And He blessed him: “God appeared to Jacob again, already upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). Likewise, Joseph with the wife of Potifera; he was incarcerated for twelve years and became king because he passed his ordeals. That is, “the Lord assesses the righteous.” The tribe of Levi, too, devoted their lives for sanctification of the name of the Holy One blessed be He. When Israel was in Egypt, they rejected the Torah and circumcision, as Ezekiel rebukes them: “So said the Lord God: On the day that I chose Israel, I raised My hand to the descendants of the house of Jacob and made Myself known to them in the land of Egypt” (Ezekiel 20:5). What is ultimately written thereafter? “They defied Me and did not want to heed Me…and I said to pour My fury upon them” (Ezekiel 20:8). What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He brought darkness upon the Egyptians for three days, during which he killed all the wicked of Israel, as it says: “I will purge the rebels and the transgressors against Me from among you” (Ezekiel 20:38). Likewise it says: “The fig tree formed its unripe figs” (Song of Songs 2:13), these are the wicked who were among Israel. “And the vines, budding, emitted fragrance” (Song of Songs 2:13), the survivors who repented were accepted. “Arise, my love, my fair one, and go” (Song of Songs 2:13), as the time of the redemption has arrived. But the tribe of Levi, all of them were righteous, and all of them would perform the Torah, as it is stated: “For they observed Your saying, and Your covenant they upheld” (Deuteronomy 33:9); this is circumcision. Moreover, when Israel crafted the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate, as it is stated: “Moses stood at the gate of the camp…and all the sons of Levi gathered to him” (Exodus 32:26). When Moses said to them: “Each man, place his sword upon his thigh” (Exodus 32:27), what did they do? They placed it and showed no favor. Likewise, Moses said in his blessing: “Who said of his father and of his mother: I have not seen him” (Deuteronomy 33:9). When the Holy One blessed be He saw that they were all righteous, he subjected them to an ordeal and they passed the ordeal, as it is stated: “Whom you subjected to an ordeal at Masa” (Deuteronomy 33:8). Immediately, He said: “The Levites shall be Mine” (Numbers 8:14), to realize what is stated: “The Lord assesses the righteous” (Psalms 11:5). But the wicked, it is written in their regard: “But He hates the wicked and the lover of villainy” (Psalms 11:5). David said: “Happy is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways” (Psalms 128:1).
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – why did he send messengers to him? Rather, this is what he said: ‘I will send him messengers; maybe he will repent.’ He said to them: ‘Say to him: Do not say Jacob remains as he was when he departed from his father’s house, as it is stated: “For with my staff I crossed…” (Genesis 32:11), “He commanded him, saying” (Genesis 32:5) – say to him: Do not say that when he departed from you he took anything from the household property. Rather, [tell him that] I acquired all these as my wages, through my effort,’ as it is stated: “And now I have become two camps” (Genesis 32:11). At the moment that Jacob called Esau “my lord,” the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You abased yourself and called him “my lord” eight times. As you live, I will establish eight kings from his descendants before your descendants,’ as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned [in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31). He [Jacob] said to them [the messengers]: ‘Say to him: If you are prepared for peace, I am with you, and if for war, I am with you. I have warriors, courageous and strong, who say something before the Holy One blessed be He, and He performs their will on their behalf,’ as it is stated: “He performs the will of those who fear him” (Psalms 145:19). That is why David came to give praise and acclaim before the Holy One blessed be He, who helped him when he fled from Saul, as it is stated: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow” (Psalms 11:2). What is written thereafter? “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous man do?” (Psalms 11:3). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, if You had distanced and forsook Jacob, who is the pillar and foundation of the world, as it is stated: “The righteous man is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25), “what can the righteous man do?”’ Regarding that moment, it is stated: “Some on chariots and some on horses, but we invoke the name of the Lord our God” (Psalms 20:8).
“I am unworthy of all the kindnesses and of all the truth that You have performed for Your servant, for with my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps” (Genesis 32:11). “I am unworthy of all the kindnesses” – Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: I am “unworthy.” Rabbi Levi said: ‘I am worthy, but [I have become] “unworthy” due to [“all the kindnesses.”]’ “For with my staff I crossed this Jordan” – Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said, in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: In the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings, we have found that Israel crossed the Jordan only due to the merit of Jacob. In the Torah – “for with my staff I crossed this Jordan.” In the Prophets – “You shall inform your children, saying: Israel crossed this Jordan on dry land” (Joshua 4:22) – Israel the elder. In the Writings – “What is it, sea, that makes you flee? The Jordan, that you turn back?…from before the God of Jacob” (Psalms 114:5, 7). There is a place called Jordan in the hot springs of Tiberias. Our patriarch Jacob entered there, panic-stricken, and Esau shut him in there. The Holy One blessed be He dug an opening in another place and he emerged. That is what is written: “When you pass through the water, I am with you, and through the rivers, they will not inundate you” (Isaiah 43:2).
(Gemara) What is the reason for such punishment for Niddah? R. Isaac said: "Because she committed corruption in the inner part of her womb, therefore should she be beaten in the inner part of her womb." This may be true regarding Niddah, but what is the reason for Challa and the lighting of the candles? It is as a certain Galilean expounded before R. Chisda: Thus said the Holy One, praised be He! "One fourth of a Log of blood did I put in your body; concerning blood (menstruation) have I warned thee. (Fol. 32a) I have called ye the first product and have charged ye concerning the first of your dough; the soul which I have put in you is called Ner (light) and I have charged ye concerning Ner (the Sabbath light); if you observe these things then it is well, but if not I shall take your souls." And why just at the time of childbirth? Rabba said: "When the ox has already fallen down, sharpen the knife for him." Abaye said: "Let the maid continue her rebellion, it will go under one rod." R. Chisda said: "Leave the intoxicant alone, he will fall by himself." Mar Ukba said: "The shepherd is lame and the goats are running away swiftly. [When they appear] at the gate of the fold, there are words (bargaining), but in the stalls (where the sheep are delivered), strict account is taken." R. Pappa said: "At the gate of business [you have] many friends, but at the gate of disgrace, no friend." And when are the sins of men investigated? Resh Lakish said: "When they pass over a bridge." A bridge and nothing else? But he intended to say all dangerous places like a bridge. Rab would not embark on a ferry where there were any heathen; he said: "His time to be punished may happen to be due [while on the boat] and I may be seized with him." Samuel [on the contrary] would not embark on a ferry unless there was also a heathen abroad, for he said: "Satan has no power over two persons of different nationalities." R. Janai always examined the ferry first and then he embarked on it. For R. Janai followed his own principle, and he said: "A man should never expose himself to danger expecting that a miracle will be wrought for him; for it may be that such a miracle will not be wrought, and even if a miracle be wrought for him, it will be deducted from the rewards due him for his merits." R. Chanin said: "What is the Biblical passage for this? I am not worthy of all the kindness, and of all the truthfulness that Thou hath done unto thy servant. (Gen. 32, 11)." R. Zeira never walked under date-trees on a day when the Shutha wind blew. Our Rabbis taught: "For three sins women die of childbirth." R. Elazar says: "Women die prematurely" [instead of child birth]. R. Acha said: "For the sin of washing the dirt of their children on the Sabbath"; and others say, "Because they call the holy ark. The chest." We are "taught that R. Ishmael b. Elazar says: "For two sins common people die; because they call the ark, The chest, and because they call the synagogue The people's house.'" We are taught that R. Jose says: "Three breaches through which death enters were created for a woman. Others say three causes of premature death were created for woman; Niddah, Challa and lighting the lamps." One is in accordance with the opinion of R. Elazar and the other is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis.
R. Huna had wine in a room which was in an unsafe condition, and the walls of which were momentarily expected to fall. He wished to remove the wine, [but was afraid to enter the room]. So he got R. Ada b. Ahaba to enter the room with him and engaged him there in a discussion of an Halacha, until his men removed the wine. After they had left, the walls of the room caved in. When R. Ada realized how he had been used, he became angry, for he agreed with R. Janai, who said: "A man should never expose himself to danger expecting that a miracle will be wrought for him; for it may be that such a miracle will not be wrought, and even if a miracle be wrought for him, it will be deducted from the rewards due him for his merits." R. Chanin said: "What is the Biblical passage for this? (Gen. 23, 11) I am not worthy of all the kindness, etc." Wherein lay the greatness of Ada b. Ahaba? As we are taught: The disciples of R. Ada b. Ahaba asked him: "Why have you lived so long?" He replied: "I was never angry in my house; I never superseded a superior; I never thought of Divine subjects in unclean alleys; I never walked four cubits without studying the Torah or without Phylacteries; I never slept in the house of study, neither regularly nor took a nap; I never rejoiced when my neighbor was in misfortune, and I never called my fellow man by a nickname."
Another interpretation (of Numb. 8:6): TAKE THE LEVITES. This text is related (to Ps. 11:5): THE LORD TESTS THE RIGHTEOUS. The Holy One does not elevate a person to an office until he tests and examines him. (Tanh. Numb. 3:8; Numb. R. 15:12.) When he withstands his test, he elevates him to the office. And so you find in the case of our father Abraham, when the Holy One tested him with ten temptations, he withstood his trial. Then after that he blessed him. It is so stated (in Gen. 24:1): AND THE LORD BLESSED ABRAHAM IN ALL THINGS. So also in the case of Isaac, when he tested him in the days of Abimelech, he withstood the trial. Then after that he blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 26:12): SO ISAAC SOWED ON THAT LAND [ … FOR THE LORD HAD BLESSED HIM]. So also in the case of Jacob, when he tested him by means of all those tribulations with Esau with Dinah, with Joseph, and how he departed from the house of his father and his mother (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): FOR WITH …, he blessed him. It is so stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN, [WHEN HE CAME FROM PADDAN-ARAM, AND BLESSED HIM]. So also in the case of Joseph, he tested him with the wife of Potiphar, and he was imprisoned for twelve years. Then after that he came out and became king because he had withstood his trial. Ergo (in Ps. 11:5): THE LORD TESTS THE RIGHTEOUS. So also in the case of the tribe of Levi, they laid down their lives for the sanctification of the name of the Holy One (i.e. for martyrdom), so that the Torah would not be set aside. Now when Israel was in Egypt, they had rejected the Torah and circumcision and all of them had become worshipers of idols as Ezekiel has demonstrated where it is stated (in Ezek. 20:5): AND YOU SHALL SAY UNTO THEM: THUS SAYS THE LORD GOD, IN THE DAY THAT I CHOSE ISRAEL…. Then what is written at the end (in vs. 8)? BUT THEY REBELLED AGAINST ME AND DID NOT COME TO HEARKEN UNTO ME. [INDIVIDUALLY THEY DID NOT CAST AWAY THE ABOMINATIONS OF THEIR EYES NOR DID THEY FORSAKE THE IDOLS OF EGYPT]. What did the Holy One do? He brought darkness upon Egypt for three days, and during those he killed all the wicked ones of Israel. For this reason it says (in Ezek. 20:36, 38): AS I BROUGHT YOUR ANCESTORS TO JUDGMENT IN THE DESERT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT….] SO WILL I REMOVE FROM YOU . So also it says (in Cant. 2:13): AND THE FIG TREE SHEDS (Heb.: hanetah. Although the biblical context suggests a translation such as “puts forth” or “ripens” the context understands this rare verb in a more negative sense. See above vol. 2, p. 62 Tanh. (Buber); Exod. 3:7).) ITS GREEN FIGS…. These are the wicked who are in Israel. (Ibid. cont.:) AND THE VINES IN BLOSSOM GIVE OFF FRAGRANCE. These are the rest who have repented and been accepted. (Ibid. cont.:) ARISE, MY BELOVED, MY FAIR ONE, AND COME AWAY, for behold the time of redemption has arrived. However all those in the tribe of Levi were righteous and carried out the Torah. It is so stated (in Deut. 33:9): FOR THEY OBSERVED YOUR WORD, i.e., the Torah; AND KEPT YOUR COVENANT, i.e., circumcision. And not only that, but when Israel made the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate there as stated (in Exod. 32:26): SO MOSES STOOD UP ON THE GATE OF THE CAMP AND SAID: WHOEVER IS FOR THE LORD COME TO ME. THEN ALL THE CHILDREN OF LEVI GATHERED UNTO HIM. When Moses said (in vs. 27): EACH [PUT HIS SWORD ON HIS THIGH, they immediately did so. Moreover they did not show partiality. And so Moses blesses them, the one (according Deut. 33:9) WHO SAYS OF HIS FATHER AND MOTHER: I DO NOT CONSIDER THEM …, FOR THEY (the Levites) OBSERVED YOUR WORD AND KEPT YOUR COVENANT. When the Holy One saw that they all were righteous, that he had tested them and they had withstood their trial, as stated (of Levi in Deut. 33:8): WHOM YOU TESTED AT MASSAH, the Holy One immediately said (in Numb. 8:14): AND THE LEVITES SHALL BELONG TO ME to fulfill what is stated (in Ps. 11:5): THE LORD TESTS THE RIGHTEOUS. In the case of the wicked, however, it is written of them (ibid. cont.:) BUT HIS SOUL (i.e. the soul of the Holy One) HATES THE WICKED AND THE LOVER OF INJUSTICE. David said (in Ps. 128:1): BLESSED IS EVERYONE WHO FEARS THE LORD AND WALKS IN HIS WAYS.
Another interpretation (of I Sam. 2:9): HE SHALL PROTECT THE FEET OF HIS SAINTS. When Jacob set out from his father's house, he set out with only his staff, as stated (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): FOR WITH < ONLY > MY STAFF DID I CROSS THIS JORDAN. The Holy One said to Isaac: Did your father, Abraham, do this to you? Did he not give you everything that he had? It is so stated (in Gen. 25:5): BUT ABRAHAM GAVE ALL THAT HE HAD TO ISAAC. < There is > also this (in Gen. 24:2): SO ABRAHAM SAID UNTO THE SENIOR SERVANT OF HIS HOUSE, THE ONE WHO RULED OVER ALL THAT HE HAD. R. Samuel bar Isaac said: What is the meaning of THE ONE WHO RULED? When he had made him a ruler over all that he had, he said: Even if you < must > give away everything that belongs to me, take a wife for my son from there. (Gen. 24:10:) THEN THE SERVANT TOOK TEN CAMELS FROM THE CAMELS OF HIS MASTER, AND WENT WITH ALL HIS MASTER'S GOODS IN HIS HAND. This refers to a diatheke (The Greek words means “covenant.”) {gift certificate} which he carried in his hand. (See Gen. R. 59:11 and some versions of PRE 16. Both use the word diatheke in this context. Cf. Gen. R. 61:6.) (Ergo, in Gen. 25:5:) BUT ABRAHAM GAVE ALL THAT HE HAD TO ISAAC. The servant began distributing earrings to one woman, necklaces (Lat.: catellae.) to another, and rings to still another. This is what the text means (in Prov. 11:24): THERE IS ONE WHO DISPENSES LIBERALLY AND STILL INCREASES. The Holy One has blessed him. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 25:11): AND IT CAME TO PASS AFTER THE DEATH OF ABRAHAM THAT GOD BLESSED HIS SON ISAAC. But Isaac did not do so for Jacob. Instead he had him set out empty-handed. The Holy One said (in Prov. 11:24, cont.): ANOTHER HOLDS BACK FROM WHAT IS RIGHT, YET THE RESULT IS WANT. And what happened to him (Isaac)? The Divine Presence departed from him. So you find him (the Holy One) speaking with him only when he died. Come and see what Esau the Wicked did to Jacob. He saw him empty-handed and did not show him mercy. Instead he said: See, I am ahead of him, and he cannot pass me on the way. So I will kill him there. And where is it shown? Where the prophet said so (in Amos 1:11): < THUS SAYS THE LORD: FOR THREE TRANSGRESSIONS OF EDOM AND FOR FOUR I WILL NOT RESCIND IT (the punishment) > BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD. Jacob knew < about it > and raised his eyes to the Holy One. Now he had performed miracles with him (Jacob); so he put {his staff for him in his hand} [his staff into the Jordan]. Then the Jordan divided for him, and he crossed. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): FOR WITH MY STAFF DID I CROSS THIS JORDAN. So Esau was waiting on the way, but Jacob did not pass on the way. When Esau perceived that Jacob had fled and crossed the Jordan, what did he do? He pursued him and found him in a cave, a place like the bath that is in Tiberias. (Cf. Gen. R. 75:5.) Jacob had said: There is no bread and no food at hand. I shall go in and get warm in the bath. Esau the Wicked came and had the bath surrounded the so that he would die in it. The Holy One said to him: < Since > you are the most wicked man in the world, are you to be paired (The verb is related to the Greek noun zeugos (“yoke of beasts”).) against him? Immediately the Holy One said to Jacob: What are you afraid of? See, I am with you. Jacob said to him: Sovereign of the World, inasmuch as I am trusting you and you are making me a promise, I will have trust [and set out. (Gen. 28:10:) AND JACOB SET OUT FROM BEERSHEBA].
Another interpretation (of Gen. 34:1): NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT. But < had she gone out > from sin? After all, Jacob had said (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): I AM UNWORTHY OF ALL THE KINDNESSES. R. Aha said: < The Holy One said >: I have nourished your ancestors from their < good > deeds, but you say: I AM UNWORTHY! The Holy One said to him: Jacob, < it is > through your righteousness < that > I have done all these miracles of which you say that you are unworthy. But look, she is going out; yet your merit shall remain for you. (Gen. 34:1:) NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT.
It is written (in Ps. 50:14): SACRIFICE A THANK OFFERING TO GOD. When Jacob left his father's house, he left with nothing but his staff, as stated (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): WITH ONLY MY STAFF I CROSSED THIS JORDAN. Immediately Jacob had made a vow before the Holy One, as stated (in Gen. 28:20): THEN JACOB VOWED A VOW. What is written at the end of the passage (in vs. 22)? AND OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME. But, when he enriched him, as stated (in Gen. 30:43): SO THE MAN (Jacob) BECAME VERY VERY PROSPEROUS, he forgot his vow. Immediately he provoked Laban against him, as stated (in Gen. 31:23): SO HE (Laban) TOOK HIS RELATIVES WITH HIM < AND PURSUED HIM (Jacob) SEVEN DAYS' JOURNEY >. When he had escaped from Laban, Esau was incited against him. Immediately the angel appeared to him. He said to him: Are you not aware of all this trouble? Why has all the trouble come over you? Because you have been late with your vow. Jacob said to him (in Gen. 32:30 [29]) {WHAT IS} [PLEASE TELL] YOUR NAME. He said to him (ibid.): WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? Sometimes the angel is made into a spirit, as stated (in Ps. 104:4): HE HAS MADE HIS ANGELS SPIRITS. Sometimes he is made a into lightning bolt, as stated (in Job 38:35): CAN YOU SEND FORTH LIGHTNINGS SO THAT THEY GO? But as for the miracles (of transformation), he (God) acts himself. And so the angel said to Manoah (in Jud. 13:18): YOU ARE NOT TO ASK MY NAME. (Gen. 32:30 [29]:) WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? (Yalqut Shim‘oni, Jud., 69, explains that names are useless because the angel would not know into what form God might change him.) Immediately the angel blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE BLESSED HIM THERE. (Hos. 12:5 [4]:) SO HE STROVE WITH AN ANGEL AND PREVAILED. What did he say to him? Go, fulfill your vow. (Eccl. 5:4 [5]:) IT IS BETTER NOT TO VOW < THAN TO VOW AND NOT FULFILL >. What did Simeon and Levi do immediately? TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, [SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD] … < AND KILLED EVERY MALE >. < Jacob > immediately fell on his face and did not get up until < the Holy One > gave him permission (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. So also with Joshua (according to Josh. 7:6 & 10): [AND HE FELL ON HIS FACE] < .. . > THEN THE LORD SAID UNTO JOSHUA: ARISE, GO. WHY IS IT THAT YOU FALL UPON YOUR FACE? So also with David (according to I Chron. 21:16): SO DAVID AND THE ELDERS, COVERED IN SACKCLOTH, FELL UPON THEIR FACES. Then what was said to him (in II Sam. 24:18)? GO UP, ERECT AN ALTAR TO THE LORD ON THE THRESHING FLOOR OF ARAUNAH. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. He immediately journeyed with his whole house; and the Holy One put his fear upon all about him, as stated (in Gen. 35:5): AND, AS THEY JOURNEYED, A TERROR FROM GOD CAME < UPON THE CITIES THAT WERE ROUND ABOUT THEM >. It is also stated (in Deut. 28:10): AND ALL THE PEOPLES OF THE EARTH SHALL SEE THAT THE NAME OF THE LORD IS PROCLAIMED OVER YOU, AND THEY SHALL BE AFRAID OF YOU.
(Numb. 8:6:) “Take the Levites.” This text is related (to Ps. 11:5), “The Lord tests the righteous.” The Holy One, blessed be He, does not elevate a person to an office until He first tests and examines him. (Numb. R. 15:12.) When he withstands his test, He elevates him to the office. And so you find in the case of our father Abraham; when the Holy One, blessed be He, tested him with ten temptations, he withstood his trials. Then after that He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 24:1), “And the Lord blessed Abraham in all things.” So also in the case of Isaac, when He tested him with the days of Abimelech, he withstood the trial. Then after that He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 26:12), “So Isaac sowed on that land […] for the Lord had blessed him.” So also in the case of Jacob, when He tested him by means of all those tribulations with Esau, with Rachel, with Dinah, with Joseph, with Simeon, with Benjamin and [with the tribulation of] how he departed from the house of his father and his mother (in Gen. 32:11), “for with [only] my staff did I cross [this Jordan].” Then after that He blessed him. It is so stated (in Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came from Paddan-Aram, and blessed him.” So also in the case of Joseph, He tested him with all of those tribulations, with the wife of Potiphar and he was imprisoned for twelve years. Then after that he came out and became king because he had withstood his trial. Ergo (in Ps. 11:5), “The Lord tests the righteous.” So also in the case of the tribe of Levi, they laid down their lives for the sanctification of the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, (i.e. for martyrdom), so that the Torah would not be set aside. Now when Israel was in Egypt, they had rejected the Torah and circumcision and all of them had become worshipers of idols, as Ezekiel has demonstrated where it is stated (in Ezek. 20:5), “And you shall say unto them, ‘Thus says the Lord God, “In the day that I chose Israel […].”’” Then what is written at the end (in vs. 8)? “But they rebelled against Me and did not come to hearken unto Me; each man did not cast away [the abominations of their eyes nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt].” What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He brought darkness upon Egypt for three days, and during those [days] he killed all the wicked ones of Israel. For this reason it says (in Ezek. 20:36-38), “[As I brought your ancestors to judgment in the desert of the land of Egypt….] So will I remove from you those who rebel and transgress against Me.” So also it says (in Cant. 2:13), “And the fig tree sheds (Heb.: hanetah. Although the biblical context suggests a translation such as “puts forth” or “ripens” the context understands this rare verb in a more negative sense. See above vol. 2, p. 62 Tanh. (Buber); Exod. 3:7).) its green figs…,” these are the wicked who are in Israel; (ibid. cont.) “and the vines in blossom give off fragrance,” these are the rest who have repented and been accepted; (ibid. cont.) “arise, my beloved, my fair one, and come away,” for behold the time of redemption has arrived. However all those in the tribe of Levi were righteous and carried out the Torah. It is so stated (in Deut. 33:9), “For they observed Your word,” i.e., the Torah; (ibid. cont.) “and kept Your covenant,” i.e., circumcision. And not only that, but when Israel made the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate there, as stated (in Exod. 32:26), “So Moses stood up on the gate of the camp and said, ‘Whoever is for the Lord come to me,’ and all the Children of Levi gathered unto him.” When Moses said (in vs. 27), “Each [of you] put his sword on his thigh…,” they immediately did so. Moreover they did not show partiality. And so Moses blesses them, [namely (according Deut. 33:9)], “The one who says of his father and mother, ‘I do not consider them’ and his brother….” When the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that they all were righteous, that He had tested them and they had withstood their trial – as stated (of Levi in Deut. 33:8), “[Your faithful one,] whom You tested at Massah” – the Holy One, blessed be He, immediately said (in Numb. 8:14), “And the Levites shall belong to Me,” to fulfill what is stated (in Ps. 11:5), “The Lord tests the righteous.” In the case of the wicked, however, it is written of them (ibid. cont.), “but His soul (i.e. The soul of the Holy One, blessed be He,) hates the wicked and the lover of injustice.” David said (in Ps. 128:1), “Fortunate is everyone who fears the Lord and walks in His ways.”
R. Jacob BeRabbi said: I have searched the entire Scripture and have found no statement that Jacob went to Seir. When did he go there? After he departed for the hereafter, as it is said: And a savior shall come up on Mount Zion (Obad. 21); Therefore, And he loved Jacob suggests that though he associates with Esau and partakes of the pleasures of this world, in the world-to-come, He spreadeth abroad his wings, beareth them upon his pinions … the Lord alone did lead him (Deut. 32:11–12). And so, Solomon said: Let them be thine own, and not strangers’ with thee (Prov. 5:17).
A lady asked of R. Yosé the son of Halafta: “In how many days did the Holy One, blessed be He, create the world?” “In six days,” he replied, “as it is written: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth (Exod. 20:1).” “What has He been doing since then?” she asked. “He has been erecting ladders,” he answered, “upon which one ascends and another descends; one becomes wealthy and the other poor.” You know this to be so from the fact that it is written with reference to Jacob’s going to Aram-naharaim: With my staff I passed over this Jordan (Gen. 32:11). And he took one of the stones of that place and put under his head (ibid. 28:11). Surely, if he had owned a mattress or a cushion he would have placed them under his head, yet after he joined Laban’s household he became wealthy, as is said: And the man increased exceedingly (ibid. 30:43). Why did he become wealthy? Because of the power of the blessings his father had bestowed upon him, as it is said: And give thee the blessing of Abraham (ibid. 28:4). What was Abraham’s blessing? And the Lord blessed Abraham in all things (ibid. 24:1). After his return from Laban’s house, the Holy One, blessed be He, said: Now I must bless him Myself. Immediately, the Holy One, blessed be He, appeared before him and blessed him, as it is said: And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came from Padan-aram, and blessed him (ibid. 35:9).
Let Israel say, "It is not becoming for a person to say that he is good about himself, unless others testify to his goodness." And who testifies to the goodness of the Lord? Jacob said, "The kindness you have shown me is not for a day or a year, but for eternity," as it is written, "I am unworthy of all the kindness and faithfulness you have shown your servant" (Genesis 32:11). They asked him, "How many kindnesses has He done for you?" He replied, "They have no measure," as it is written, "God has shepherded me" (Genesis 48:15). Let Israel say, "What did I do to them in Egypt? And what did I pay them in the desert?" (Exodus 13:8) "And the Lord goes before them by day." (Exodus 13:21) "And what did they do to me at Sinai?" (Exodus 24:7) "All that the Lord has spoken, we will do and obey." At that moment, it was said, "I remember the kindness of your youth." (Jeremiah 2:2) Let Israel say, "Let the house of Aaron say, 'God is good, for His kindness is eternal.'" This can be compared to a homeowner who treated his workers well, but at the time of accounting, he did not scrutinize their work. At the time of threshing, he would serve them the best wine, but they did not know what was going on behind the scenes. Who knows his servants and his palace attendants? And who are the servants of the Lord? The sons of Aaron, who offer sacrifices to Him at all times.
"A Psalm of David. Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; preserve me from the violent man; Solomon said (Proverbs 4:6), 'Do not forsake wisdom, and she will keep you.' (Proverbs 6:22) 'When you walk, they will lead you; when you lie down, they will watch over you.' So said the Lord to David, 'It is your desire that I preserve you; I will preserve you and keep you in the Torah,' as it says (Proverbs 4:13), 'Keep her, for she is your life.' Your desire is that I rescue you from the hand of the wicked; sing for joy before Me, and I will deliver you.' (Psalm 32:7) 'Sing for joy, O daughter of Zion; shout aloud, O Israel! Be glad and rejoice with all your heart, O daughter of Jerusalem!' Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; who is he, but Esau the wicked? And what is his evil? Death. So said the Lord, 'When I redeem you from the hand of death, I will redeem you,' as it says (Hosea 13:14), 'I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death.' Death is the evil that Esau has done. Therefore it is said, 'Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man,' (Psalm 140:1) and Jacob also said, 'Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man.' (Genesis 32:12) 'And what kind of evil is it that a violent person does? Protect me from the hand of the oppressor.' And what was the oppression? (Genesis 32:14-15) 'He spent the night there, and from what he had with him he took a present for his brother Esau: two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams.' This was not oppression. And so it says (Obadiah 1:10), 'Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you.'" Israel said, "The mountains will be cut off forever, and whatever was swallowed up will be swallowed up." Then the Lord said, "I will bring them out from between their teeth," as it is written (Psalm 68:23), "God said, 'I will bring them back from Bashan.'" Therefore, it is said, "Protect me from the hands of the wicked, who have thought evil thoughts in their hearts," etc. What does it mean to have evil thoughts in the heart? It does not mean that it is only hidden in one's heart and not spoken aloud. Rather, it means that one thinks evil thoughts in the heart. When they think of evil, they are not only thinking of themselves but also of others, as it is written (Obadiah 1:18), "The house of Jacob will be a fire," etc. This is also expressed in Daniel 7:7-8, "I looked at these horns and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, and it uprooted three of the horns with eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth uttering great boasts." Looking at God, one speaks harsh and reviling words. It is written (Daniel 7:11), "I watched until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire."
Another thing to the conductor, to serve God. What did David see fit to say to the servant of God? To teach you that anyone who repents for their sins, the Almighty adds honor to them and calls them a beloved name. Come and see this in the case of the sons of Korah: until they repented, they were not called beloved, but after they repented, they were called beloved (Psalms 45:1). To the conductor, on Shoshanim. When they repented, they were called friends, as it says, "To the conductor, on the Shoshanim, for the sons of Korah, a maskil, a song of friendship" (Psalms 47:1). You also find this with David, as until he repented, he was not included in the upper assembly, but after he repented, he was included in the upper assembly and was called the servant of God, to the conductor, for the servant of God. You will find that anyone who calls themselves a servant, the Almighty calls them a servant. Abraham called himself a servant (Genesis 18:3), "My lord, if now I have found favor in your sight, do not pass on by your servant." And the Almighty called him a servant (Genesis 26:24), "Because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Jacob called himself a servant (Genesis 32:11), "I am not worthy of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which You have shown to Your servant." And the Almighty called him a servant (Isaiah 44:1), "But now listen, O Jacob, My servant." Moses called himself a servant (Deuteronomy 3:24), "O Lord God, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your mighty hand." And the Almighty called him a servant (Numbers 12:7), "Not so with My servant Moses." David called himself a servant (Psalms 116:16), "Truly, I am Your servant, the son of Your maidservant." And the Almighty called him a servant (2 Samuel 3:18), "By the hand of David, My servant, I will save." And there were those who did not call themselves servants, but the Almighty called them servants. Isaac did not call himself a servant, but the Almighty called him a servant (Exodus 32:13), "Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants." Joshua did not call himself a servant, but he was called a servant (Joshua 24:29), "And Joshua, the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died.
Rabbi Eliezer said: The five letters of the Torah, which alone of all the letters in the Torah are of double (shape), all appertain to the mystery of the Redemption. With "Khaph" "Khaph" our father Abraham was redeemed from Ur of the Chaldees, as it is said, (Lekh Lekha) "Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred… unto the land that I will shew thee" (Gen. 12:1). With "Mem" "Mem" our father Isaac was redeemed from the land of the Philistines, as it is said, "Go from us: for thou art much mightier (Memennu M'ôd) than we" (Gen. 26:16). With "Nun" "Nun" our father Jacob was redeemed from the hand of Esau, as it is said, "Deliver me, I pray thee, (Hazilêne na) from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau" (Gen. 32:11). With "Pê" "Pê" Israel was redeemed from Egypt, as it is said, "I have surely visited you, (Paḳôd Paḳadti) and (seen) that which is done to you in Egypt, and I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt" (Ex. 3:16, 17). With "Zaddi" "Zaddi" the Holy One, blessed be He, in the future will redeem Israel from the oppression of the kingdoms, and He will say to them, I have caused a branch to spring forth for you, as it is said, "Behold, the man whose name is (Zemach) the Branch; and he shall grow up (yizmach) || out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord" (Zech. 6:12). These letters were delivered only to our father Abraham. Our father Abraham delivered them to Isaac, and Isaac (delivered them) to Jacob, and Jacob delivered the mystery of the Redemption to Joseph, as it is said, "But God will surely visit (Paḳôd yiphḳôd) you" (Gen. 1. 24). Joseph his son delivered the secret of the Redemption to his brethren. Asher, the son of Jacob, delivered the mystery of the Redemption to Serach his daughter. When Moses and Aaron came to the elders of Israel and performed the signs in their sight, the elders of Israel went to Serach, the daughter of Asher, and they said to her: A certain man has come, and he has performed signs in our sight, thus and thus. She said to them: There is no reality in the signs. They said to her: He said "Paḳôd yiphḳôd"—"God will surely visit you" (ibid.). She said to them: He is the man who will redeem Israel in the future from Egypt, for thus did I hear, ("Paḳôd Paḳadti") "I have surely visited you" (Ex. 3:16). Forthwith the people believed in their God and in His messenger, as it is said, "And the people believed, and when they heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel" (Ex. 4:31).
23) What was their death like? Two strands of fire came forth from the holy of holies and parted into four. Two entered the nostrils of one, and two, the nostrils of the other, burning their bodies and leaving their garments intact, viz. (Tehillim 33:25): "And a fire came forth from before the L–rd (i.e., from the holy of holies) etc." Aaron stood in astonishment, saying: Woe unto me! There must be transgression in me and in my sons that such has befallen me! Thereupon Moses entered and comforted him, saying: Aaron, my brother, from Sinai it was revealed to me: I (the L–rd) am destined to consecrate this house (the mishkan) — I will do so with a great man. I thought to myself that the house will be consecrated either through me or through you. We find now that your two sons are greater than both of us, the house having been consecrated through them. When Aaron heard this, he vindicated G d's judgment upon him and he was silent, as it is written (Vayikra 10:3): "And Aaron kept his peace." And the righteous are wont to vindicate G d's judgment upon them. Abraham did so, viz. (Bereshith 18:27): "… and I am dust and ashes." Jacob did so, viz. (Bereshith 32:11): "I am too small for all of the lovingkindness and for all of the truth that You have conferred upon Your servant."
(Devarim 3:24) "to show Your servant": There are those who call themselves "servants," whom the Holy One Blessed be He calls "servants." And there are those who call themselves "servants," whom the Holy One Blessed be He does not call "servants." And there are those who do not call themselves "servants," whom the Holy One Blessed be He calls "servants." Abraham called himself a "servant," viz. (Bereshith 12:3) "Do not now pass away from Your servant," and the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. (Ibid. 26:24) "for the sake of Abraham, My servant." Jacob called himself a "servant," viz. (Ibid. 32:11) "I am too small for all of the lovingkindnesses and all of the truth that You have done with Your servant," and the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. (Isaiah 41:8) "But you, Israel, are My servant, Jacob, etc." Moses called himself a "servant, viz. "to show Your "servant," and the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. (Joshua 1:2) "Moses My servant is dead." David called himself a "servant," viz. (Psalms 116:16) "Heed, O L-rd, for I am Your servant," and the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. ( II Kings 19:34) "for the sake of David, My servant." Isaiah called himself a "servant," viz. (Isaiah 49:5) "… who formed me from the womb to be a servant to Him," and the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. (Ibid. 20:3) "Isaiah, My servant." Samuel called himself a "servant," but the Holy One Blessed be He did not call him a "servant." Shimshon called himself a "servant," viz. (Judges 15:18) "You have given unto the hand of Your servant, etc.", but the Holy One Blessed be He did not call him a servant. Solomon called himself a "servant," viz. (I Kings 3:9) "Give Your servant an understanding heart," and the Holy One Blessed be He did not call him a "servant," but wrought for his father's sake, viz. (I Kings 15:13) "for the sake of David, My servant." Iyyov did not call himself a "servant," but the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," (viz. Iyyov 2:3) "Have you given heart to My servant, Iyyov"? Joshua did not call himself a "servant," but Scripture called him a "servant," viz. (Joshua 24:29) "and Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the L-rd, died." Calev did not call himself a "servant," but the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. (Bamidbar 14:24) "But My servant Calev, etc." Elyakim did not call himself a "servant," but the Holy One Blessed be he called him a "servant," viz. (Isaiah 22:20) "And I will call My servant Elyakim, etc." Zerubavel did not call himself a "servant," but the Holy One Blessed be He called him a "servant," viz. (Chaggai 2:23) "Zerubavel ben Shaltiel, My servant." Daniel did not call himself a "servant," but Scripture called him a "servant," viz. (Daniel 6:21) "The king spoke and said to Daniel: Daniel, servant of the living G-d." Chananiah, Mishael, and Azaryah did not call themselves "servants," but the Holy One Blessed be He called them "servants," viz. (Daniel 6:23) "Shadrach, Meshach and Aved-nego, servants of the exalted G-d." The early prophets did not call themselves "servants," but the Holy One Blessed be He called them "servants," viz. (Amos 3:7) " … but He revealed His secret to His servants, the prophets."
"and with all your might (meodecha)": Confess (modeh) to Him, as did Jacob ("modeh," as in "meodecha"), as it is written (Bereshith 32:11) "I am too small for all of the lovingkindness and all of the truth that You have done with Your servant. For with my staff did I cross this Jordan, and now I have become two camps."
“Take the staff…” (Bamidbar 20:8) This is what the scripture says “The staff of your might the Lord will send from Zion…” (Psalms 110:2) This is the staff which was in the hand of our father Yaakov, as it says “…for with my staff I crossed…” (Genesis 32:11) And it is the staff which was in the hand of Yehudah, as it says “Your signet, your cloak, and the staff that is in your hand.” (Genesis 38:18) And it was in the hand of Moshe, as it says “And you shall take this staff in your hand…” (Exodus 4:17) And it was in the hand of Aharon, as it says “Aaron cast his staff…” (Exodus 7:10) And it was in the hand of David, as it says “And he took his staff in his hand…” (Samuel I 17:40) And it was in the hand of every king until the Holy Temple was destroyed, and so in the future that very staff will be given to the King Messiah and with it he will rule over the nations of the world in the future. Therefore it says “The staff of your might the Lord will send from Zion…” (Psalms 110:2)…
“Say not to yourselves, when the Lord your God has thrust them from your path, saying, ‘The Lord has enabled us to possess this land because of our virtues, etc.’ It is not because of your virtues and your rectitude, etc.” (Deuteronomy 9:4-5). We are warned with this not to imagine to ourselves that our success is from our righteousness and the rectitude of our hearts, but rather that we believe and know in our hearts that our success is from the kindness of the Most High and His great goodness - and like the matter that was said by our father, Jacob (Genesis 32:11), “I am unworthy of all the kindness and all the truth.”
Jacob achieved perfection in matters concerning money when he did not purchase the birthright for the material advantages this might confer upon him but for the added religious duties it imposed upon him.
קטנתי מכל החסדים . Jacob was afraid that his merits had decreased due to the many favors G–d had already showered upon him. If even our patriarch Jacob felt that way, what shall we sinners say, who are so much inferior to our patriarchs? A person must therefore live very frugally so that he does not squander the few merits he has accumulated, even if he performed a lot of charitable deeds, etc.
Jacob attained the distinction of ים, seeing that he said of himself כי במקלי עברת את הירדן הזה, "Originally I crossed this river Jordan with no more than my walking staff." Bereshit Rabbah 76, 5 states that the crossing of the Sea of Reeds by the Israelites became possible through the merit acquired by Jacob when he crossed the Jordan on his way to Laban, relying only on G–d for he was bereft of material possessions. Jacob merited the horizon of the sun, (רקיע), that the sun set or shone especially for him, as we know from Genesis 32, 32: "The sun shone for him." Jacob also merited a special relation with the "throne" of G–d in that we have a tradition that his features were engraved on it.
My merit has been depleted by all the favors and the fulfillment of Your promises." According to Rabbi Aba in Bereshit Rabbah 76,5 the word קטונתי, means that Jacob felt unworthy of all the favors he had experienced at the hands of G–d. Rabbi Levi, however, feels that Jacob had felt entitled to receive favors, but had exhausted his merits by so doing. Both Rabbis are quite correct. Jacob's remarks expressed both his feelings vis-a-vis Esau and his feelings vis-a-vis Samael. Concerning his standing vis-a-vis Esau, Jacob expressed concern that the very favors he had experienced up to now might place him in a disadvantageous position, for Esau had not been recompensed for his merits. We know from Shabbat 32a that a miracle performed for someone draws on his accumulated merits. The Talmud derives this principle from our verse. Rashi understands the verse in the latter sense. We must conclude that Jacob appealed to G–d at this point to perform a miracle for him now too, in order to save him from Esau. When he invoked the four-lettered Name of G–d, we see a similarity to Psalms 20, 8: ’אלה ברכב ואלה בסוסים ואחנו בשם ה' אלוקינו נזכיר, "They (call) on chariots, they (call) on horses, but we call on the name of the LORD our G–d," for true salvation is G–d's domain. Not feeling morally entitled, Jacob pleaded with G–d to perform the miracle for the sake of His Name. Regarding his imminent confrontation with Samael, however, he said: קטונתי מכל האמת, he invoked his own specific attribute of “אמת,” as we have explained repeatedly in connection with Michah 7,20: תתן אמת ליעקב, "You will keep faith with Jacob." This attribute is a reference to the Torah which is known as תורת אמת, in other words the Torah was given to the people of Israel through this attribute of Jacob. According to the Kabbalists the Torah originates in the upper regions of Heaven, a region where the attribute of Jacob is at home. Jacob is described in the Torah as being איש תם, "a perfect individual residing in the 'tents' of Torah” (Genesis 25,27). The expression קטונתי, "I am too insignificant, too unworthy," may be understood better when we compare it to the last Mishnah in tractate Sotah 49, where we are told that after the death of Rabbi Yossi the “קטנותא,” there were no longer any men deserving the title "the pious one." If Rabbi Yossi was so pious, why does the Mishnah refer to him as "the little one?" According to Rashi the meaning is that Rabbi Yossi was the least pious of all the pious men preceding him. According to Maimonides it means that Rabbi Yossi was the "root" of all the pious men, and the root is by nature something that has small beginnings. Jacob then alluded to the process of attaining significance as being one that commences by one's being small, קטן. This is also why Jacob is popularly known as יעקב הקטן, "little Jacob." In his entreaty to G–d to save him from Samael, Jacob referred to this when he said: קטונתי. When Rabbi Levi said in the Midrash that Jacob meant: "I was deserving, he meant "but now I have become 'small' seeing that my merits may have been used up."
כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן . Rashi understands this to be a reference to the fact that Jacob did not have either silver or gold with him. He used these words vis-a-vis Esau in order to convince him that he, Jacob, had not seen his father's blessing fulfilled, just as Rashi explained earlier when Jacob had acknowledged to be the owner of flocks, herds, men servants and maid servants. ועתה הייתי לשני מחנות, "now I have become two camps," was meant to also show that none of this wealth was related to the blessings bestowed on him by Isaac. Rashi adds a homiletic explanation, that the "staff" that Jacob had crossed the Jordan with was endowed with the power to split the waters of that river for him, and enable him to cross. This indicates that Jacob certainly had great merits. He wanted G–d to remind Samael of this so that the latter should not even entertain the thought of successfully challenging Jacob on moral grounds.
ותמת דבורה, “Deborah died;” Rashi explains why the Torah suddenly inserts this statement and how it is relevant. We never knew that she was part of Yaakov’s entourage. After all, Yaakov himself had said that when he crossed the river Jordan the first time he had been accompanied only by his walking stick (Compare Genesis 32,11) Rivkah had told Yaakov (Genesis 27,4445) that she would let him know when it was safe to return, when Esau’s wrath had cooled off. She had dispatched Deborah to Padan Arom to inform Yaakov of this. Yaakov had not been willing to return already. Deborah remained with him in the house of Lavan and passed away on the journey on the way back to the land of Canaan. When she had been mentioned the first time (Genesis 24,59) she had only been described as Rivkah’s nursemaid; now the Torah supplied her name.
ועצי שטים, “and acacia wood.” Actually, the word שטים is a notrikon, an acrostic composed of the respective first letters in the words: שלום, טובה, ישועה, מחילה, “peace, goodness, salvation, and pardon.” There were some forests in the desert from which the Israelites were able to cut boards which they called shittim. This is also why we read in Joshua 2,1 that “Joshua sent out spies from (the forest around Shittim)” This is also what the prophet Isaiah referred to (Isaiah 41,19) when he wrote (in the name of the Lord) אתן במדבר ארז ,שיטה, והדס, “I will plant cedars in the deserts, acacias and myrtles, and oleasters.“ This is a very lightweight wood and it is very smooth. If we needed any proof that its wood was very light, consider the size of the boards of the Tabernacle’s which were 48 in number. Add two silver sockets for each board, i.e. 96 sockets, add all the upright boards use to surround the courtyard of the Tabernacle, which all had to be transported only by four wagons pulled by eight oxen, as spelled out in Numbers 4,29. Even though each board was 10 cubits high (6 meters) and their thickness was 1 cubit (60cm) and you will realise that unless the wood itself was extremely light, all of this could not have been pulled by only eight oxen. The other four oxen had to pull the weight of the carpets (4 layers) which formed the “roof” of the Tabernacle. We have been told in addition that the בריח התיכון, (Exodus 36,33), the center bolt, used to be Yaakov’s walking staff, the one with which he had crossed the river Jordan on his way to Lavan. Rashi claims that the shittim wood were trees that Yaakov had planted in Egypt as soon as he had come to Egypt, which the Israelites uprooted and took with them when departing from Egypt and which were used now to make the boards for the Tabernacle from. This is also what the liturgist bases himself on. Another interpretation found in the Midrash is that this was wood from the staff Yaakov had .taken with him on the way to Lavan. [I suppose that what the Midrash means is that Yaakov had planted that walking staff in the earth in Charan already, and it had developed. Ed.] This is why he had referred to it in Genesis 32,11, as a symbol of G–d’s providence guiding him during all the years he had been at Lavan. Ed.] It is not surprising therefore that he took those trees with him also to Egypt.
This (chapter) will explain (1. In commenting on this chapter of Genesis in Maṣref La-Kesef (MK II 53), Kaspi says, “the explanation of this vision will be found in the Gevia‘.”) the second vision of Abraham, which begins: “And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, and the Lord appeared unto Abram and said unto him, ‘I am God Almighty; walk before me and be thou whole-hearted.’” (2. Gen. 17:1.) I have already discussed the name “God” (’El), and the name “Almighty” (Shaddai) in many places, where I have pointed out that (the Torah) ascribes these weak names to the Lord, in the context of the command to be fruitful and multiply, (3. Maṣref La-Kesef (MK II 53). In that work (MK II 143) Kaspi explains that Shaddai is superior to ’El. Kaspi’s explanation of the names of God is discussed above in Chapter 3. On the name Shaddai, see above chap. IV, n. 13.) both here and in the context of Jacob. (4. Gen. 32:11.) For this reason this (verse) does not use “I am the Lord …” (At the same time) I do not insist that this (explanation of that name) is certain and necessary, for it is not (necessarily) acceptable to everyone. I do say, however, that this explanation is the best and most exact, in accordance with Maimonides’ fifth cause of contradiction, i.e., substitution and change. (5. The Guide, Introduction. The use of this method of contradictions in Kaspi’s exegesis is discussed above pp. 42–43.)
[HOVERED.] Merachefet (hovered) means “blowing above the waters.” As an eagle…Hovereth (yerachef) over her young (Deut. 32:11), is similar.
Translator's Summary: With a keen sense of justice, the Maggid and his commentators wrestle with the motivation for Israel’s subligation. On the one hand, God decrees that Israel will be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years. On the other hand, Israel’s suffering appears unfair; there must be a reason for Israel’s subjugation. And if Israel deserved the fate that was visited upon them, why did it end sooner than was originally decreed? Further, why did God wait as long as he did to redeem the people of Israel? Chida wrestles with these questions. “And God heard our voice,” as it is said, “Adonai heard their moaning….” to the end of teh verse. It's possible the Maggid had a problem with this verse. It should have said, “And we cried out to Adonai and God took us out.” The verse implies that it was better that “God heard our voice.” Furthermore, since the verse said, “And Adonai heard our voice,” it should have immediately said, “And God took us out.” Why was it necessary to add, “And God saw our affliction;” This seems obvious. Further, it states, “He heard our voice,” and that “He saw our affliction.” Shouldn’t the seeing have been before the hearing since everything is revealed to God? The Maggid interprets the verse as we shall now explain it with the help of God in order to answer these questions. This matter is related to what the sages said about the verse, “I am unworthy of all the kindness…” (Gen 32:11) “Unworthy (katonti) means little (mi’at) and little (mi’at) alludes to tzedakah, charity, as it says, “Better a little (mi’at) with charity (tzedakah). (Pro. 16:8)” (Eliyahu Zuta 1:1) The great rabbi of his generation, Rabbi Chaim Abulafia, (Rabbinical authority; born in Palestine; died at Damascus, 1744. He was the grandfather of Ḥayyim ben David Abulafia and grandson of Isaac Nissim aben Gamil. Abulafia was a rabbi in Smyrna, where he instituted many wholesome regulations. In his old age he restored Tiberias. He is the author of several works. (JE)) writes in his illuminating book Eitz HaChaim, Parshat Vayakhel, in the name of the pious one, Rabbi Yudah Chavliv, that the Holy Ari said that in times of danger a person needs to mention his own virtues. How then could Jacob belittle his own virtues with regard to his acts of kindness? Rabbi Abulafia understood this differently. He is saying that Jacob decreased his possessions.. through acts of charity so that God would save him. According to this interpretation, when Israel cried out, they had to explain why they deserved to be taken out of Egypt before the assigned time. They were, however, sorely oppressed, as it says, “The Egyptians dealt harshly with us and they oppressed us and placed hard labor upon us...” All these things should have been obvious. So what was the purpose of crying out? Weren’t these things part of the earlier decree in which God told Abraham, “They shall enslave them and oppress them?” So why were they moaning? In His great compassion, God heard their voice when they said that there was a claim to change in favor of their merit and to take them out. This was so even though they only mentioned the pain of slavery. Thus, when it says, “Adonai heard their voice,” - it means that in His great mercy, God heard their voice and not their intention. Scripture states, “And God heard our moaning.” It was not appropriate that Israel did not mention their merits. Still, God’s compassion was aroused and He remembered His covenant. In this way God’s compassion was aroused by remembering the virtues of our forefathers even though they didn’t explicitly state them. “And He saw our affliction” - this is the forced separation of husbands and wives.” God saw this even though he never demanded it of the Egyptians. “And our misery,” these are the children,” because of their wickedness. (Killing the male children.) And our oppression,” This is a reference to the persecution and harsh subjugation which was the main reason that brought about the conclusion of slavery. The forced separation of couples, the decree to kill the Israelite boys, and the harsh labor brought about a quicker conclusion of the subjugation. Also the Egyptians deserved to be stricken with harsh plagues for their abominations. This is what the verse means. Of their own volition the Egyptians chose to deal harshly with the Israelites since God did not decree the cessation of family life or to drown the baby boys or place harsh labor upon Israel while they were subjugated. The Holy Ari said that when we interpret the passage in this way, it is like mentioning the merits of the Israelites. These acts became advocates against the judgment. Even though everything is known to God, there still a need for there to be an advocate who can argue on one’s behalf. When these things were stated in heaven they became merits for Israel and it aroused God’s compassion...
Rabbi Yannai would examine the ferry and cross. The Gemara comments that Rabbi Yannai acted in accordance with his reasoning stated elsewhere, as he said: A person should never stand in a place of danger saying that they on High will perform a miracle for him, lest in the end they do not perform a miracle for him. And, moreover, even if they do perform a miracle for him, they will deduct it from his merits. Rabbi Ḥanin said: What is the verse that alludes to this? When Jacob said: “I am not worthy of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which You have shown unto Your servant” (Genesis 32:11), and he explains: Since You have bestowed upon me so much kindness and truth, my merits have been diminished. Similarly, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Zeira would not go out and walk among the palm trees on a day when there was a southern wind blowing due to the fear that the trees might fall on him.
The Gemara explains: Rav Adda bar Ahava holds in accordance with this statement, as Rabbi Yannai said: A person should never stand in a place of danger and say: A miracle will be performed for me, and I will escape unharmed, lest a miracle is not performed for him. And if you say that a miracle will be performed for him, they will deduct it from his merits. Rav Ḥanan said: What is the verse that alludes to this idea? As it is written: “I have become small from all the mercies and all the truth that You have showed Your servant” (Genesis 32:11). In other words, the more benevolence one receives from God, the more his merit is reduced.
I am unworthy [My merits are few] because of all the kindness and of all the faithfulness [goodness] that you have done with Your servant; for I crossed over this Jordan [only] with my staff [alone], and now I have become two camps.
I am altogether less than any of the (acts of) goodness and truth which Thou hast exercised towards Thy servant: for with my staff, alone, I passed this Jardena, and now I am become two bands.
| הַצִּילֵ֥נִי נָ֛א מִיַּ֥ד אָחִ֖י מִיַּ֣ד עֵשָׂ֑ו כִּֽי־יָרֵ֤א אָנֹכִי֙ אֹת֔וֹ פֶּן־יָב֣וֹא וְהִכַּ֔נִי אֵ֖ם עַל־בָּנִֽים׃ | 12 J | Deliver me, I pray, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau; else, I fear, he may come and strike me down, mothers and children alike. |
Genesis 32,11. “please save me from my brother, i.e. from Esau;” Esau represents the negative side of the emanations, Satan, the angel of death, the evil urge within us. Yaakov prays that his brother should not turn out to be a Satan in disguise, just as the evil urge sometimes portrays something sinful as if it were a good deed, a מצוה, so as to enable us to salvage our conscience when following his advice.
Genesis 32,12. “seeing that You have said to me that ‘I will keep doing good for you.’” The meaning of the repetition היטב איטיב is that the “goodness” that G’d will perform for Yaakov is of the kind that everyone around him can recognize as such. There are acts of loving kindness performed by G’d for individuals who recognize them as such, as for instance, when G’d answered a prayer of theirs; on the other hand, prayers in which the petitioner asked for something that no one else was aware of as being an object of that person’s longing, even when fulfilled, will not be seen by outsiders as benevolent acts of G’d. Something that appears to be a curse when viewed by one person, is viewed as a blessing by another person. Yaakov reminds G’d that He had promised him the kind of help that would be recognized by one and all as a special blessing.
“And You have promised me that You will do good to me” (Bereishis 32:12). Could it be that Yaakov would question Hashem and imply a contradiction in His promises? Rather, we can explain that Yaakov's fear and concern were for his descendants in future generations. Yaakov acknowledged that if his descendants were not chosen and unique to Hashem, and if all of creation did not depend on them, he would not be afraid just because they are his children. However, since Hashem promised that his descendants would be as numerous as the sand of the sea and blessed, Yaakov sought mercy for them, knowing their significance in Hashem's plan.
מיד אחי, מיד עשו, from (the hand of) my brother, from (the hand of) Esau.” If Yaakov had only referred to Esau as “my brother,” it could have referred to any blood relative. If he had referred to Esau only by his name, it could have been understood as referring to anyone named Esau. [Yaakov had used the same caution when spelling out for whom he would serve Lavan for his future wife, i.e. “your younger daughter, Rachel.” (29,18) Ed.]
מיד אחי, מיד עשו, from (the hand of) my brother, from (the hand of) Esau.” If Yaakov had only referred to Esau as “my brother,” it could have referred to any blood relative. If he had referred to Esau only by his name, it could have been understood as referring to anyone named Esau. [Yaakov had used the same caution when spelling out for whom he would serve Lavan for his future wife, i.e. “your younger daughter, Rachel.” (29,18) Ed.] פן יבא והכני אם על בנים, “lest he come and smite me both mother and children.” Yaakov implied that if this were to happen, G-d forbid, how could the promises G-d had made to him that his children would develop into numerous tribes (28,13) come true. A different exegesis of this phrase: Yaakov was not at all concerned about being killed himself because he had G-d’s assurances. He was only concerned about the lives of his wives and children, concerning whom he did not have G-d’s assurance. G-d had only promised him personally that He would bring him safely back to his home (even though it might entail many detours, i.e. בכל אשר תלך), “wherever you will go” (28,15). This is why he specifically spelled this out with the words: אם על בנים, “mother and children.” Use of the preposition על in the sense of “with,” also occurs in Numbers 28,10: על עולת התמיד, “with the daily burnt offering,” as well as in Numbers 19,5: על פרשה ישרף, “it is to be burned with its dung.”
פן יבא והכני אם על בנים, “lest he come and smite me both mother and children.” Yaakov implied that if this were to happen, G-d forbid, how could the promises G-d had made to him that his children would develop into numerous tribes (28,13) come true. A different exegesis of this phrase: Yaakov was not at all concerned about being killed himself because he had G-d’s assurances. He was only concerned about the lives of his wives and children, concerning whom he did not have G-d’s assurance. G-d had only promised him personally that He would bring him safely back to his home (even though it might entail many detours, i.e. בכל אשר תלך), “wherever you will go” (28,15). This is why he specifically spelled this out with the words: אם על בנים, “mother and children.” Use of the preposition על in the sense of “with,” also occurs in Numbers 28,10: על עולת התמיד, “with the daily burnt offering,” as well as in Numbers 19,5: על פרשה ישרף, “it is to be burned with its dung.”
כי ירא אנכי אותו, “for I am afraid of him.” How could Yaakov still be afraid of Esau after all the assurances of support he had received from G–d? One sage answered that the answer to this question is found immediately in the words uttered by Yaakov himself. He refers to how he had set out on his journey to Lavan with nothing but his walking stick, whereas in the interval he had become very wealthy. When G–d had given him His assurances they had applied to himself alone. He had never included the people who now comprised his two camps, his family and the servants. As a result, while he did not fear for his person, he did fear for the lives of his wives and children, who had become an integral part of him.
Mother together with children - if we are going to explain that he was worried that he [Esav] would attack mothers along with children, as it is said at the end of his prayer "and You said, etc and I set your seed etc" it is difficult to do so, given that God said to Avram, after Lot separated from him "and you seed will be like the dust of the earth, that is a person can count etc", since what would the "like the sand of the sea", an expression also present in the blessing, add? And more, what proof is there that he [Esav] wouldn't kill some of the children but the blessing could still happen on the rest of them? Rather, he was not worried about the children, since the children are "like him", exactly. He only worried about the wives, because they would protect them so that he [Esav] would not harm them, like the way of the mothers, and he was worried that he would kill the mothers in front of the children, and since "his wife is like his body" he said "strike me down." And this is also true given that he was warned not to take new wives, even after their deaths [of Rachel and Leah] since Lavan said "more children after theirs" since he was worried that their inheritance would be diminished due to children of another wife, and this is why he made a pact not to take other wives over his daughters, even after their deaths. And the proof to this is that the mitzvah of [not taking for wives] "a woman and her sister" applies only "during her lifetime" (Leviticus 18:1), and so obviously Lavan meant even after their deaths.
AND SMITE ME. And smite me applies to two phrases. (Ve-hekkani is in the singular and prima facie refers only to Jacob. Thus nothing is stated about what Esau will do to the mother and the children.) It is similar to And Saul’s son had two men that were captains of bands (II Sam. 4:2). (The Hebrew literally reads: And two men, captains of bands were son of Saul. I.E. says that captains of should be read as if written twice, i.e., And two men, captains of bands, were captains of Saul’s son. Cf. Kimchi’s comment on this verse.) Our verse should be read as follows: and smite me and smite the mother and the children.
Mothers and children together - There are two in the tradition, this one and "mother and children dashed." This is about Sanheriv, the king of Ashur, whi said to destroy Israel, and then Esav who came to make war against Yaakov, and so "do not take mother and children alike" is a hint regarding exile.
הצילני נא, "Save me please!" He used the word נא, a combined form of "please" and "now." He pleaded with G'd not to allow Esau to cause him any losses instead of letting him recoup his losses later on.
מיד אחי, מיד עשו, from my brother's hand, from Esau's hand. Rashi understands the word אחי as a plea that Esau should not treat him like a brother but rather as befitted the wicked Esau. According to this explanation Jacob should only have said מיד אחי עשו, and we would have understood the Torah's meaning from the otherwise superfluous "my brother," seeing that Esau was his only brother.
I believe therefore that the correct meaning is that Jacob prayed and addressed himself to the fact that there were two facets to Esau's character. On the one hand Esau was a son of Isaac and Isaac's merits would assist him. On the other hand, he was a person in his own right, a very powerful person at that; it would require great strength to be saved from attack by such a person. Jacob therefore prayed to G'd that Isaac's merit should not now assist him; this is what he meant by "save me please from the hands of my brother," i.e. although he is my brother. Concerning Esau's being a powerful adversary in his own right, Jacob prayed "please save me from Esau!"
Jacob also had in mind that if Esau were to use the fact that he was his brother as a trick to attack him after feigning brotherliness, G'd should save him from such machinations. He also needed G'd's help, however, if Esau proclaimed his hostility openly.
Jacob also drew G'd's attention to the enormity of Esau's crime if he were to try and murder his own brother, מיד אחי; surely the mere thought of committing such a heinous crime should provide sufficient excuse for G'd to humble Esau; on the other hand, Esau's wickedness (without considering the fact that in this case he set out to murder a brother) was sufficient to warrant G'd's intervention on behalf of Jacob.
הציליני נא מיד אחי מיד עשו, “save me please, from my brother, from Esau!” (According to Rashi) the prayer was the result of Yaakov having been told that Esau does not come to meet him in order to welcome him back like a brother, but that he is coming to meet him as an adversary, as an Esau. This is why Yaakov prayed for Divine help. One may also explain the wording of this prayer in a different way. Yaakov prayed for what he needed immediately and for his needs during future generations. As far as his immediate needs were concerned, he needed to be saved from “my brother.” During future generations, throughout a good part of Jewish history, he or his descendants would need to be saved “from Esau.” Concerning such future times, David also formulated a prayer in Psalms 10,15 when he said: שבור זרוע רשע, “break the power (arm) of the wicked!”
כי ירא אנכי אותו, “for I am afraid of him.” Yaakov’s fear stemmed from the fact that Esau knew no mercy. We have proof of this in the writings of our prophets (Amos 1,11) על רדפו בחרב אחיו ושחת רחמיו, “because he pursued his brother with the sword and repressed all pity.” פן יבא והכני, “lest he come and smite me,” and he would then also murder the "mothers and the children". The Midrash wonders how such a thing is possible in view of the Torah expressly forbidding the slaughter of both mother animal and her young on the same day (Leviticus 22,28)? We have a similar prohibition concerning fowl in Deut, 22,6 where the Torah words it thus: “do not take the mother bird together with her young ones.” Yaakov was fearful of Esau violating this commandment in the future as it is written in Hoseah 10,14 אם על בנים רוטשה, “when mothers and babies were clubbed to death together.”
הצילני נא מיד אחי, these words correspond to the words נושא עון in Exodus, meaning that the sin has not caused Yaakov’s downfall.
הצילני...אם על בנים. The word על in this line substitutes for the word עם, “with.” It is used in a similar sense in Hoseah 10,14 אם על בנים רטשה, “mothers and children were dashed to pieces.”
AND HE SMITE ME, THE MOTHER WITH THE CHILDREN. Commentators (Mentioned in Ibn Ezra. The verb “smite” thus applies to the beginning and end of the sentence.) have explained it as meaning. “And he smite me and smite the mother with the children.” There are many similar verses.
פן יבא והכני, because I am not worthy of all the loving kindness G’d has already shown me, (as I explained on verse 10)
מיד אחי מיד עשו FROM THE HAND OF MY BROTHER, FROM THE HAND OF ESAU — from the hand of my brother who does not treat me as a brother should, but as Esau, the wicked.
gleichwohl rette mich vor meinem Bruder, der vielleicht ein Recht gegen mich hat, vor Esau, der seinem Charakter nach vielleicht eine Rache im Schilde führt, die ich doch vielleicht nicht verdient; rette mich um meiner Kinder willen, auf die du doch den Bau einer so großen Zukunft verheißen.
Auf diesen Angstschrei wird Jakob keine Antwort; sie wird ihm erst durch ein Erlebnis, dem er mit allem diesem entgegenging.
Wie später in den Galutjahrhunderten דורן ותפלה, nächst dem Hilferuf zu Gott in Beschwichtigung durch Spenden von seiner Habe das Jakobsvolk seine Rettung Esau gegenüber zu suchen hatte, also flüchtet schon der Stammvater in gleicher Lage zu dem gleichen Mittel. —
Mother and children alike. Literally, “he will strike me, mother with sons” — i.e. he would deal Yaakov a devastating blow by killing his family, even if he himself escaped.
“From the hand of my brother who does not act towards me as a brother...” Here too, Rashi deduced this because מיד is written twice. And Yaakov would not use an expression of honor [about Eisov] when speaking to Hashem. (Maharshal)
And You said in the vision of the ladder at Beit El: I will benefit you, and render your descendants as the sand of the sea, which cannot be enumerated for multitude. You promised to shield me, and I am now in need of Your protection.
והכני אם על בנים, “and he will smite me, mother and children.” He means “mothers and their children.”
“I fear, he may come and strike me down, mothers and children alike” [32:12]. Jacob said: I am afraid that he will kill the mothers and the children. Jacob was not afraid that he would be killed, since the Holy One promised that He would protect him from all evil. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:12.)
Avraham Avinu stood in prayer and begged that Sodom not be destroyed. Hashem answered him that if there were ten righteous people in Sodom the city would be saved. But ten righteous people were not to be found there, and Sodom was demolished (Genesis 18). Childless for many years, Yitzchak Avinu and Rivkah Imeinu, pleaded to Hashem in prayer and were answered with the birth of Yaakov and Eisav (Genesis 25). Yaakov Avinu prayed for Hashem to save him from his brother, Eisav, who set out against him with four hundred warriors, and he was answered and saved (Genesis 32). Following the sin of the Golden Calf, Hashem’s wrath rose up against the nation of Israel, and Moshe Rabbeinu prayed intensely until Hashem canceled the decree of disaster that He had threatened to bring on His people (Exodus 32). When Miriam, Moshe’s sister, fell ill with leprosy, Moshe stood and prayed, “Kel na refa na lah” (“O God, please heal her!”) and she was healed (Numbers 12). To turn back a Heaven-sent plague, Aharon used the incense to pray, and the plague ceased (Numbers 17). After the army of Israel was defeated by Ai, Hashem heard Yehoshua’s prayers and guided him to correct the sin of Achan, after which they won their next battles (Joshua 7). When the Philistines waged war against Israel, Shmuel cried out to Hashem for help on behalf of the nation. In answer, Hashem led him and Israel to defeat and conquer the Philistines (I Samuel 7). David, the king of Israel, would often pray to Hashem; his prayers eventually became the Book of Psalms. After Shlomoh finished building the Temple, he prayed that the Shechinah dwell therein, and that all people who pray there would be answered, and Hashem accepted his prayer (I Kings 8-9). When Eliyahu the Prophet fought against the false prophets of Ba’al on Mount Carmel, he prayed that fire would descend from the sky and so it transpired (I Kings 18). Likewise, Elisha the Prophet prayed to Hashem that He revive the son of the Shunamite woman, and the boy came back to life (II Kings 4). When Chizkiyah faced death from his disease, he too prayed to Hashem and was cured (II Kings 20).
The patriarch Avraham stood in prayer and begged that Sodom not be destroyed. God answered him that if there were ten righteous people in Sodom the city would be saved. But ten righteous people were not to be found there, and Sodom was demolished (Bereishit 18). Childless for many years, the patriarch Yitzḥak and matriarch Rivka prayerfully pleaded with God and were answered with the birth of Yaakov and Esav (Bereishit 25). The patriarch Yaakov prayed for God to save him from his brother, Esav, who set out against him with four hundred warriors, and he was answered and saved (Bereishit 32). Following the sin of the Golden Calf, God’s wrath was kindled against the people of Israel, and our teacher Moshe prayed intensely until God canceled the terrible decree that He had threatened to visit on His people (Shemot 32). When Miriam, Moshe’s sister, fell ill with leprosy, Moshe stood and prayed, “Kel na refa na la” (“O God, please heal her!”), and she was healed (Bamidbar 12). To turn back a heaven-sent plague, Aharon used the incense to pray, and the plague ceased (Bamidbar 17). After the army of Israel was defeated by Ai, God heard Yehoshua’s prayers and guided him to rectify the sin of Akhan, after which they won their next battles (Yehoshua 7). When the Philistines waged war against Israel, Shmuel cried out to God for help on behalf of the nation. God answered his prayer, and Israel struck and vanquished the Philistines (1 Shmuel 7). King David of Israel would often pray to God; his prayers eventually became the book of Tehilim. After King Shlomo finished building the Temple, he prayed that the Divine Presence (Shekhina) dwell therein, and that all people who pray there would be answered; God acceded to his prayer (1 Melakhim 8-9). When Eliyahu the Prophet fought against the false prophets of Ba’al on Mount Carmel, he prayed that fire would descend from the sky and so it transpired (1 Melakhim 18). Likewise, Elisha the Prophet prayed to God that He revive the son of the Shunamite woman, and the boy came back to life (2 Melakhim 4). When King Ḥizkiyahu faced death from his disease, he too prayed to God and was cured (2 Melakhim 20).
And in Pirkei deRabbi Eliezer (Chapter 48:17), he gave a different reason for the word[s], I have surely visited [pakod pakadati], with which they were redeemed. It said, and this is its language there: Rabbi Eliezer said, "The five letters of the Torah that are of double [shape] are all expressions of redemption. Kaf, kaf, with which our father Abraham was redeemed from Ur of the Chaldees, as it is stated: Go out [lekh lekhah] of your land (Gen. 12:1). Mem, mem, with which our father Isaac was redeemed from the Philistines, as it is stated: Go from us, for you are much mightier than us [mimenu meod] (Genesis 22:16). Nun, nun, with which our father Jacob was redeemed from the hand of Esau, as it is stated, Deliver me, I pray, [hatzileini na] (Genesis 32:11). Peh, peh, with which the Jewish people was redeemed from Egypt, as it is stated: I have surely visited you, [pakod pakadti] (Exodus 3:16, 17). Tzadi, tzadi, with which the Holy One, blessed be He, in the future will redeem the Jewish people at the end of the fourth empire, as it is stated: Tzemach is his name; and he shall grow up [yitzmach] out of his place (Zechariah 6:12). All of them were told to Abraham, and Abraham passed them down to Isaac, and Isaac passed them down to Jacob, and Jacob passed them down to Joseph and his brothers, as it is stated: He will surely visit [pakod yifkod] you (Genesis 50:24). Asher, the son of Jacob, passed down the mystery of the redemption to Serah his daughter. When Moses and Aaron came to the elders of Israel and performed the signs in their sight, the elders of Israel went to Serah, the daughter of Asher, and they said to her, 'A certain man has come, and he has performed such and such signs before us.' She said to them, 'There is no substance to these signs.' They said to her, 'But did he not say, "Pakod yifkod?"' She said to them, 'He is the man who will redeem the Jewish people in the future from Egypt, for so did I hear from father.' As it is stated: And the people were convinced when [...] the Lord had visited [pakad] His people (Exodus 4:31)." To here [is the midrash].
Mem, nun, tzadi, peh, kaf, the double letters, (These letters are written differently when they appear as the last letter of a word.) were stated by the prophets. Kaf kaf alludes to Abraham: “Lekh lekha” (Genesis 12:1) – he will beget a son at the age of one hundred. (The letter kaf appears twice in lekh lekha. Lamed – 30 + kaf – 20 = 50 x 2 = 100. Mem mem) is for Isaac: “For you have grown much mightier than we [mimenu]” (Genesis 26:16). (The letter mem appears twice in mimenu. An alternative term meaning “than we” could have been employed, but wasn’t.) He alluded to him that he and his descendants would be mighty in two worlds. Nun nun for Jacob: “Deliver me, please [hatzileni na]” (Genesis 32:12); deliver in two worlds. Peh peh to Israel, [when God said] to Moses: “I have remembered you [pakod pakadeti]” (Exodus 3:16). Tzadi tzadi – “Behold a man, Tzemaḥ is his name, [and he will sprout [yitzmaḥ…]” (Zechariah 6:12). And it says: “I will establish for David a righteous offshoot [tzemaḥ tzadik] and he will reign as king and succeed, and he will perform justice and righteousness in the land” (Jeremiah 23:5). “A leader of fifty” (Isaiah 3:3) – twenty-four books; add to them eleven of the twelve minor prophets, excluding Jonah, which stands alone, six orders of Mishna, and nine chapters of Torat Kohanim (The Torat Kohanim is a midrash halakha on Leviticus. At the time that this midrash was written, the Torat Kohanim was apparently divided into nine large chapters.) – that is fifty. “They are sixty queens” (Song of Songs 6:8) – sixty tractates; “and eighty concubines” (Song of Songs 6:8) – eighty study halls that were in Jerusalem, corresponding to its entrances; “and young women without number” (Song of Songs 6:8) – external Mishna. (Tannaitic statements which were not incorporated into the Mishna.) “Behold the bed of Solomon: There are sixty valiant men around it” (Song of Songs 3:7) – sixty letters of the Priestly Benediction. (Numbers 6:24–26.) “Three hundred and eighteen” (Genesis 14:14) – it is Eliezer. (The number of members of his household whom Abraham took to recover Lot corresponds to the numerical value of Eliezer: alef – 1 + lamed – 30 + yod –10 + ayin – 70 + zayin – 7 + reish – 200 = 318.) “Because [ekev] Abraham heeded My voice, and kept My commission, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws” (Genesis 26:5) – at the age of three he recognized Him. (Abraham heeded God’s voice for ‘ekev’ years: ayin – 70 + kof – 100 + beit – 2 = 172. He lived a total of one hundred and seventy-five years. He recognized God at age three.) HaSatan – three hundred and sixty-four, (Heh – 5 + sin – 300 + tet – 9 + nun – 50 = 364.) the number of days in the solar year that he [the Satan] has license to inform on all of them, excepting Yom Kippur. Rav Ami said in the school of Rabbi Abba: Abraham, as long as he was not circumcised and had not begot a son, was lacking a heh. The heh was added, he became whole, and he begot a son at the sum of his letters. (Alef – 1 + beit – 2 + reish – 200 + heh – 5 + mem – 40 = 248, the number of limbs in a person’s body.) “A woman of valor is the crown of her husband” (Proverbs 12:4) – this is Sarah. Sarai was her name; two amora’im have a dispute regarding this: One said: The yod was split in two, heh for Abraham and heh for Sarah. (Yod is ten and heh is five.) And one said: The yod that was taken from Sarah objected, until Joshua [Yehoshua] came and Moses added a yod (Yehoshua's name, originally, was Hoshea.) – may the Lord rescue you [Ya yoshiakha] from the counsel of the spies. (Yehoshua is a portmanteau of ya yoshiakha.) The yod of Isaac [Yitzḥak] corresponds to the ten ordeals; tzadi,to the ninety years of age that Sarah was when he was born; ḥet, to the eight days [of age] at which he was circumcised; kof, Abraham was one hundred years of age. (When Isaac was born.) Jacob [Yaakov] was named for himself. Yod corresponds to the tenth. Calculate from Benjamin until Levi; (Counting backwards from Benjamin, Levi is the tenth.) he is the tenth. Ayin – “with seventy people” (Deuteronomy 10:22); (This is the number of people with whom Jacob descended to Egypt. kof) – corresponding to the letters in the blessing of: “May God give you” (Genesis 27:28). Beit remains. It is corresponding to the two angels that ascended. (When Jacob left Canaan to go to Aram.) The tablets contained six hundred and thirteen mizvot, corresponding to the letters from “I am” (Exodus 20:2) until “that is your neighbor’s” (Exodus 20:14), no more and no fewer. All of them were given to Moses at Sinai, among them statutes, ordinances, Torah, Mishna, Talmud, and aggada. “Fear of the Lord, that is his treasure” (Isaiah 33:6). Among all the attributes, there are none greater than fear and humility (Since humility is not mentioned elsewhere in this portion of the midrash, Matnot Kehuna and Etz Yosef write that it should be erased.) – “Now, Israel, what does the Lord your God ask of you? Only to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him, and to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul” (Deuteronomy 10:12). The numerical value of yirat is six hundred and eleven, (Yod – 10 + reish – 200 + alef – 1 + tav – 400 = 611.) and of Torah is six hundred and eleven. (Tav – 400 + vav – 6 + reish – 200 + heh – 5 = 611.) Add fear and Torah to them; (When a gematria is used, sometimes the word or words being discussed are used to add 1 to the gematria. Thus, 611 + Torah + yirat = 613.) the result is six hundred and thirteen. Tzitzit – the Rabbis taught: Eight strings that are drawn and five knots, two above (Adjacent to the corner of the garment.) and three below, that is six hundred and thirteen. (Tzadi – 90 + yod – 10 + tzadi – 90 + yod – 10 + tav – 400 = 600 + 8 strings + 5 knots = 613.) The days of Abraham were one hundred and seventy-five years; Isaac, one hundred and eighty years; Jacob, one hundred and forty-seven years. When you add them together, the result is five hundred and two years. That is, likewise, the distance between the heavens and earth: “Like the days of the heavens over the earth” (Deuteronomy 11:21). (The preceding phrase is: “regarding which the Lord has taken an oath to your forefathers.” And "the days of the heavens over the earth" is interpreted as the time that it would take to walk from the earth to the heavens.) “[These are David’s last words: The utterance of David son of Yishai, and the utterance of the man] raised on high [al]” (II Samuel 23:1) – this corresponds to one hundred blessings. (The numerical value of al is 100: Ayin – 70 + lamed – 30 = 100.) Each day one hundred men of Israel would die. David came and instituted for them one hundred blessings. Once he instituted them, the plague was halted. Al – the yoke [ol] (Both al and ol are written with an ayin and lamed.) of Torah and the yoke of suffering. “Forgive all iniquity, and accept good [tov], and instead of bulls we will pay the offering of our lips” (Hosea 14:3). Israel said: ‘Master of the universe, when the Temple was extant, we would sacrifice an offering and gain atonement; now, we have nothing in our hand other than prayer.’ The numerical value of tov is seventeen; prayer contains nineteen blessings? (The Amida.) Exclude from there the blessing of the heretics, (This refers to the twelfth blessing in the Amida.) that they instituted it in Yavne, and “the offshoot of David” (This refers to the fifteenth blessing of the Amida.) that they instituted after him because of: “Examine me, Lord, and test me” (Psalms 26:2). (See Sanhedrin 107a, where David fails the test of Bathsheba.) Rabbi Simon says: On the basis of a numerical cypher, “and accept good [tov]” equals the value of nefesh [person]. (With the atbash cypher, the distance of a letter from the beginning of the alphabet is measured, and it is replaced bythe letter that is the same distance from the end of the alphabet. Tet – nun; vav – peh; beit – shin: tov becomes nefesh.) Israel said: ‘When the Temple was extant, we would burn fats and the other portions on the altar and gain atonement. Now, here are our fats, our blood, and our souls. May it be Your will that they will serve as atonement on our behalf’ – “instead of bulls we will pay the offering of our lips.” “The Lord granted her pregnancy [herayon]” (Ruth 4:13). Its numerical value is two hundred and seventy-one. (This is the number of days in nine full months, plus the first day of the tenth month.) The measure of water in a ritual bath is forty se’a, which corresponds to the number of times that the water of a well [be’er] is written in the Torah. How many egg bulks are in a ritual bath? There are five thousand seven hundred and sixty. Each and every se’a is one hundred and forty-four egg-bulks. Ḥalla is forty-three and one-fifth egg-bulks. From where is it derived that one requires forty se’a for a ritual bath? “The water of Shilo’aḥ that flows slowly [le’at]” (Isaiah 8:6), whose numerical value is forty. One who is separating ḥalla must, by Torah law, separate one from forty-three and one-fifth [egg-bulks], in accordance with the numerical value of ḥalla. (Ḥet – 8 + lamed – 30 + heh – 5 = 43.) The primary categories of labor are forty less one, as it is written: “These are the matters [eleh hadevarim]…” (Exodus 35:1). (The following verse begins: “Six days labor shall be performed…” Eleh) – thirty-six, (Alef – 1 + lamed – 30 + heh – 5 = 36. devarim) – two, (Devarim (matters) is written in the plural. The minimum plural possible is two. hadevarim) –three; (Deriving an additional one from the heh prefix.) that is forty less one. “Forty he shall flog him, he shall not add” (Deuteronomy 25:3), corresponding to the forty curses that the serpent, Eve, Adam, and the ground were cursed. The Sages deducted one due to “he shall not add.” Those who recommended acquittal would have a majority of one, and thus the iniquities are fewer. (Iniquities can refers to people who the court puts to death by mistake. According to that explanation, the midrash here explains that in order to prevent the iniquity of mistakenly killing somebody, for acquittal a majority of one is sufficient, but a majority of two is required for a guilty verdict.) It is preferable when convicting that at least a majority of two will prevail, rather than one. “Sheshakh” (Jeremiah 25:26, 51:41) is Babylon [Bavel] in the atbash cypher. “[Son of] Tave’al” (Isaiah 7:6) according to the albam (Alef becomes lamed. The alphabet is divided in two in the middle, with eleven letters in each group. The first letter in the first group – aleph – is replaced by the first letter in the second group – lamed. The second letter – bet – is replaced by mem, etc.) cypher is Remala. (The son of Tave’al, mentioned in the verse, is a reference to Pekaḥ ben Remalyahu, king of Israel.) “With this [bezot] shall Aaron enter the Sanctum: with a young bull as a sin offering, and a ram as a burnt offering” (Leviticus 16:3), bezot is an allusion to the first Temple, that would stand four hundred and ten years. (Beit – 2 + zayin – 7 + alef – 1 + tav – 400 = 410.)
“Every crawling creature that lives shall be yours to eat; like green vegetation, I have given you everything” (Genesis 9:3). “But flesh with its life, its blood, you shall not eat” (Genesis 9:4). “Every crawling creature that lives…but flesh with its life, its blood [you shall not eat]” (This is a prohibition against eating a limb or piece of meat taken from a living animal.) – Rabbi Yosei bar Aivu in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: Adam the first man, for whom the consumption of meat for pleasure was not permitted, was not warned regarding a limb taken from a living animal, (As it was not relevant for him.) but the descendants of Noah, for whom the consumption of meat for pleasure was permitted, (Genesis 9:3.) were warned regarding a limb taken from a living animal. “But I will demand your blood of your lives; from every beast I will demand it, and from man; from every man for his brother, I will demand the life of man” (Genesis 9:5). “But [akh] [I will demand your blood of your lives]” (This is a prohibition against suicide.) – to include one who strangles himself. (Even though there is no shed “blood” to be “demanded.”) One might think that this applies [even] to cases like Saul? (Who took his own life to avoid torture and desecration by the Philistines (I Samuel 31:4).) The verse states akh. (Akh is an exclusionary term, which teaches that there are circumstances when it is permitted for one to take his life.) One might think that this applies [even] to cases like Ḥananya, Mishael, and Azarya? (Who consented to surrender their own lives in order to avoid committing idolatry (Daniel 3:17).) The verse states akh. “From every beast” – this refers to one who makes his fellow man available to a wild beast to kill him. (Although murder was not technically committed, one who does this is still culpable.) “From every man for his brother” – this refers to one who hires others to kill his fellow man. Another interpretation, “from every beast I will demand it” (God will exact justice against any man or beast that kills a human.) – these are the four kingdoms. (The four kingdoms that would subjugate Israel until the advent of the Messiah (Daniel chapter 2).) “From man [adam], from every man for his brother” – this is Esau, (Also known as Edom, the forebears of the Romans.) as it is written: “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau” (Genesis 32:12). “I will demand the life of man” – these are Israel, (Who are constantly being killed by the Romans.) as it is stated: “You are My flock” (Ezekiel 34:17); “Flock of My pasture, you are man” (Ezekiel 34:31).
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother and children alike” (Genesis 32:12). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau” – deliver my future descendants from the hand of his descendants, who come with the power of Esau. (The power of Esau is the sword – “by your sword you shall live” (Genesis 27:40).) That is what is written: “I was looking at the horns, and behold, another, small horn arose among them” (Daniel 7:8) – that is the son of Netzer. (A robber who conquered provinces on the Roman–Persian border and ruled there under the auspices of Rome.) “And three of the original horns were uprooted from before it” (Daniel 7:8) – this is that they gave them their kingdom; Macrinus, Carinus, and Kyriades. (These were the provinces.) “Behold, there were eyes like the eyes of a man in this horn, and a mouth speaking arrogantly” (Daniel 7:8) – this is the evil empire that imposes levies upon all the nations of the world. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is written: “And the ten horns: From this kingdom, ten kings will arise” (Daniel 7:24), all of those referred to in the verse are descendants of Esau. (All ten horns represent ten kingdoms descended from Esau, not from the son of Netzer.) Rather, “I was looking at the horns, and behold, another, small horn arose among them” – this is the evil empire. “And three of the original horns were uprooted from before it” – these are the three previous kingdoms. (Babylon, Persia–Media, and Greece.) “Behold, there were eyes like the eyes of a man in this horn” – this is the evil empire, that casts an envious eye on the possessions of others. This wealthy one, we will make him governor of his province; this wealthy one, we will make him an economic adviser. “Lest he come and smite me, mother and children alike” – and you said: “You shall not take the mother with the offspring” (Deuteronomy 22:6). Another matter, “Lest he come and smite me, mother and children alike” – and you said: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28).
“Wisdom is better than instruments of battle, and one sinner destroys much good” (Ecclesiastes 9:18). “Wisdom is better than instruments of battle” – this is the wisdom of Jacob; “than instruments of battle” – of Esau the wicked. Rabbi Levi said: He armed them (Jacob armed his sons and the other members of his camp.) with weapons on the inside and dressed them in white garments on the outside, and he prepared himself for three matters: for prayer, for a gift, and for war. For prayer, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “Please rescue me from the hand of my brother” (Genesis 32:12). For a gift, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “You shall say: From your servant Jacob, it is a gift sent” (Genesis 32:19). For war, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “He placed the maidservants [and their children first, and Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last.] He passed before them and prostrated himself earthward” (Genesis 33:2–3). He said: It is preferable that he harm me and not my children. (Thus, Jacob was prepared for the fact that Esau might act violently upon their encounter.) “Esau returned on that day on his way to Se’ir” (Genesis 33:16). Why to Se’ir? Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani, Rabbi Elazar said: It was due to a promissory note. (The descendants of Isaac were to receiv the Land of Israel and were to be enslaved in Egypt. Esau preferred to forgo the Land of Israel and forgo the enslavement in Egypt. The midrash refers to the coming enslavement as though it were a debt set forth in a promissory note.) Rabbi Shmuel said: It was due to shame. (He was ashamed for having sold his birthright.) “And one sinner destroys much good” – this is Esau who lost all the goodness and the gifts of the World to Come.
When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel according to their number (Exod. 30:12). (Pesikta de Rav Kahana, Shekalim, p. 156.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Take the sum of the children of Israel. He replied: My master, it is written: And Thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth (Gen. 28:14), and it is written elsewhere: And make Thy seed as the sand of the sea (ibid. 32:13), yet you tell me now to do this. He answered: If you want to know their number, you need only add together the first letter of the names of each of the tribes and this will give you their number. The resh in the word Reuben stands for two hundred thousand; the shin in Simeon stands for three hundred thousand, the yods in the names Judah, Issachar, and Joseph total thirty thousand, the nun in Naphtali accounts for fifty thousand, the zayin in Zebulun’s name is seven thousand, the daled in Dan is four thousand, the gimmel in Gad is three thousand, the bet in Benjamin is two thousand, and the alef in Asher is one thousand—totaling five hundred and ninety-seven thousand in all. The three thousand not accounted for were slain at the time of the episode of the golden calf, as it is said: And the sons of Levi did according to the words of Moses; and there fell of the people on that day about three thousand men (Exod. 32:28). Hence the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: You are taking the count to learn how many are missing. R. Menahem said in the name of R. Bebai: This may be compared to a king who had many sheep. When wolves attacked and destroyed some of them, the king told his shepherd: “Count the sheep and find out how many are missing.” Likewise, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Go, count the Israelites, and find out how many are missing.
The Seers (i.e., the prophets) were the ones who said the doubled letters, mantzepakh (mem, nun, tzadi, peh, and kaf, which are the letters that have a different form when they appear at the end of a word). [The doubling of kaf that is found in Genesis 12:1,] "Lekh lekha (Go for yourself)," hints to Avraham that he will father Yitschak at one hundred years [of age] (as the numerical value of these two words is one hundred). [The doubling of mem that is found in Genesis 26:16,] "ki atsamta memenu (as you have become more powerful than us)" is a hint [to Yitschak] that hints that he and his seed will be powerful in both worlds. The doubling of nun [that is found in Genesis 32:12,] "Hatsileini na (Save me)" [is a hint to] Yaakov, [that] he will be saved in both worlds. The doubling of peh [that is found in Genesis 50:24,] "pakod yifkod (He will surely remember you)" [is a hint to] Yosef, [that] He will remember you in this world, and He will remember you in the world to come. The doubling of tzadi [that is found in Zachariah 6:12,] "hinei eesh, Tsemach shemo, ou'metachtav yitsmach (behold, a man called Branch shall branch out from the place where he is,)" is [referring to] the messiah. And so is it stated (Jermiah 23:5), "vahikimoti leDaveed tsemach tsadeek (and I will raise up a true branch of David)." ["The leader of fifty" (Isaiah 3:3)] ("Sixty were the queens" [Song of Songs 6:8]). Twenty-four books (of the Bible), and add to them eleven of the thirteen [books of the minor prophets] - besides Yonah which is by itself - and six orders of the Mishnah and nine chapters of Torat Kohanim, behold ["The leader of fifty"] ("Sixty were the queens"). "[Sixty were the queens] and eighty were the concubines" (Song of Songs 6:8). Sixty tractates and eighty study halls that were in Jerusalem corresponding to its gates. "And maidens without number" (Song of Songs 6:8). The study outside. "Behold the bed of Shlomo, sixty warriors" (Song of Songs 3:7). [This] corresponds to the [number of] letters of [the priestly blessing,) "May the Lord bless you and keep you, etc." (Numbers 6:24-26). The Satan (HaSatan) has the numerical equivalent of the count of the days of the solar year, as he rules over all the year to slander, except for Yom Kippur. Rabbi Ami bar Abba said, "Avraham was missing five organs before he was circumcised and [before he] fathered. The [letter] hay (with a numerical value of five) was added [to his name] and he became complete and fathered, and he was called Avraham [corresponding to the complete set of organs, two hundred and forty-eight], the numerical count of his letters." [Regarding] Sarai, two Amoraim (later rabbinic teachers) differed. One said, "The [letter] yod [with a numerical count of ten that was taken from her] was divided into two, [to give] a hay to Avaraham and a hay to Sarah." And [the other] said, "The yod that was taken from Sarah raised a protest until Yehshoua came and had a yod added, as it is stated (Numbers 13:16), "and Moshe called Hoshea [...], Yehoshua." And it saved him from the counsel of the [other] spies. [The significance of the letters in the name,] Yitschak [is as follows]: Yod [with a numerical count of ten] corresponds to the ten trials [of Avraham]. [The letter] tsadi [with a numerical count of ninety, as] Sarah was ninety when he was born. [The letter] chet [with a numerical count of eight, as] he was circumcised on the eighth day. And the letter kof [with a numerical count of one hundred, as] Avraham was a hundred years old when he was born. Yaakov was called according to [the significance of the letters of] his [own] name: Yod [corresponds to] the tenth of his offspring going backwards, Levi. Count from (the last son), Binaymin to Levi - there are ten sons, and Levi was the tenth. And he gave him as a tithe to the Omnipresent to fulfill [what he said] (Genesis 28:22), "all that You give to me, I will surely tithe it to You." [The letter] ayin [with a numerical count of seventy corresponds to the number of offspring he took to Egypt], "with seventy souls" (Deuteronomy 10:22). Kof corresponds to the [number of the] letters of the blessing [that he received], "And may He give you [etc.]" (Genesis 27:28). Take away the name [of God] from there, and one hundred [letters] remain. [The letter] bet [with a numerical count of two] corresponds to two angels [that he saw on the ladder in his dream] rising. Yehudah was called according to [the significance of the numerical count of the letters of] his [own] name: Thirty, corresponding to the thirty virtues of the monarchy. There were six hundred and thirteen letters on the tablets - from "I am" (Exodus 20:2) to "to your neighbor" (Exodus 20:14) - corresponding to the six hundred and thirteen commandments. And they were all given to Moshe at [Mount] Sinai; and in them are statutes and judgments, Torah and Mishnah, Talmud and aggadah. "The fear of the Lord is his treasure" (Isaiah 33:6). There is no greater characteristic than fear and humility, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 10:12), "And now Israel, what does the Lord, your God, ask of you [besides to fear Him]." "The fear of" (Yirat) has a numerical value of six hundred and eleven; along with Torah and circumcision, behold that is six hundred and thirteen. [The numerical value of] fringes (tsitsit) is six hundred. [Add] eight strings and five knots, behold that is six hundred and thirteen. "[The man (David)] raised on high" (II Samuel 23:1) - [high (al)] has a numerical value of one hundred, corresponding to one hundred blessings. As on every day, one hundred men of Israel were dying. [So] David and ordained [the daily saying of] one hundred blessings. "And now Israel, what (mah) does the Lord, your God, ask of you" - read it as one hundred (meah), these are the hundred blessings. Once he ordained it, the pestilence ceased. "This is the law of the burnt-offering (olah), it is the burnt-offering" (Leviticus 6:2), [meaning] the yoke (ulah) of Torah and the yoke of repentance. "Two anointed ones" (Zechariah 4:14). These are David and Aharon who were anointed with the anointing oil, such that their anointing was for [all] the generations. With Aharon, it is written (Numbers 25:13), "It shall be for him and his descendants after him, a pact of priesthood for all time." With David it is written (Ezekiel 37:25), "and My servant David as their prince for all time." "Forgive all guilt and take the good (tov)" (Hosea 14:3). Israel said, "Master of the world, at the time that the Temple existed, we would offer a sacrifice and be cleansed. But now all we have in our hand is prayer." The numerical value of tov is seventeen. Prayer [consists of] nineteen [blessings]. Take away from them the blessing for the malfeasers that was composed at Yavneh, and "Let the sprout of David blossom," which they ordained for the sake of "Probe me, Lord, and try me" (Psalms 26:2). Rabbi Simon says, "'Forgive all guilt and take the good (tov).' The numerical value of tov in at-bash (matching letters based on how close they are to the center of the alphabet) is [the same as] soul (nefesh). Israel said, 'Behold the fat from us, from our souls. May it be Your will that it be atonement for us and "that we pay with the words of our lips" (Hosea 14:3).'" "And the Lord gave her conception (herayon)" (Ruth 4:13). [Herayon] has a numerical value of the [number of the] days of the nine months of birthing (two hundred and seventy one). The name of the angel that is appointed for conception is night, as stated (Job 3:3), "and the night [that it was] said, 'A man was conceived." The measure of the water of a mikveh (ritual bath) is forty seah corresponding to the [forty mentions] of well, written in the Torah. And [the volume of] how many eggs is the measure of the mikveh? Five thousand seven hundred and sixty. And a seah is a hundred and forty-four eggs. Forty-three and a fifth eggs is the measure of [what is required for] hallah [tithe]. And from where [do we know] that a mikveh requires forty seah? As it is written (Isaiah 8:6), "Since this nation has rejected the waters of Shiloach that flow gently (le'at)." The numerical value of le'at is forty. Behold the measure of a seah is a tefach by a tefach with the height of [sixteen] tefach [and a fifth]. And one who separates the measure of the hallah [tithe] must separate [one part in forty three] and a fifth [from Torah writ like the numerical value of hallah]. Forty lashes (which are actually thirty-nine) is from Torah writ, as it is written (Exodus 35:1), "These (eleh) are the things which the Lord commanded." [The numerical count of] "eleh" is thirty-six; "things" (being plural) is two; "the things" [indicates an additional] one - behold, forty minus one (thirty-nine). "He shall strike him forty, he shall not add" (Deuteronomy 25:3), corresponds to the forty curses received by the snake, Chava, Adam and the ground, and the sages lessened one, because of "he shall not add." A Sanhedrin is twenty-three, so [that it is possible for] those advocating innocence to have one more (than twenty), and those advocating guilt to have two more. It is best for the two to come and push off one. The numerical value of anathmea (cherem) is two hundred and forty-eight. And Shmuel said, when it takes force it takes force on [all] two hundred and forty-eight organs, and when it leaves, it leaves from two hundred and forty-eight limbs, as it is written (Habakuk 3:2), "in anger, remember to have mercy (rachem, which is made up of the same letters as cherem)." It is written,"tirash," but we read it [as] tirosh. [If] he merits, he becomes a rosh (leader); [if] he does not merit, he becomes a rash (poor person). Our rabbis, may their memory be blessed said, "A man is recognized by three things: by his purse, by his glass and by his anger. Tavel is Ramaliah. Seshach is Bavel (Babylon) [according to] its numerical value of in at-bash. The numerical value of Gog and Magog is seventy, as they are the seventy nations [of the world].
And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying … “He cometh to meet thee with four hundred men” (Gen. 32:7). Thereupon, Jacob was greatly afraid and was distressed (ibid., v. 8). Why is the word for “fear” repeated in this verse? He was greatly afraid that he might be killed and distressed lest he should be forced to kill. Jacob was an extremely powerful man. Proof of this is that he had subdued a mighty angel, as is said: So he strove with an angel and prevailed; he wept, and made supplication unto him (Hos. 12:5). But at that moment he began to plead for mercy, as it is said: Deliver me, I pray thee, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau (Gen. 32:12).
"A Psalm of David. Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; preserve me from the violent man; Solomon said (Proverbs 4:6), 'Do not forsake wisdom, and she will keep you.' (Proverbs 6:22) 'When you walk, they will lead you; when you lie down, they will watch over you.' So said the Lord to David, 'It is your desire that I preserve you; I will preserve you and keep you in the Torah,' as it says (Proverbs 4:13), 'Keep her, for she is your life.' Your desire is that I rescue you from the hand of the wicked; sing for joy before Me, and I will deliver you.' (Psalm 32:7) 'Sing for joy, O daughter of Zion; shout aloud, O Israel! Be glad and rejoice with all your heart, O daughter of Jerusalem!' Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; who is he, but Esau the wicked? And what is his evil? Death. So said the Lord, 'When I redeem you from the hand of death, I will redeem you,' as it says (Hosea 13:14), 'I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death.' Death is the evil that Esau has done. Therefore it is said, 'Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man,' (Psalm 140:1) and Jacob also said, 'Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man.' (Genesis 32:12) 'And what kind of evil is it that a violent person does? Protect me from the hand of the oppressor.' And what was the oppression? (Genesis 32:14-15) 'He spent the night there, and from what he had with him he took a present for his brother Esau: two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams.' This was not oppression. And so it says (Obadiah 1:10), 'Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you.'" Israel said, "The mountains will be cut off forever, and whatever was swallowed up will be swallowed up." Then the Lord said, "I will bring them out from between their teeth," as it is written (Psalm 68:23), "God said, 'I will bring them back from Bashan.'" Therefore, it is said, "Protect me from the hands of the wicked, who have thought evil thoughts in their hearts," etc. What does it mean to have evil thoughts in the heart? It does not mean that it is only hidden in one's heart and not spoken aloud. Rather, it means that one thinks evil thoughts in the heart. When they think of evil, they are not only thinking of themselves but also of others, as it is written (Obadiah 1:18), "The house of Jacob will be a fire," etc. This is also expressed in Daniel 7:7-8, "I looked at these horns and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, and it uprooted three of the horns with eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth uttering great boasts." Looking at God, one speaks harsh and reviling words. It is written (Daniel 7:11), "I watched until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire."
[And his friend will only lose because of this. For it is known that one who robs his friend is only a fool and an evildoer. For his grant will not increase beyond what was decreed for him on Rosh Hashanah, because of his theft. For in exchange for taking the grant that came or that was destined to come to the hand of his friend, there will be taken from him the grant that was decreed for him on Rosh Hashanah. And the end of the matter will be that the money of [i.e., attained by] the wrong will consume also the "surviving remnant," the "kosher" grant that had already been allotted him. As Chazal have said (Succah 29b): "Because of four things a man's property goes lost," one of them being because he divests himself of his own yoke and places it on his friend. And so we find in Derech Eretz Zuta, Chapter 3: "If you have taken what is not yours, yours will be taken from you." And he will remain only with the bartering of a kosher grant for one that is forbidden. For he will be destined to give din and accounting for every [misappropriated] p'rutah [small coin]. As Chazal have said (Bava Kamma 119a): "If one steals from his friend the worth of a p'rutah, it is as if he has taken his soul." And he also constrains the Holy One Blessed be He to return the theft to its owner. As Chazal have said (Sanhedrin 8a): "The Holy One Blessed be He says to the wicked: 'It is not enough that you steal, but you also constrain Me to return the theft to its owner." And all of these things are intimated in our holy Torah, in Parshath Vayetze, where it is written (Bereshith 32:11-12): "And the angel of the L-rd said to me in a dream: 'Yaakov, … lift up your eyes and see all the rams that go up on the sheep — ringstraked, speckled and grizzled" (As Rashi explains there, the angels would bring them from the flock assigned to the sons of Lavan to that assigned to Yaakov. And lest you ask, how am I permitted to take from the grant of Lavan and give it to you? The angel, therefore, concludes: "For I have seen all that Lavan does to you," that he has changed your wage ten times and taken your grant; therefore I am returning it to you.)]
הצילני נא מיד אחי מיד עשו . The Zohar comments on this verse (Sullam edition page 21) that when someone prepares a prayer it is important that he chooses his words carefully. At first glance we would think that an appeal to G–d such as "save me!" would be sufficient; Jacob added the words "from my brother” so that he would not be misunderstood as requesting to be saved from Laban. In the event that G–d could use the term "brother" in a wider sense, [as Jacob himself had done in Genesis 29,4 for instance, Ed.] he added the word "from Esau," to make certain G–d knew whom he had in mind. He added what it was exactly that he needed to be saved from, i.e. an onslaught against his family. One must not rely on the fact that G–d is well aware of our unspoken thoughts. I believe that since the very letters used in prayer are holy, they are able to penetrate the outer shell of Heaven and penetrate to G–d's throne.
הצילנו נא מיד אחי, מיד עשו . The first half of this verse is addressed to G–d concerning the threat from Samael, whereas in the second half Jacob implores G–d to save him from Esau.
כי בצלם אלוקים עשה את האדם, “for in the image of G-d did the Maker make man.” [This is obviously not a literal quotation of our verse, as the word העושה, does not appear in the text The author adopted Rashi’s comment that the word העושה is missing in our text and has to be substituted by the reader. Rashi adds that there are numerous other examples of this type throughout the Torah.] Bereshit Rabbah 34, 14 understands the words אך את דמכם לנפשותיכם אדרוש, as including suicide by means of asphyxiation when no blood has been spilled. To the question if the kind of suicide committed by King Saul who was already in his death throes when he commanded the Amalekite to finish him off so that he would not be captured by the Philistines alive counted as suicide, the answer is that it is not, as the word אך in our verse is an exclusion and exempts such a situation. The question is also asked if people such as Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah who allowed themselves to be thrown into a fiery furnace (i.e. certain death) had been guilty of a form of suicide, the answer is negative and the reason cited is also the restrictive word אך in our verse (verse 5). The words מיד כל חיה are understood by the Midrash as a reference to the four empires who have hosted Jews in exile as these are referred to as חיות, comparable to beasts in Daniel 7.3. מיד האדם , this is a reference to Israelites who have been referred to as אדם by Ezekiel 34,31 when he said ואתן צאני צאן מרעיתי אדם אתם, “and you are My flock, sheep of My pasture-you are Adam.” The words מיד איש אחיו refer to the descendants of Esau as Yaakov prayed in Genesis 32,12 “save me please from my brother, from Esau.” The words אדרש את נפש האדם, refer to an accounting to be rendered at a future time.
And he counted them with lambs. He told each one to take a lamb (According to Targum this occurred just before Pesach, and the lambs were Pascal sacrifices.) from the king's flocks, and afterwards he counted the lambs, because it is forbidden to count Jewish people. ( See Maseches Yoma 22b which states that in order to avoid counting the Bnei Yisroel directly which is forbidden by the Torah, each man took a lamb from the king’s flock and the lambs were then counted. See also Kli Yokor in Bamidbar 1:2 who discusses the exceptions to this rule.) for it is stated concerning them, '[which] are too numerous to count.' (Bereishis 32:12.)
Rescue me, I pray [now], from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Eisov, for I fear him, that he will come and attack me—mother and children alike.
Deliver me I pray, from the hand of my elder brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him: for he hath been mindful of the glory of his father; lest he come and smite the mother with the children.
| וְאַתָּ֣ה אָמַ֔רְתָּ הֵיטֵ֥ב אֵיטִ֖יב עִמָּ֑ךְ וְשַׂמְתִּ֤י אֶֽת־זַרְעֲךָ֙ כְּח֣וֹל הַיָּ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־יִסָּפֵ֖ר מֵרֹֽב׃ | 13 J | Yet You have said, ‘I will deal bountifully with you and make your offspring as the sands of the sea, which are too numerous to count.’” |
Genesis 32,12. “seeing that You have said to me that ‘I will keep doing good for you.’” The meaning of the repetition היטב איטיב is that the “goodness” that G’d will perform for Yaakov is of the kind that everyone around him can recognize as such. There are acts of loving kindness performed by G’d for individuals who recognize them as such, as for instance, when G’d answered a prayer of theirs; on the other hand, prayers in which the petitioner asked for something that no one else was aware of as being an object of that person’s longing, even when fulfilled, will not be seen by outsiders as benevolent acts of G’d. Something that appears to be a curse when viewed by one person, is viewed as a blessing by another person. Yaakov reminds G’d that He had promised him the kind of help that would be recognized by one and all as a special blessing.
Like the sands of the sea. In favorable times the Israelites are likened to the stars and in bad times they are trampled like the dust. But in intermediate times they are like the sand of the shore, which the waves continually threaten to overwhelm, but upon which they are broken instead.
כי ירא אנכי, these words correspond to the word וחטאה in the list of attributes in Exodus. It is a minor type of sin, the one committed inadvertently. ואתה אמרת, these words and their continuation correspond to the word ונקה in the list of G’d’s attributes revealed to Moses in Exodus 34,7.
ואתה אמרת, Yaakov’s formulation is reminiscent of that of David in Psalms 119,49 “remember Your word to Your servant through which You have given me hope.”
היטב אטיב עמך, it is the custom for Scripture to write the verb in the infinitive mode together with the appropriate mode of the verb in order to reinforce what the verb expresses. According to Bereshit Rabbah 76,7 the word היטב refers to G’d’s support for Yaakov based on his merits, whereas the word איטיב refers to G’d’s support for him based on the merit of his father and grandfather.
כחול הים, an inaccuracy, as in the verse Yaakov referred to G’d had promised that his descendents would be as numerous as the “dust of the earth,” not like the sand on the beaches of the sea. (28,14) The change in syntax is irrelevant, as we explained repeatedly that when the Torah repeats the same theme with different words, the reason is not to alert the reader to an additional dimension of the message, but only to stress the message, to draw attention to its importance.
AND THOU SAIDST: I WILL SURELY DO THEE GOOD. Even though he was afraid lest the sin cause him to lose that which he was promised, Jacob said: “You have done great kindnesses for me even though I was unworthy of them. Certainly You will do for me this undeserved kindness which You have promised me, namely, that You will bestow good upon me and increase my seed. My sin should not withhold from me the good You have promised me, for in the beginning I was also unworthy of it had You marked against me mine iniquities. (See Psalms 130:3.) And You did not promise it to me on account of my deeds, but only out of Your abundant mercies.” And some commentators say (Ibn Ezra. Thus Jacob’s fear was not lest his sin cause him to lose that which he was promised, but because he did not know, etc., as explained in the text.) that Jacob had compassion for his children and household lest Esau smite them, because he did not know whether the promise, And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, (Above, 28:14.) applied to these or to others, it being possible that he himself would escape and have additional children. But in my opinion this is not correct, for if this was his thought, how did he say in his prayer, And Thou saidst: I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea? Moreover, it was told to him in Beth-el, And behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee whithersoever thou goest, and I will bring thee back into this land. (Above, 28:15.) If his children were to fall before his brother’s sword, this promise would not be fulfilled, and it is to this promise that Jacob alluded when he said, And Thou saidst: I will surely do thee good. Similarly with the promise, And I will do thee good: (Verse 10 here.) all this Jacob said on the basis of it having been said to him, And I will be with thee. (Ibid., 31:3.) But all his misgivings were on account of the fear of sin, for it is the way of the righteous to be always fearful. Thus Jacob was fearful that perhaps even after he left Haran, he sinned by entering into a covenant with Laban, who was an idol-worshipper, or in some other matter, and Who can discern errors? (Psalms 19:13.)
ואתה אמרת היטב איטיב עמך; even though You are under no obligation to keep the promise You have made to me seeing that I am not worthy of it, do it for the sake of Your Holy Name which obligates You to keep Your promises (as Moses argued when he reasoned with You not to destroy Israel in spite of their having sinned with the golden calf. His argument had been: “Why should the impression be created that You are unable to keep promises You have made?”) The argument used by Moses he used more than once when he repeated it after the sin of the spies (Numbers 14,16)
היטב איטיב I WILL SURELY DO [THEE] GOOD — The use of two words denoting “doing good” is intended to signify: היטב doing good to thee on account of your own merits, איטיב I will also do good to thee on account of your father’s merits (Genesis Rabbah 76:7).
ושמתי את זרעך כחול הים AND I WILL MAKE THY SEED AS THE SAND OF THE SEA — Where, indeed, did God promise him this? Did he not promise him only (Genesis 28:14) “And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth"? But the explanation is that He had at the same time promised him (Genesis 28:15) “for I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken about thee”, and to Abraham he had promised (Genesis 22:17) “and I will greatly multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven and as the sand which is upon the seashore”.
ואתה אמרת היטב איטיב עמך, if what I am afraid of were to happen this would be the reverse of Your promise to me. How can I watch the destruction of my family?
ושמתי את זרעך, even if only my children will be killed this will be the opposite of what You promised. It behooves You to let them survive for the sake of Your great name, even if I myself do not deserve to survive. We use this kind of argument in our prayers when we say (based on Jeremiah 14,7) אם עונינו ענו בנו עשה למען שמך, “if our sins testify against us, (save us) for the sake of Your name!”
היטיב on account of your merits, and איטיב on account of your fathers’ merits. Although the Torah speaks in the language of man, [thus a double verb need not be expounded,] here it is clear that it is to be expounded. For it should have said היטב תיטב, in second person, like העניק תעניק (Devarim 15:14). This is preferable to Re’m’s explanation, that whenever an exposition can be made it should be made. You might ask: Rashi explained on v. 11 that Yaakov said, “My merits have diminished.” [Why did he pray here on account of his own merits?] The answer is: He surely was not praying here on account of his merits, but on account of his fathers’ merits. That is why Rashi adds, “I will do good on account of your fathers’ merits.”
Until I have done. Also this verse shows that, “Until I have done that which I have spoken for you,” refers to [what Hashem spoke to] Avraham, as Rashi explained on v. 28:15. Otherwise, the difficulty [remains]: Hashem never said this to Yaakov.
He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother:
ואתה אמרת היטיב איטיב עמך, ”and You have said: “I will keep on doing good with you.” Nachmanides explains that although Yaakov was afraid that sins he might have committed would prevent G’d from making good on His promises to him, he refers to very generous kind deeds G’d had already performed, implying that he had not been worthy of these favours. He argues that if G’d had seen fit to perform favours for him which He had not promised, He will most certainly perform those which he had promised him, regardless of any sins he might have become guilty of inadvertently in the meantime. Some commentators claim that Yaakov was concerned as a loving father that Esau should not be allowed to harm members of his family, as it was possible that he would stage a hit and run raid, and only he, Yaakov, would escape due to G’d’s protection of him as promised. In such an event, G’d could still fulfill His promise by enabling Yaakov to start a new family and to raise children. This scenario, as something which Yaakov had in mind with his words here, is not plausible, as if this was what Yaakov had in mind he could not have formulated his prayer with the words “and You yourself have said, etc.,” a reference to people whose very life he attributed to G’d having already fulfilled part of His promise. Furthermore, part of G’d’s promise during the dream of the ladder had been that He would protect Yaakov on all his journeys etc. If his family would become victims of Esau’s vengeful attack, how could this promise still come true? We must attribute Yaakov’s fear as worry only about any sins committed since the promise of G’d had been received as a cause of invalidating such a promise.
“I will make your offspring as the sands of the sea” [32:13]. Jacob said: if he will kill the children and the mothers, where will be the blessing that my children will be like the sand of the sea.
4. Rashi, I Chronicles 27:24, seemingly ignoring the sources cited in both Berakhot 62b and Yoma 22b, posits two entirely different verses as sources for this prohibition. The passages "If a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall your seed also be numbered" (Genesis 13:16) and " 'Look now toward heaven and count the stars if you are able to count them'; and he said unto him, 'So shall your seed be' " (Genesis 15:5) are interpreted by Rashi, not simply as blessings, but as prohibitions against counting the progency of Abraham. In his commentary on I Samuel 15:4, Rashi cites yet a third verse, "I will surely do you good and make your seed as the sand of the sea which cannot be numbered for multitude" (Genesis 32:13) which he renders as "which shall not be numbered for multitide. (Cf., Meshekh Ḥokhmah, Parshat Naso, s.v. be-haftorah.)
It is well known that the meaning of the word yir-ah, is twofold. One meaning is the instinctive unreasoning fear of a physically stronger phenomenon, a fear common to both man and beast. Jacob, fearing defeat at the hands of Esau, prays to G'd for help, lest Esau smite both him an his family. (Genesis 32,10-13) Isaac, who is afraid to be murdered on account of his wife, indulges in a white lie. (Genesis 26,7) Another kind of fear is that which recognises superior moral or intellectual qualities in someone whom one confronts. In effect, this fear is reverence. When Miriam and Aaron discussed Moses' marital relationship, (Numbers 12,2) G'd takes them to task for having failed to display that degree of reverence that is due a prophet of Moses' calibre. The Mishnah in Avot 4,15, urges that reverence for one's teacher should be on a level similar to that accorded the Almighty Himself. Whereas the former kind of fear is common both to the sinner and the devout person, the latter, i.e. reverence is a form of fear that sinners do not know. Proverbs 10,24, states: "the fear of the wicked, it shall come upon him, but the desire of the righteous will be granted." The thing that the wicked is afraid of will happen to him, the pious however, will not be denied, since his adversary can sense his moral superiority. G'd promises that the Canaanites will be awed by the Jewish people in this fashion when the latter are about to invade their land. "The fear of you and the reverence for you, the Lord will implant on all the face of the earth." (Deut 11,25) The most interesting example we find of this phenomenon is the account of Saul, who tries to kill David. (Samuel I chapter 18) He tried to make David's death (intended) appear like an accident, and that is why David did not run for his life at once. Twice, during the playing of the harp, David had turned his head at the precise moment Saul had thrown his spear at him. Saul, who realised that David's escape was not accidental, had previously only feared David as a formidable warrior. Now, however, he also developed reverence for him, seeing G'd had so obviously protected him. (verses 12-15) Verse thirteen refers to the reverence, verse sixteen to the fear of an adversary of known superiority. Saul had experienced similar feelings when his efforts to trick David into being killed by the Philistines had failed. At that time he had let it be known that he would give David his daughter in marriage in return for a dowry of one hundred Philistine foreskins, (ibid, especially verse nine) Other examples of fear and terror are found in Psalms 33,8 and 9. Psalms 68,4, and Jeremiah 5,22. On the other hand, the reverence of the righteous is not based on terror. Compare Psalms 34,10 as well as Psalms 145 and 147. The yereyim are not full of terror, but await G'ds kindness with confidence. We must now examine what kind of fear is referred to in our Parshah in chapter 10,22. It is unlikely that Moses would refer to the fear common to man and beast, since one would then have to assume that G'ds main purpose is for man to relive experiences that would remind him of moments of fear and terror. His service of the Lord then would be based only on man's terrifying awareness of G'ds superior power, His ability to punish man. When under the influence of such terror, truthfulness can easily be turned into falsehoods told because one hopes to escape detection of one's sins. Such untruths would then not even be sinful. We find Abraham calling his wife his sister. Isaac does so likewise, each one having feared for his life at the time. (Genesis 12,10 and 20,6) Joseph's brothers told him of a supposed statement by their father Jacob. They too had been motivated by fear that Joseph would revenge himself now that their father had died. Aaron had agreed to make the golden calf after having seen Chur killed. (Sanhedrin 7) It is therefore quite unthinkable that this is the kind of "fear" that G'd asks of the Jewish people. In fact the whole concept of free will would be demolished if that were to be the basis of our relationship with G'd. The statement of Rabbi Abdima ben Chana (Shabbat 88) that G'd had threatened the Jewish people with annihilation should they fail to accept the Torah at Mount Sinai, is used as evidence that contracts entered into under duress are not binding. Also, it would not make sense if the Talmud in Berachot 33, had described the attainment of fear as a minor accomplishment for the likes of Moses. Surely, any person could possess that kind of fear without even half trying. One certainly would not have to be a Moses to live in terror of G'ds power. On the other hand, if what is meant in our Parshah is reverence inspired by awareness of G'ds many attributes, then such a demand would seem to be the ultimate demand that can be made of any human being. Certainly such a demand ought not to be described as a very modest request. Intellectual awareness of the need for such reverence vis a vis G'd and all He stands for, may indeed be relatively easy to attain, but a lifetime filled with constant awareness of this reverence seems more than can be reasonably expected from any individual. Even of Moses himself it is said: "He turned his face away since he was afraid to look upon G'd." The Torah compliments Moses on this yir-ah, reverence. If a Moses deserves special mention for displaying such reverence, it cannot be come by easily by lesser mortals. (Exodus 2,6)
“And You said: I will benefit you, and render your descendants as the sand of the sea, which cannot be enumerated for multitude” (Genesis 32:13). “And You said: I will benefit [heitev eitiv] you” – heitev, by your merit; eitiv, by the merit of your fathers. “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother” (Genesis 32:14). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother. Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats…” – Rabbi Elazar said: From here one derives the period of conjugal rights of a woman that is stated in the Torah: The men of leisure – every day; the laborers – twice a week; the seafarers – once in six months. “Two hundred female goats” that need “twenty male goats,” “two hundred ewes” that require “twenty rams.” “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring [uvneihem]” and their males [boneihem] (Boneihem means those who build them, which also can mean those with whom they have offspring. Being built can refer to having offspring (See Genesis 16:2).) thirty; Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel: Because it is modest in its sexual relations, the verse did not publicize it, but just, “thirty nursing camels and their offspring.” “Forty cows and ten bulls,” as they need ten bulls. Twenty female donkeys and they need ten male donkeys – why did it place the camels in the middle? It is, rather, as though he [Jacob] was saying to him [Esau]: ‘Consider yourself as though you are sitting on the platform and judging, and I am being judged before you, and you become filled with mercy over me.’ (The tall camels, after the goats and sheep and before the cows and donkeys, evoke the courtroom, with the judges elevated over those present.)
And he hid him in the sand (ibid., v. 12). He said to the Israelites: You are likened to sand, (Referring to Thy seed as the sand of the earth (Gen. 32:13).) which moves soundlessly from one place to another; so, too, no word of this must depart from your mouths. Therefore it is written: And he hid him in the sand (ibid.).
You have said: "I will do good good with you." The word הטיב refers to the good G–d would do with Jacob on earth, whereas the word אטיב referred to the good G–d would do for Jacob in the "higher" world.
Know that in the Torah, when any prophet expresses a thought that implies some question or uncertainty, it does not mean that that prophet doubts the word of the Lord, or considers the possibility that His word, whether great or small, could be voided. (The reason is that a prophet knows that) “there shall fall unto the earth nothing of the word of the Lord.” (1. II Kings 10:10.) When such statements are spoken by the prophets, as when Abraham said, “Shall a child be born unto him that is a hundred years old,” (2. Gen. 17:17.) and “Wilt thou indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked”; (3. Gen. 18:23.) or when Jacob said, “Thou saidest, ‘I will surely do thee good’”; (4. Gen. 32:13.) or when Moses uttered several statements of this kind—all these are spoken in the fullest faith that the word of the Lord will neither fail nor deceive. These statements come instead by way of investigative query, inasmuch as the word of the Lord can be interpreted in various ways. The student, i.e., the prophet, requests clarification of whether (the Lord’s) intention is to (all) the interpretations or some of them, and if to some of them, how many and which ones. (5. He means that God’s words can be interpreted in several ways, and it is not always immediately clear to the prophet which interpretation is correct.) Regarding this variety of interpretations, there are many things to consider. The most important, those that override the others, are two: are there terms or phrases which are equivocal; and, what is the mode of expression? (The latter factor occurs) when (it is not clear whether the expression) is contingent or necessary, because it lacks a qualifying phrase. (6. In the Shulḥan Kesef, fol. 182a, Kaspi says: Examples of statements that are without qualifying phrases are “man lives,” “man writes,” while examples of statements with qualifying phrases are “man lives necessarily,” “man writes possibly.”) An example of a contingent statement (that is unclear) is, “It may be that I shall be builded up through her.” (7. In the same passage of Shulḥan Kesef, Kaspi appears to say that this verse is an example of a statement that possesses a qualifying phrase, for “it may be” is the equivalent of “possibly.” That explanation appears more accurate than the present one.) An example of a necessary statement (that is similary unclear) because it lacks a qualifying phrase, is, “I will give thee a son of her.” (8. He means that in the original Hebrew the term natati (“I will give”) could mean “I will possibly give.”) Statements having qualifying phrases include “Nay, but Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son,” (9. V. 19.) which (indicates) a covenantal obligation or an expression of an oath. Nowhere in the Torah is there an expression that has qualifying phrases unless such a phrase conforms to these (two) formulations. Even the pronouncements of Isaiah on the destruction of Edom (10. Isa. 34.) are not really necessary expressions—certainly none of the others (that prophesy destruction). (11. This, as well as the entire paragraph, is in accordance with Kaspi’s assertion (against Maimonides) that divine decrees never change—they are only reinterpreted in the light of subsequent events. Accordingly the pronouncement of a divine decree, while it may appear to foretell a necessary event, in most cases foretells a contingent event. The only exceptions, Kaspi says here, are pronouncements that include an oath or a covenant. See Maṣref La-Kesef (MK II 286) and Shulḥan Kesef, fols. 182a ff., for a fuller treatment of this doctrine.)
Accordingly, Abraham’s words “whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it” were as if he had said, “Lord God, | on several occasions you have promised me that ‘this land will I give unto you,’ but I do not know if this future decree is necessary or contingent, and therefore I am in doubt and afraid. (109. Elsewhere (MK II 289, AK II 51) Kaspi explains that a prophet might be uncertain of the meaning of a divine statement, for a prophet has only the word-characters (mahut ha-millot) to go by. Here God’s words do not indicate whether the promise is necessary or contingent, so Abraham is unsure.) Explain this to me.” The Lord then fulfilled Abraham’s desire through the making of the covenant, which informed Abraham that (the promise) was a necessary one. It was for this reason that Abraham said “how shall I know” and did not say “how shall I believe” or “how shall I think” or “how is it possible,” as had been said earlier in regard to the two earlier promises, i.e., the promise of seed, and that of———. (110. Here the MS is unclear, with the word devaro inserted.) In this regard, Maimonides explained ’emunah (“faith”) and ha’amanah (“the act of believing”) in the Guide I:50. In the Posterior Analytics it has been explained that what is not known by means of a necessary proof is considered a “justifiable conception,” or a thought that is right and just. (111. In the Posterior Analytics I, 33, 88b, Aristotle says: “opinion may be concerned with that which is true or false, and can be otherwise: opinion is in fact the grasp of a premise which is immediate but not necessary … (on the other hand scientific knowledge) is universal, and proceeds by necessary connections, and that which is necessary cannot be otherwise.”) It is similar with the mode of prophecy, for that which is not known with certainty, as the knowledge of the future rising of the sun, is described in these terms (i.e., “belief”). Therefore earlier it states, “And He counted it to him for righteousness” (i.e., Abraham’s acceptance of the promise of seed), for God had not informed Abraham that it was a necessary promise, and Abraham did not ask for such (assurance) except in this case (of the land), for whatever reason. It was only after Abraham did well in the binding of Isaac that the Lord, of His own accord, provided Abraham the necessary knowledge, i.e., the (necessary) great multiplication of his seed, in the words “by myself have I sworn.” (112. Gen. 22:16.) Had the Lord made (such) a covenant with Jacob, or sworn on the words “I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude,” (113. Gen. 32:13.) then Jacob would not have feared on account of Esau. (114. Gen. 32:8.) (His fear) was not because Jacob was foolish, he merely followed Abraham’s thinking (in not asking for such a covenant regarding seed), for Abraham did not ask “how shall I know …” in relation to the promise of his personal benefits, or of the multiplication of his seed. Those things were close in time to being fulfilled, as well as close in reality, for they were naturally probable. (This is) enough on this subject.
כמעותיו As its bowels. The possessive pronoun refers to the sea, the waves and sand of which have just been mentioned (The sand refers to the sea, mentioned at the end of the preceding verse. Comp. Gen. 32:13.) (ver. 18 and 19); by the bowels of the sea the roe of the fish is meant.
And the comparison of the sand indicates the time when the nations rise up against Israel to destroy them, but they cannot [defeat] them. This is like the waves that go up as if they wanted to flood the whole world. But immediately when they reach the sand, they are broken. So too are the nations, as it is stated (Psalms 42:8), "all Your breakers and waves have swept over me." However they are not able to [defeat] them, because they fall and break there. That is why it called them, "Your breakers." That is why Israel is compared to this sand that breaks the waves. As they are not able to pass the sand; for the sand is the statute and the limit of the sea. So too are the nations not able to destroy Israel. Therefore when Esav came to meet Yaakov, Yaakov said in his prayer (Genesis 32:13), "You have said, I will do very good with you, and I will make your offspring like the sands of the sea." Why did he mention specifically the promise of the sand and not mention the stars, which have two advantages - numerousness and greatness? And he also did not [even] mention an expression of increase, but rather, "and I will make your offspring like the sands of the sea!" Rather, it is that since this is a promise that their enemies will not be able to [defeat] them, so too will Esav not be able to injure him. And for this reason, he mentioned specifically the sand that is at the shore of the sea. For is there no other sand in the world besides it? Rather, it is because it breaks the waves, as mentioned. That is why, "as the sand on the shore of the sea," is stated here. But what is the relationship of this to "and your descendants will inherit the gate of their enemies?" Rather it is in the way of, "not [only] this, but also that." As it is not [only] this, that they will be like the sand that the waves - meaning the enemies - are not able to [defeat]; but rather also that, that they will inherit the gate of their enemies and will be able [to defeat] them.
שש מאות אלף ואלף שבע מאות ושלושים, “six hundred and one thousand seven hundred and thirty.” Remember that both this number and the number 603,550 given in Numbers 1,47 is not the total number of Israelites; their total number was beyond the ability of the enumerators to determine. On both occasions of the census only men over the age of twenty who were potentially soldiers in the army were counted. No doubt the total number of Israelites comprised many sick people, many who were physically weak and not fit to serve in the army, and many old people all of whom were not included in the count given by the Torah. As a result of all this the total number of the Jewish people was never revealed in Scripture. Ever since the family of Yaakov descended to Egypt they became the recipients of the Divine blessing which resulted in over 600,000 males leaving Egypt, not counting the children. The number reported in Exodus 12,37 remained the same throughout the revelation at Mount Sinai when a renewed blessing was bestowed on the people as per Numbers 1,1.
From all the above we learn that when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai the people already knew the precise number of males over 20. During the short ten months until the count in the desert of Sinai their number climbed to one that was beyond counting. The truth is that the number of Jews is beyond determination by means of a census. There has never been a time in Jewish history when the total number of Jews was known. G’d had already foretold Avraham that the number of his descendants would exceed the ability of people to count them (Genesis 15,5). Moses too said to the people shortly before his death (Deut. 1,10) “and here, as of this day, you are as numerous as the stars in heaven,” i.e. beyond counting. Even Bileam, our perennial opponent and sworn enemy, testified that ”the dust of Yaakov has defied the ability to be counted, neither have even a quarter of the Jewish nation been counted” (Numbers 23,10). We find that when David gave instructions (which were only partially carried out) to take a census of Israel’s fighting men that the number Yoav reported as having been counted was 1,3 million people (Samuel II 24,9). If this was the number of active, arms-bearing male Israelites at that time, the total number of Jews must have been several times that number. The verses in Scripture are even more convincing than extrapolations arrived at by our intelligence. Concerning the future, the prophet Isaiah states clearly that at that time the Jewish people will be more numerous than any (or all) the nations of the earth (as per Isaiah 54,1): “for the children of the forlorn wife shall outnumber those of the espoused, says the Lord.” Once the great ingathering of the Jews in exile will be in progress the number of Jews will be seen to be even far greater still. This is the meaning of Isaiah 49,12: “Look these are coming from afar, these from the north and the west and these from the land of Sinnim.” The prophet continues in verse 21 of that chapter: “and you will say to yourself, ‘who bore these for me when I was bereaved and barren, exiled and disdained; by whom then were these raised? I was left all alone and where have these been?’” You will note that the prophet mentioned the word “these”, אלה, three times in each of these verses! This is an allusion to the fact that the Shechinah will return with the exiles at the time of the redemption. This Shechinah which consists of the six extremities of the globe is alluded to by David who used the word שמר, “to guard, to protect” six times in connection with the G’d of Israel protecting His people (Psalm 121).
You have said, I will do very good with you, and I will make your offspring [many] like the sands of the sea, which are too numerous to count.
But Thou hast promised, I will surely do thee good, and will make thy sons many as the sand of the sea be numbered for that cannot be numbered for multitude.
| וַיָּ֥לֶן שָׁ֖ם בַּלַּ֣יְלָה הַה֑וּא וַיִּקַּ֞ח מִן־הַבָּ֧א בְיָד֛וֹ מִנְחָ֖ה לְעֵשָׂ֥ו אָחִֽיו׃ | 14 E | After spending the night there, he selected from what was at hand these presents for his brother Esau: |
מנחה לעשו אחיו, “as a gift for his brother Esau.” He meant to be conciliatory regardless of Esau’s intentions concerning him.
מן הבא בידו, “from that which had come into his hand, etc.” The Torah means “from that which he had acquired rightfully, as opposed to things which are acquired by illegal means. We have a verse in Malachi 1,13 specifically targeting gifts (offerings to G’d) which the owner had not acquired honestly. “and you bring (as a gift) the stolen or the lame. Would I accept it from you- said the Lord?”
Another meaning of the words: מן הבא בידו could be that it referred to gemstones, i.e. literally: “valuables capable of being carried in one’s hand.” There is a commentator who understands that expression to mean that there is a certain bird called falcon which is an expert hunter. Seeing that Esau was a hunter, Yaakov thought that presenting him with such a bird which had been domesticated like a hunting dog would please Esau. We would then have to translate the whole verse something like this: ”he took a gift for Esau his brother from amongst these birds, i.e. from a species Esau used to carry in his hand .”
וילן, he remained standing all night waiting for a response to his prayer. While waiting he prepared the gift he was going to send to Esau in the morning. The Torah describes this gift in detail a little later on in its narrative, commencing with the words עזים מאתים.
בידו, which were his. The word occurs in this sense also in 39,4 where Potiphar transfers all his belongings to the care of Joseph. The angel with whom Yaakov wrestled, and who represented the answer to his prayer, did not arrive until after Yaakov had completed preparing his gift for Esau. The reason for this delay was in order to teach us that we must not entrust our affairs to the intervention of G’d on our behalf until after we have exhausted natural means of achieving our purpose (legally, of course). Even the greatest tzaddik must not entrust his needs to G’d while attending to matters such as Torah study, for instance, instead of his duties to insure his own and his family’s needs. These include prayer, appeasement of adversaries by gifts or lip-service, and in the final analysis physical resistance, war. In all one’s endeavours one must, of course, put one’s trust in G’d, hoping that He will approve of one’s efforts and grant one success.
OF THAT WHICH HE HAD WITH HIM A PRESENT. Scripture states that he composed a gift out of that which he had since his wealth consisted of flocks and herds, and it was from them that Jacob sent a gift, for he was en-route and he had no opportunity to send him vessels of silver, and vessels of gold… and precious things. (Above, 24:53.)
הבא בידו AND TOOK OF THAT WHICH CAME TO HIS HAND (literally, in his hand) — in his possession, similar to (Numbers 21:26) “and he had taken all his land out of his possession (מידו).” A Midrashic explanation is: מן הבא בידו — precious stones and jewels which a person ties up in a package and carries in his hand. Another explanation is: מן הבא בידו THAT WHICH A MAN MAY TAKE INTO HIS OWN POSSESSION — of that which no longer has a sacred character — for he had set aside the tithe, just as you read (28:22) “[And Jacob vowed] … I will surely give the tenth unto Thee”. Only afterwards did he take the present of what was left after the tithe had been set aside, and this was that which he might rightly take into his own possession.
In his possession. There is a question [on the first explanation]: Why does it need to say בידו? [Obviously, he took only from what was his!] Thus Rashi brings the Midrashic explanation that it refers to jewels. But there is a question on this: Why does it not mention [the type of jewel] by name, [as it does with the animals]? Therefore Rashi brings the alternate explanation, about tithes. But this explanation alone does not suffice, because why did it say, “Which comes into his hand”? The non-sacred was already in his hand, [as he made it so by tithing it]. That is why Rashi presents all the explanations. (Maharshal)
Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams,
מן הבא בידו, “from something he had acquired.” The gift he prepared was not something he had to buy, but it came out of his own possessions, Seeing that he was not near any town, he did not have time to look for something especially suited as a gift. He took from the items which represented his wealth.
“He selected from what was at hand presents” [32:14]. He took precious stones in his hand and wanted to present them to Esau. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:14.) Bahya and Toldot Yizhak write. He took a bird in his hand with which one hunts animals, called a hawk. Nobles carry them on their arm to hunt animals with them. Jacob wanted to present the bird to Esau, since Esau was a hunter. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 32:13; Bahya, Genesis, 32:14.)
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“And You said: I will benefit you, and render your descendants as the sand of the sea, which cannot be enumerated for multitude” (Genesis 32:13). “And You said: I will benefit [heitev eitiv] you” – heitev, by your merit; eitiv, by the merit of your fathers. “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother” (Genesis 32:14). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother. Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats…” – Rabbi Elazar said: From here one derives the period of conjugal rights of a woman that is stated in the Torah: The men of leisure – every day; the laborers – twice a week; the seafarers – once in six months. “Two hundred female goats” that need “twenty male goats,” “two hundred ewes” that require “twenty rams.” “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring [uvneihem]” and their males [boneihem] (Boneihem means those who build them, which also can mean those with whom they have offspring. Being built can refer to having offspring (See Genesis 16:2).) thirty; Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel: Because it is modest in its sexual relations, the verse did not publicize it, but just, “thirty nursing camels and their offspring.” “Forty cows and ten bulls,” as they need ten bulls. Twenty female donkeys and they need ten male donkeys – why did it place the camels in the middle? It is, rather, as though he [Jacob] was saying to him [Esau]: ‘Consider yourself as though you are sitting on the platform and judging, and I am being judged before you, and you become filled with mercy over me.’ (The tall camels, after the goats and sheep and before the cows and donkeys, evoke the courtroom, with the judges elevated over those present.)
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. Did he lack something? Indeed, when they said to him (in Gen. 32:7 [6]): MOREOVER HE (Esau) IS COMING TO MEET YOU, AND THERE ARE FOUR HUNDRED MEN WITH HIM; he arose and prepared a gift. (Gk.: doron.) (According to Gen. 32:15-16 [14-15]) he began by giving she-goats because they were tender. Afterwards < according to the text, there were > he-goats, ewes, rams, < and > THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS. [R. Levi said: If I went around among all the tents of Kedar (i.e., of the Ishmaelites) you would not have found THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS.] Look at Jacob's wealth! In addition (according to Gen. 32:16 [15]) he gave FORTY COWS AND TEN BULLS. R. Isaac said: < These did > not include precious stones and pearls. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:14 [13]): THEN HE TOOK FROM WHAT WAS IN HAND, < i.e., > things taken up in the hand. These would be precious stones and pearls. R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: All twelve months that he spent with him, he would so honor him (with gifts) on each day. In this regard Jacob said (in Deut. 16:19): FOR A GIFT BLINDS THE EYES OF THE (PRUDENT) [WISE]. < He reasoned > a fortiori, how much the more < would a gift blind > the wicked! Just consider this: I am honoring him so that he will not touch me.
When the High Priest performed the service in the Temple on the Day of Atonement, he first confessed the sins of the Jewish people over the scapegoat. We read in Leviticus 16,22: "The scapegoat carries upon it all their iniquities unto a land which is cut off;" in the case of Jacob, the Torah writes: "He took from what had come into his hand, a gift for Esau" (Genesis 32,14). This corresponds symbolically to the sins with which the Jews had dirtied themselves throughout the year, and which were now presented as a gift to our "cousin" Esau, as will be explained. The Torah continues by listing the gifts in detail, commencing with עזים מאתים, two hundred goats, etc.
A meal-offering. The expression מנחה connotes a tax or tribute given by a servant to his master. It appears to me that it is based on the root נח (to rest, lie down), which connotes submission and coming down from above to below. Accordingly, מנחה connotes how a servant demonstrates his submission to his master. This same usage of מנחה applies to any present sent from one to another, such as in (Bereishis 32:14): A present (מנחה) to his brother, Eisov. Here, Yaakov wished to demonstrate to Eisov that he is submissive to him and honors him as a servant honors his master. Now, a poor man whose home is empty and has nothing to offer besides a tenth of an ephah demonstrates his great submission when he brings the little in his possession to God, more than the rich man who offers a calf. Therefore, this offering, although it is very little in quantity, is called the מנחה.
As an answer to the first question, God changed the staff into a serpent. After Israel was chosen to receive the Torah, it was necessary to bring the Israelites to a state of wholeness so that they would be worthy of redemption. As long as a person is affluent, he is not aware of the evil inclination within himself. Only when his heart is broken, and he is alone does he begin to understand that his evil inclination has incited him. Wealth is referred to by the expression haba b’yado, as in the verse: “After spending the night there Jacob selected from what was at hand (haba b’yado (This will become relevant in a few lines when he quotes Exodus again. God asks Moses: “What is in your hand” which he interprets to mean – do you have wealth?) ) these presents for his brother, Esau.” (Gen. 32:14) Also wealth is referred to as a ‘staff’ since wealth offers support to a person just as a staff in a person’s hand helps him to remain standing…But wealth can be a serpent which misleads and destroys, as it is written: “Jeshurun grew fat and kicked…” (Deut. 32:15) The sages interpreted this verse with the following parable: “It is like the case of a man who had a son; he bathed and anointed him and gave him plenty to eat and drink and hung a purse round his neck and set him down at the door of a bawdy house. How could the boy help sinning?”
ללין, the word לין is a noun, just as the word ריב in Deuteronomy 25,1כי יהיה ריב בין אנשים , “when there is a quarrel between men, etc.” is a noun. It is a derivative of Genesis 31,36 וירב בלבן, he “(Yaakov) quarreled with Lavan.” The word דין is a similar noun derived from דן אנכי in Genesis 15,14. לין is in a similar relationship to Genesis 32,14 וילן שם בלילה הוא, “he spent that night there.” (the night of the wrestling match with the angel on the far side of the river Yabbok) Rivkah’s answer גם מקום ללון (as opposed to the word ללין in Eliezer’s enquiry) meant that there is room for you and your men’s bodies to spend the night with us. The formulation ללון is a verbal formulation just as in Genesis 31,35 לקום, where Rachel excuses herself for not rising in the presence of her father. It is also similar to the formulation (verbal infinitive) לשוב מצרימה “to return to Egypt” in Exodus 4,21. If Rivkah had said: גם מקום לכם, she would have had to continue with the word ללין instead of the word ללון. Whereas the word לנו used by Eliezer meant that he and his men would be prepared to spend the night where the camels spent it, the word ללון after the word עמנו, “with us,” which clearly refers to Rivkah and her family, i.e. accommodation designed for human beings. She therefore meant to say: “why would you need to spend the night at an inn? This is the correct meaning as understood by people who understand the nuances of the Holy Tongue, i.e. Hebrew as written in the Torah.
that...is ready and prepared to come to his hand, i.e., to him, and with him is the day of darkness. at his hand Like (Gen. 32: 14), “from what came into his hand.”
Rebbi Eliezer (His list of prescribed minimal frequencies of intercourse is based on the occupation of the male. The same argument is given in Gen. rabba 76(6); it is reproduced in Rashi’s Commentary to Gen. 32:15–16.) inferred from the gift which Jacob had sent to his brother Esaw, for he sent him according to copulations. “200 she-goats and 20 he-goats,” one for ten; “200 ewes and 20 rams,” one for ten (One male can satisfy 10 females since it has nothing to do except grazing and copulating.) . “Nursing camels and their sons 30.” Rebbi Berekhiah said, because it is decent in his sexual behavior did the verse not publicize (In Gen.rabba 76(6), R. Berekhiah in the name of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel implies that 30 males (בנאים “builders”) accompanied the 30 females.) . “40 cows and ten bulls,” one for four since they are tired (Cattle was used extensively for ploughing and drawing agricultural implements.) ; “20 she-donkeys and ten he-donkeys,” one for two since they are tired.
He spent that night there. He took from that which comes into his hand, [for] a present to his brother, Eisov.
And he abode there that night; and he took what was ready at his hand a present for Esau his brother:
| עִזִּ֣ים מָאתַ֔יִם וּתְיָשִׁ֖ים עֶשְׂרִ֑ים רְחֵלִ֥ים מָאתַ֖יִם וְאֵילִ֥ים עֶשְׂרִֽים׃ | 15 E | 200 she-goats and 20 he-goats; 200 ewes and 20 rams; |
TWO HUNDRED SHE-GOATS. Jacob sent ten females for every male of the flock, (Ten she-goats for every he-goat and 10 ewes for each ram.) four bulls for each cow, and two she-asses for every foal. He did this because he knew their nature. (He sent as many males as were needed to service the females.)
עזים מאחים, two hundred goats, etc. I have heard from my grandfather of blessed memory that Jacob intended that the total number of animals he sent as a gift to Esau should correspond to the numeriacl value of the letters in the word שעיר (580). Therefore he sent a total of 440 sheep and goats, thirty camels plus a young one each, i.e. a total of 60 camels. Add to this the forty cows and ten bulls, the twenty she-asses and ten donkeys, and you have a total of 580. The word שעיר symbolises Esau's power; the animals Jacob sent him as a gift were supposed to neutralise that power.
עזים מאתים ותישים עשרים, “two hundred she-goats and twenty he-goats.” Yaakov sent ahead the goats as is customary amongst the flocks. We have other examples in Scripture when the species of goats precedes a list of other animals, such as in Jeremiah 50,8 “and be like the goats which lead the flock.” Another piece of information contained in our verse is the fact that the males of the goats and the sheep were more numerous than those of the other herds of animals Yaakov sent Esau as a gift. We observe that the camels appear to have been monogamous, seeing that Yaakov sent identical numbers of males and females. When it came to mentioning the cows and donkeys, each of which were the same number, the Torah first lists the pure species, i.e. the cows. You will observe that in each instance the female of the species was mentioned before the male seeing the females outnumbered the males. Another way of looking at the sequence in which these animals are listed is that they are listed in order of the time it takes for the respective species to reproduce, i.e. the length of pregnancy of the mother animal. Sheep and goats reproduce after a pregnancy of five months, camels after six months, cows after nine months and donkeys after a pregnancy of twelve months. I have written earlier (verse 1) that Yaakov did not really want to commence with the goats seeing that the goats had been what had enabled him to snatch the blessing away from Esau and that this was the reason he listed oxen as the first in a list of the possessions he had acquired; why then did he send precisely these goats ahead of any other flock? The answer is relatively simple. As long as he had not prayed for G’d’s help and it was a matter of how the angels (or human messengers) were to announce his impending arrival to Esau, Yaakov did not want to do anything which could be interpreted as provocative. Now that he had prayed and had prevailed over the celestial force representing Esau, he had changed his stance and wanted to do something which would make Esau afraid of him rather than the reverse. He therefore deliberately placed the goats first to hint that he had no reason to feel afraid of him. Had he not obtained the blessing through having presented his father with two goats and obviously G’d had approved the part in which his father had said “be an overlord over your brothers, etc.?” He wanted to remind his brother that their father had designated Esau as becoming a servant to Yaakov. By placing the asses and donkeys last, in that order, Yaakov hinted that in the distant future the descendants of Esau would become the victims of the Jewish messiah who would appear riding on a donkey. We find the following verse in Zechariah 9,9 concerning this future event: “Rejoice fair Zion; raise a shout fair Jerusalem! Lo, your king is coming to you He is victorious, triumphant, yet humble, riding on an ass, on a donkey foaled by a she-ass.” When you look at things in that way you will find that Yaakov caused Esau to become afraid of him both by the first part of the gift he sent, i.e. by the goats, as well as by the last item, the donkeys. When looking at the immense wealth possessed by both Esau and Yaakov, the gift listed here did not represent a meaningful addition to the wealth of either brother. The meaning of the gift was therefore more in its symbolic significance. Keeping this in mind, Rabbeinu Chananel points out that the total number of animals sent by Yaakov to Esau amounts to 550. This number corresponds to the number of years the descendants of Esau preceded Yaakov (Israel) as an organized state.
ויפן וירד משה מן ההר. We learn from this word ויפן, he turned around, that Moses descended while facing the cloud just as he had done when ascending the mountain. In other words, just as he had ascended facing the cloud, he now descended keeping his face toward the cloud, walking backwards. The High Priest, on the Day of Atonement, emulated this when withdrawing from the Holy of Holies by walking backwards after having offered the incense before the lid of the Holy Ark, the kapporet, as well as some of the blood of the two offerings on behalf of the people as well as sprinkling some on the dividing curtain. We have a similar verse in Chronicles II 1,13 describing Solomon’s approach to the altar that was standing in Givon at that time. Even though one could say that the words ויבא שלמה לבמה אשר בגבעון ירושלים mean: “Solomon returned from the altar in Givon to Jerusalem,” [seeing Givon at that time was certainly not part of Jerusalem Ed.] the correct interpretation is that he withdrew in the same way as he had approached. The point of all this was to conform to the principle of שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד, “I am keeping Hashem in front of Me at all times.” (Psalms 16,8) One does not turn one’s back on G’d. The Mishnah, Yuma 52 states: “in the manner he had entered he also exited.” This is also the way Leviticus 16,24 describes this, writing: “he exited and completed the ritual of his own burnt offering as well as that of the people.” These words have been interpreted by our sages to mean that the word לבמה “to the altar,” must also be read as מבמה.”from the altar,” when he was headed back to Jerusalem (Yuma 53). There is a precedent for this in Numbers 31,21, where the words הבאים למלחמה, must also mean הבאים מן המלחמה, “the ones who were returning from the war.” How do we know that indeed the Shechinah was on the mountain at the time Moses descended? In Deuteronomy 9,15 where Moses refers to his descent from the mountain, he adds the words: “and the mountain was burning in fire while the two tablets of the covenant were on my hands.” We learn from all of this that the student, when taking leave of his teacher, walks backwards until the face of his teacher is no longer directly visible to him. (Yuma 53) This is also the reason why, at the end of the principal prayer the amidah, we step three steps backwards, as if to take leave of the G’d Whom we had faced and addressed before. (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim section 123).
עזים מאתים, Yaakov the shepherd knew precisely how many male animals were required to service a flock of female animals to achieve the best results. Sheep and goats have similar requirements in this respect.
עזים מאתים ותישים עשרים TWO HUNDRED SHE GOATS AND TWENTY HE GOATS — Two hundred she goats have need of twenty he goats, and so too in the case of all the various species the males were in number according to the need of the females. In Genesis Rabbah 76:7 an inference is made from here as regards the minimum period imperative for the marital duty imposed by the Torah - [for] the men of leisure, every day; [for] the laborers, twice a week; [for] the donkey drivers, once a week; [for] the camel drivers, once in thirty days, [for] the sailors, once in six months. I am unable however to show exactly how this inference is arrived at. But it appears to me that we may learn from here at least that this period is not the same for every person, but that it depends upon the amount of labor imposed upon him by his occupation. As we have found here that ten she goats were given to each he goat, and so [too] to each ram; [as] since they are free from work, their way is to be frequently involved in sexual relations and to impregnate ten females - and once an animal becomes pregnant, it does not accept a male. And [concerning] the bulls that engage in work, it only gave four females to the male; and to the donkey who goes on long journeys, [it gave] two females to the male; and to the camels that go on [even] longer journeys, [it gave] one female to the male.
Once an animal has become pregnant it does not accept the male. Rashi is saying that it is the nature of an animal to mate as often as enjoyment calls for and free time permits. Since he-goats and rams are free all day, Yaakov gave them ten females each. This enabled them to fulfill their desire and maximize offspring for the owner. And so Yaakov gave each [type of male animal] according to its free time. This raises a question: Although he-goats and rams are free all day, they do not know that their mating with many females benefits the owner. Perhaps one male will fulfill its desire with one female, mating with it repeatedly? To this Rashi answers: “Once an animal has become pregnant...” This forces the male to separate from her and go to a second and a third, etc. Re’m explained differently; the reader may decide. See Kesubos 62a, which says that free time serves as the determining factor. (Nachalas Yaakov)
thirty nursing camels and their offspring, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys. Of every species that Jacob sent, he included both males and females, so that they would be able to reproduce. This is also the reason for the various proportions between the males and females, as different ratios are more suitable for the reproduction of different animals. One can infer from the impressive size of the present that Jacob must have owned an enormous amount of livestock.
“200 she-goats and 20 he-goats” [32:15]. Bahya writes. Jacob put the goats in front of the animals, since they always go in front of the animals and because he had twenty times as many he-goats as the other animals. He mentions the camels after them because the camels were better than the other animals. Then he mentions the kosher animals and afterwards the donkeys and horses, which are non-kosher animals. Jacob also placed the animals according to the length of their pregnancy. Sheep and goats are pregnant for five months; camels for six months; cows for nine months; donkeys and horses for twelve months. Another explanation is that Jacob did not want to mention sheep and goats first. He thought: let not Esau hate me because I took away the blessing through goats. However, now that Jacob prayed, Jacob said to Esau, I am not afraid of you. Therefore, he began with goats. He said: I began the blessings through goats that I should be a lord over my brother and you should be my servant. Therefore, he mentioned donkeys and young foals at the end. That is to say, you will fall into the hands of the Messiah, who will ride on a donkey and on a young foal, as the verse says, “Lo, your king is coming to you. He is victorious, triumphant, yet humble, riding on an ass, on a donkey foaled by a she-ass” [Zechariah, 9:9]. Jacob showed all this with the present to Esau, how Israel will go into exile, and the number of animals was five hundred and fifty. Therefore, the kingdom of Esau began five hundred and fifty years before the kingdom of Israel was established. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:15.) Ba’al ha-Turim writes. The verse says, “200 she-goats and 20 he-goats; 200 ewes and 20 rams” [32:15]. Each word ends with a final mem. This shows us that Jacob only sent animals that were not worthy to be sacrificed. That is to say, they had a defect [mum], which is shown by the [letter] mem. (Ba’al ha-Turim, Genesis, 32:15.) Rashi writes. Jacob divided the animals in the following way. He gave ten she-goats for each he-goat; since the he-goat does not work he has to have ten she-goats to lie with. If you want to ask, does the animal have sense that the he-goat will lie with ten she-goats? Perhaps he will only lie with one she-goat. The explanation is that the animal no longer lies with the male when it gets pregnant. Therefore, the he-goat will certainly lie with ten she-goats, since he has nothing to do. Similarly, the ram who does nothing also needs ten ewes. However, the oxen do not have free time, since they must plow. Therefore, Jacob gave each ox four cows to lie with. The donkeys who travel long distances do not have free time and therefore Jacob gave each male donkey two females. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:15.)
Rabbi Schuck bolsters this thesis by pointing to the enumeration in Genesis 32:15-16 of the various species of animals sent by Jacob as a gift to his brother Esau. Scripture first mentions goats and sheep, then camels, followed by cattle and, finally, donkeys. The order is puzzling in that the enumeration of clean species is interrupted by mention of camels, an unclean species, while the other unclean species, viz., donkeys, is mentioned last. Rabbi Schuck suggests that the "camel" to which reference is made is none other than the taḥash. He contends that at a later period the taḥash was bred with a non-kosher species, i.e., a non-kosher camel, and that the giraffe was the product of that union. Rabbi Schuck seems to believe that the common species of the present-day giraffe, produced as a result of crossbreeding, possesses hoofs that are incompletely split and hence is obviously non-kosher, but that the original giraffe was a ruminant with completely split hoofs. In any event, if Rabbi Schuck were to be correct in describing its origin, the present-day giraffe, since it would be descended from a non-kosher ancestor, could not be regarded as a kosher species.
[2] Another interpretation: "And there will be an end..." Like scriptures says: "For from the house of bondage he went out to reign" (Ecclesiastes 4:14), referring to Abraham who left Ur of the Chaldeans and was raised in the world, as it says, "I am the Lord who brought you out" (Genesis 15:7). Alternatively, "from the house of bondage" refers to Isaac, whom God saved from the sword of his father, as it is written: "And he said, 'Do not stretch out your hand against the lad'" (Genesis 22:12). Isaac went out into the world and grew up, as it is written: "And Isaac went out to meditate" (Genesis 24:63). Additionally, regarding "from the house of the prisoners," this refers to Jacob, who left his father's house when he fled from Esau, as it says "And Jacob went out" (Genesis 28:10). And what is written about him? "And the man broke out exceedingly" (Genesis 30:43). However, even in his kingship he was born poor (Ecclesiastes 4:14), as when Esau came and took his goats and more (Genesis 32:15). Alternatively: "Regarding Joseph, who came from the house of prisoners and became king, as it is said 'The king sent and released him, even the ruler of peoples, and set him free.' (Psalms 105:20). However, even in his kingship, he was born poor, as it says 'A poor man who became king.' (Ecclesiastes 4:14). He did not elevate himself to become king, but just as his heart was when he was imprisoned, as it says 'And Joseph was the ruler...and he was the provider' (Genesis 42:6). And do not think that I only know him as the ruler and provider, but rather to teach you that he was both in his youth and as a king. As Solomon says: "If the spirit [of judgment] of the Ruler arises against you..."(Ecclesiastes 10:4)."
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“And You said: I will benefit you, and render your descendants as the sand of the sea, which cannot be enumerated for multitude” (Genesis 32:13). “And You said: I will benefit [heitev eitiv] you” – heitev, by your merit; eitiv, by the merit of your fathers. “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother” (Genesis 32:14). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother. Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats…” – Rabbi Elazar said: From here one derives the period of conjugal rights of a woman that is stated in the Torah: The men of leisure – every day; the laborers – twice a week; the seafarers – once in six months. “Two hundred female goats” that need “twenty male goats,” “two hundred ewes” that require “twenty rams.” “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring [uvneihem]” and their males [boneihem] (Boneihem means those who build them, which also can mean those with whom they have offspring. Being built can refer to having offspring (See Genesis 16:2).) thirty; Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel: Because it is modest in its sexual relations, the verse did not publicize it, but just, “thirty nursing camels and their offspring.” “Forty cows and ten bulls,” as they need ten bulls. Twenty female donkeys and they need ten male donkeys – why did it place the camels in the middle? It is, rather, as though he [Jacob] was saying to him [Esau]: ‘Consider yourself as though you are sitting on the platform and judging, and I am being judged before you, and you become filled with mercy over me.’ (The tall camels, after the goats and sheep and before the cows and donkeys, evoke the courtroom, with the judges elevated over those present.)
[(Gen. 43:14:) AND MAY GOD ALMIGHTY (ShDY) GRANT YOU MERCY.] What was the reason for Jacob to bless them with < the formula > GOD ShDY? (Tanh., Gen. 10:10; below, 10:16.) To teach you that a lot of afflictions had come upon him. While he was in his mother's womb, Esau had contended with him, as stated (in Gen. 25:22): BUT THE CHILDREN STRUGGLED TOGETHER WITHIN HER. (Cf. PRK 3:1.) And so it says (in Amos 1:11): BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND DESTROYED HIS WOMB. "His womb" is < what is > written. (DESTROYED HIS WOMB would normally be read as a metaphor and translated by an expression such as “cast off all pity.”) Because of Esau he fled to Laban. See how many troubles there were! (Gen. 31:40:) THUS I WAS: BY DAY SCORCHING HEAT CONSUMED ME…. < Look at > how, when he left, < Laban > pursued after him to kill him, [as stated (in Gen. 31:23)]: AND PURSUED AFTER HIM FOR A JOURNEY OF {THREE} [SEVEN] DAYS. He escaped from him; Esau came with the intention of killing him. On account of him he lost all that gift (Gk.: doron.) (according to Gen. 32:15 [14]): TWO HUNDRED SHE-GOATS…. He went away from Esau; the trouble about Dinah came (in Gen. 34). Then after that, the trouble with Rachel < dying > (in Gen. 35:19). Then, after these troubles, he was intending to rest a bit, until there came the trouble about Joseph (in Gen. 37); and after that, the trouble with his father, Isaac, who died (in Gen. 35:29) ten years after the sale of Joseph. So the Scripture has cried out (in Job 3:26): I WAS NOT TRANQUIL, NOT QUIET, HAD NO REST; AND TROUBLE CAME. After that there came upon him the trouble with Simeon (in Gen. 42:24); and after that, the trouble with Benjamin (in Gen. 42:36; 43:3-15). He therefore prayed (in Genesis 43:14) AND MAY GOD ShDY. Now he says: The one who said: Enough (DY), to the heavens and to the earth should say: Enough (DY), to my afflictions. For, when the Holy One created the heavens and the earth, they continued expanding until the Holy One said to them: Enough (DY). (See above, 1:11; 3:25. below, 10:16.) It is therefore written (in Gen. 43:14): GOD WHO IS ENOUGH (ShDY).
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. Did he lack something? Indeed, when they said to him (in Gen. 32:7 [6]): MOREOVER HE (Esau) IS COMING TO MEET YOU, AND THERE ARE FOUR HUNDRED MEN WITH HIM; he arose and prepared a gift. (Gk.: doron.) (According to Gen. 32:15-16 [14-15]) he began by giving she-goats because they were tender. Afterwards < according to the text, there were > he-goats, ewes, rams, < and > THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS. [R. Levi said: If I went around among all the tents of Kedar (i.e., of the Ishmaelites) you would not have found THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS.] Look at Jacob's wealth! In addition (according to Gen. 32:16 [15]) he gave FORTY COWS AND TEN BULLS. R. Isaac said: < These did > not include precious stones and pearls. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:14 [13]): THEN HE TOOK FROM WHAT WAS IN HAND, < i.e., > things taken up in the hand. These would be precious stones and pearls. R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: All twelve months that he spent with him, he would so honor him (with gifts) on each day. In this regard Jacob said (in Deut. 16:19): FOR A GIFT BLINDS THE EYES OF THE (PRUDENT) [WISE]. < He reasoned > a fortiori, how much the more < would a gift blind > the wicked! Just consider this: I am honoring him so that he will not touch me.
"A Psalm of David. Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; preserve me from the violent man; Solomon said (Proverbs 4:6), 'Do not forsake wisdom, and she will keep you.' (Proverbs 6:22) 'When you walk, they will lead you; when you lie down, they will watch over you.' So said the Lord to David, 'It is your desire that I preserve you; I will preserve you and keep you in the Torah,' as it says (Proverbs 4:13), 'Keep her, for she is your life.' Your desire is that I rescue you from the hand of the wicked; sing for joy before Me, and I will deliver you.' (Psalm 32:7) 'Sing for joy, O daughter of Zion; shout aloud, O Israel! Be glad and rejoice with all your heart, O daughter of Jerusalem!' Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; who is he, but Esau the wicked? And what is his evil? Death. So said the Lord, 'When I redeem you from the hand of death, I will redeem you,' as it says (Hosea 13:14), 'I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death.' Death is the evil that Esau has done. Therefore it is said, 'Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man,' (Psalm 140:1) and Jacob also said, 'Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man.' (Genesis 32:12) 'And what kind of evil is it that a violent person does? Protect me from the hand of the oppressor.' And what was the oppression? (Genesis 32:14-15) 'He spent the night there, and from what he had with him he took a present for his brother Esau: two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams.' This was not oppression. And so it says (Obadiah 1:10), 'Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you.'" Israel said, "The mountains will be cut off forever, and whatever was swallowed up will be swallowed up." Then the Lord said, "I will bring them out from between their teeth," as it is written (Psalm 68:23), "God said, 'I will bring them back from Bashan.'" Therefore, it is said, "Protect me from the hands of the wicked, who have thought evil thoughts in their hearts," etc. What does it mean to have evil thoughts in the heart? It does not mean that it is only hidden in one's heart and not spoken aloud. Rather, it means that one thinks evil thoughts in the heart. When they think of evil, they are not only thinking of themselves but also of others, as it is written (Obadiah 1:18), "The house of Jacob will be a fire," etc. This is also expressed in Daniel 7:7-8, "I looked at these horns and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, and it uprooted three of the horns with eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth uttering great boasts." Looking at God, one speaks harsh and reviling words. It is written (Daniel 7:11), "I watched until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire."
You will find that the number 400 is prominent in matters concerning the עין רע, “the evil eye.” The numerical value of the words עין רע is 400. The last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the letter ת is equal to 400. As such it embodies all the letters in the alphabet. Similarly, עין רע is an all inclusive destructive concept. Seeing that the letter ה was added to Avram’s name (Avraham), a letter which represents the attribute of Justice, the evil eye gained power over him, and the attribute of Justice decreed exile on his descendants for four hundred years, corresponding to the עין רע, the eye of Satan. We may now understand the words ידוע תדע כי גר יהיה זרעך, “you must surely know that your descendants will be strangers” [they will be subject to a hitherto unknown attribute of G-d in their lives. Ed.], i.e. the ones who will be born as the result of the two letters ה which will be added to both your and Sarai’s name respectively, and which represent the attribute of Justice, will be subject to the evil eye. As a result of such a development ועבדום וענו אותם ארבע מאות שנה, they will be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years. You will encounter this number again in connection with Efron, עפרן, whose name equals 400 and who demanded 400 shekel from Avraham before he allowed him to bury Sarah in the cave of Machpelah. What we learn from this is that עפרן also represented the “evil eye.” You will also find this in connection with עשו, who based his success in life on that of his father Yitzchak who represented the attribute of Justice. He too possessed עין רע, an evil eye. Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 76,8 claims that the reason Yaakov (Genesis 32,15) instructed the attendants of the herds and flocks he sent to his brother Esau as gifts to place a substantial distance between one flock and another was to satisfy Esau’s evil eye which could never get enough of anything. This may be the reason that Esau had taken precisely 400 men with him when he set out to meet (and maybe to kill) Yaakov.
You ought to appreciate that this paragraph contains an explanation of what exactly did happen to Yaakov as a result of his encounter with Esau. There is also a hint of what would be a correct form of relationship between the respective descendants of Esau and Yaakov during the long course of Jewish history. It is worth our while to consider Yaakov’s preparations for his fateful encounter with Esau as something to use as a model for ourselves in our dealings with the descendants of Esau. Basically, Yaakov used a three-pronged approach. 1) He prepared to wage war if it were forced upon him. 2) He prayed to G’d for deliverance. 3) He prepared gifts to soften the mood of his adversary. The first stage of his preparation, mobilising for war, is described in our paragraph in verse eight when the Torah writes that he divided the camp in two to give himself the maximum chance for at least one camp to escape unharmed. He then engaged in prayer when he appealed to G’d, saying (verse 12) “please save me from my brother, from Esau.” The third part of his preparation, i.e.. sending gifts (or bribes if you will), is found in verses 14-21. A great Jewish King, the King Chiskiyah learned from Yaakov when Jerusalem was under siege when he faced Sancheriv, [who during his time was the foremost conqueror of the world who had already liquidated the Northern Kingdom and exiled the Ten Tribes, Ed.]. We read in Kings II 18,15 that Chiskiyah gave all the silver that was in the treasury of the Temple and in his own vaults to Sancheriv in accordance with that King’s demands. He also readied what few forces remained at his disposal for war (Chronicles II 32,6). Finally, he prayed (Kings II 19,15) asking G’d to demonstrate His power to the world at large by saving the Kingdom of Yehudah. We have to act similarly whenever we find ourselves threatened by hostile Gentile forces. However, nowadays when G’d’s displeasure with us has become manifest seeing we are still in exile, we must not provoke war against our enemies as is evident from Song of Songs 2,7 השבעתי אתכם בנות ירושלים וגו', “I have made you take an oath o daughters of Jerusalem, etc.” One opinion in the Talmud Ketuvot 111 understands the oath as an undertaking by Jews in exile not to rebel against the local rulers and try and recapture the land of Israel by force of arms.
.ולאביו שלח כזאת “and to his father he sent the following:” The word מנחה, “gift” is missing here. The meaning of the verse is that Joseph sent his father a gift consisting of the items mentioned in our verse. He sent both male and female donkeys just as Yaakov had done when he sent a number of gifts to Esau [though Yaakov had sent twice as many female donkeys as males. Ed.]
“200 she-goats and 20 he-goats” [32:15]. Bahya writes. Jacob put the goats in front of the animals, since they always go in front of the animals and because he had twenty times as many he-goats as the other animals. He mentions the camels after them because the camels were better than the other animals. Then he mentions the kosher animals and afterwards the donkeys and horses, which are non-kosher animals. Jacob also placed the animals according to the length of their pregnancy. Sheep and goats are pregnant for five months; camels for six months; cows for nine months; donkeys and horses for twelve months. Another explanation is that Jacob did not want to mention sheep and goats first. He thought: let not Esau hate me because I took away the blessing through goats. However, now that Jacob prayed, Jacob said to Esau, I am not afraid of you. Therefore, he began with goats. He said: I began the blessings through goats that I should be a lord over my brother and you should be my servant. Therefore, he mentioned donkeys and young foals at the end. That is to say, you will fall into the hands of the Messiah, who will ride on a donkey and on a young foal, as the verse says, “Lo, your king is coming to you. He is victorious, triumphant, yet humble, riding on an ass, on a donkey foaled by a she-ass” [Zechariah, 9:9]. Jacob showed all this with the present to Esau, how Israel will go into exile, and the number of animals was five hundred and fifty. Therefore, the kingdom of Esau began five hundred and fifty years before the kingdom of Israel was established. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:15.)
§ When Isi bar Hini ascended from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Yoḥanan found him teaching the mishna to his son. Isi taught that the obligation of the first sheared wool applies only in the case of sheep [reḥelim], the masculine plural form of raḥel, meaning a sheep. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Isi: You should teach him using the term reḥelot, the feminine plural form. Isi said to him in reply: I teach the mishna in accordance with that which is written: “Two hundred reḥelim” (Genesis 32:15). Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Isi: The language of the Torah is distinct and the language of the Sages is distinct, i.e., these are like two separate languages, and the Sages do not always use the same forms that appear in the Bible. In this case, they use reḥelot rather than reḥelim.
Rebbi Eliezer (His list of prescribed minimal frequencies of intercourse is based on the occupation of the male. The same argument is given in Gen. rabba 76(6); it is reproduced in Rashi’s Commentary to Gen. 32:15–16.) inferred from the gift which Jacob had sent to his brother Esaw, for he sent him according to copulations. “200 she-goats and 20 he-goats,” one for ten; “200 ewes and 20 rams,” one for ten (One male can satisfy 10 females since it has nothing to do except grazing and copulating.) . “Nursing camels and their sons 30.” Rebbi Berekhiah said, because it is decent in his sexual behavior did the verse not publicize (In Gen.rabba 76(6), R. Berekhiah in the name of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel implies that 30 males (בנאים “builders”) accompanied the 30 females.) . “40 cows and ten bulls,” one for four since they are tired (Cattle was used extensively for ploughing and drawing agricultural implements.) ; “20 she-donkeys and ten he-donkeys,” one for two since they are tired.
Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams.
she--goats two hundred, and he--goats twenty; ewes two hundred and rams twenty:
| גְּמַלִּ֧ים מֵינִיק֛וֹת וּבְנֵיהֶ֖ם שְׁלֹשִׁ֑ים פָּר֤וֹת אַרְבָּעִים֙ וּפָרִ֣ים עֲשָׂרָ֔ה אֲתֹנֹ֣ת עֶשְׂרִ֔ים וַעְיָרִ֖ם עֲשָׂרָֽה׃ | 16 E | 30 milch camels with their colts; 40 cows and 10 bulls; 20 she-asses and 10 he-asses. |
גמלים מיניקות, “female camels;”
גמלים מיניקות, “female camels;” ובניהם, and their masculine young. The total number of camels was 30. How is this number arrived at? There were twenty female camels and 10 male camels. [Each mother animal had a female young with her. Ed.] The ratio was similar to that of the male and female donkeys which also totaled 30. After having read the details of the latter, we understand what is meant about the camels. According to Rashi, however, there were 30 male camels plus thirty female camels.
ובניהם, and their masculine young. The total number of camels was 30. How is this number arrived at? There were twenty female camels and 10 male camels. [Each mother animal had a female young with her. Ed.] The ratio was similar to that of the male and female donkeys which also totaled 30. After having read the details of the latter, we understand what is meant about the camels. According to Rashi, however, there were 30 male camels plus thirty female camels.
גמלים מיניקות, we did not know why Yaakov sent along young camels that were so tender that they still depended on mothers’ milk. (according to the words of the author Yaakov also sent such young male calves and male donkeys with their mother animals.) ובניהם together with their young there were a total of 30 camels. The number of animals in each herd was proportionate to the respective size of Yaakov’s total herds of that category of animal. Seeing that he owned relatively few camels, his gift of camels represented a certain percentage of the total number of camels he owned. The reason why the Torah bothered to give us the details of the gift Yaakov sent to his brother was to show us that he sent a substantial gift, and to teach us that if we ever need to atone for having deeply hurt someone and to hope that he will forgive us, it is appropriate to demonstrate our contriteness not so much with words as with a gift of substantial proportions. Yaakov enhanced the impression his gift made upon Esau by leaving a good amount of space between each of the flocks, making Esau feel repeatedly that he had already seen the whole gift, only to find that more was to follow. Bereshit Rabbah 76,8 also addresses the question of the space between the herds which Yaakov insisted the messengers must allow for. According to the Midrash he wanted Esau to feast his eyes on the size of the gift. When one part of the gift had been received and he thought that he had seen it all, another messenger with another herd would appear and request that Esau accept his herd as a gift from Yaakov.
ובניהם, according to the plain meaning the males which the camels were suckling. When there are both females and males, the Torah does not mention the females separately.
גמלים מיניקות MILCH CAMELS שלשים THIRTY, ובניהם means AND THEIR COLTS with them — A Midrashic explanation of ובניהם is that it is the same as וּבַנָּאֵיהֶם their builders (those that build them up) i.e., one male for each female. Because, however, it (the camel) is chaste in its ways Scripture does not state this plainly (Genesis Rabbah 76:7) but employs a term from which it may be inferred.
ועירים means MALE ASSES.
And their young were with them... Rashi is saying that there were also thirty young ones. Otherwise, why would it include them all in the same number, when the verse is coming to describe how large the gift was? The young are not significant when [included] with their mothers! Perforce, the verse should be rearranged to read: גמלים מניקות שלשים ובניהם.
The Midrashic explanation... one male per female... Accordingly, שלשים is rightly written after בניהם, for it indicates that there were thirty altogether. The numbers of the males and of the females were not stated explicitly because camels are discreet in mating.
And their young were with them... This [first explanation] is saying that there were also thirty young ones. Question: If so, why does it not say שלשים also for the young, like it does for the nursing camels? Thus Rashi brings the Midrashic explanation, that they were thirty altogether. And so that we will not ask, “If so, why does the verse not state the numbers of the males and of the females?” Therefore Rashi explains, “Since it is discreet in mating...” And in fact there were fifteen males and fifteen females. (Maharshal)
He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself, handled by a different cattle herder. And he, Jacob, said to his servants: Go ahead of me, to reach my brother before me, and make space between one drove and the other drove. The gift was spread out so that it would appear even more impressive to Esau.
גמלים מיניקות, “camels with their young.” The males of the species were not mentioned here. Some people claim that the word גמל, camel, is the description for both the male and the female of the species. We would then assume that there were 10 adult males, 10 adult females, and their 10 female young. The male/female ratio of the camels would then correspond to the male/female ratio of the donkeys.
“30 milch camels with their colts” [32:16]. Thirty female camels and their males. Rashi asks a question here. Why did the verse not explicitly write about the males? The explanation is that the camels are very modest. They do not lie with their females in front of others. That is why the verse does not explicitly name them. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:16.) Toldot Yizhak asks a question. Why did the Holy One not appear to Esau and say to him, do no evil to Jacob, like the Holy One appeared to Laban and said to him, do no evil to Jacob? The explanation is that the Holy One wants that there should be nations who will persecute Israel, in the expectation that they will be pious. With this explanation, another question is also explained. Why did Jacob not pray when Laban came to kill him? The explanation is that Jacob only prayed concerning Esau, who was the greatest evildoer to Israel, that he should not cause a great exile for his children in the future. However, Laban was only an evil for a specific time. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 32:13.) Toldot Yizhak asks another question. Why did the angels leave him and not protect him that nothing should happen to him? The explanation is that the Holy One wanted to show that the righteous are better than the angels, as we find with Jacob who fought with the angel who could not do anything and he vanquished the angel. (Ibid.)
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“And You said: I will benefit you, and render your descendants as the sand of the sea, which cannot be enumerated for multitude” (Genesis 32:13). “And You said: I will benefit [heitev eitiv] you” – heitev, by your merit; eitiv, by the merit of your fathers. “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother” (Genesis 32:14). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He stayed there that night; he took from that which was in his possession a gift for Esau his brother. Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats…” – Rabbi Elazar said: From here one derives the period of conjugal rights of a woman that is stated in the Torah: The men of leisure – every day; the laborers – twice a week; the seafarers – once in six months. “Two hundred female goats” that need “twenty male goats,” “two hundred ewes” that require “twenty rams.” “Thirty nursing camels and their offspring [uvneihem]” and their males [boneihem] (Boneihem means those who build them, which also can mean those with whom they have offspring. Being built can refer to having offspring (See Genesis 16:2).) thirty; Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel: Because it is modest in its sexual relations, the verse did not publicize it, but just, “thirty nursing camels and their offspring.” “Forty cows and ten bulls,” as they need ten bulls. Twenty female donkeys and they need ten male donkeys – why did it place the camels in the middle? It is, rather, as though he [Jacob] was saying to him [Esau]: ‘Consider yourself as though you are sitting on the platform and judging, and I am being judged before you, and you become filled with mercy over me.’ (The tall camels, after the goats and sheep and before the cows and donkeys, evoke the courtroom, with the judges elevated over those present.)
“Jacob arrived intact” – intact in his body. Because it is written: “He was limping because of his hip” (Genesis 32:32); nevertheless, intact in his body. Intact in his children; because it is written in his regard: “If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will survive” (Genesis 32:9); nevertheless, here, intact in his children. Intact in his wealth; although, Rabbi Avun said in the name of Rav Aḥa: Our patriarch Jacob would give Esau that same gift (See Genesis 32:14–16.) for nine years; nevertheless, here, intact in his wealth. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Intact in his studies, but Joseph forgot, as it is stated: “As God has made me forget all my toil” (Genesis 41:51). Elsewhere it says: “The toiling soul toils for itself” (Proverbs 16:26). (The toil of the soul is Torah study.)
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. Did he lack something? Indeed, when they said to him (in Gen. 32:7 [6]): MOREOVER HE (Esau) IS COMING TO MEET YOU, AND THERE ARE FOUR HUNDRED MEN WITH HIM; he arose and prepared a gift. (Gk.: doron.) (According to Gen. 32:15-16 [14-15]) he began by giving she-goats because they were tender. Afterwards < according to the text, there were > he-goats, ewes, rams, < and > THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS. [R. Levi said: If I went around among all the tents of Kedar (i.e., of the Ishmaelites) you would not have found THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS.] Look at Jacob's wealth! In addition (according to Gen. 32:16 [15]) he gave FORTY COWS AND TEN BULLS. R. Isaac said: < These did > not include precious stones and pearls. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:14 [13]): THEN HE TOOK FROM WHAT WAS IN HAND, < i.e., > things taken up in the hand. These would be precious stones and pearls. R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: All twelve months that he spent with him, he would so honor him (with gifts) on each day. In this regard Jacob said (in Deut. 16:19): FOR A GIFT BLINDS THE EYES OF THE (PRUDENT) [WISE]. < He reasoned > a fortiori, how much the more < would a gift blind > the wicked! Just consider this: I am honoring him so that he will not touch me.
UNFORMED. Saadiah Gaon claims that the word tohu (unformed) is a derivative of tehom (the deep). This explanation is incorrect because the mem of tehom is a root letter (Hence the mem would not fall out. Thus tohu cannot derive from tehom.) like the mem of hadom (footstool). (The mem of tehom is similar to the mem of hadom. Both mems are integral parts of the respective words and do not drop out.) The Sefer Yetzirah explains tohu (unformed) and bohu (void) as follows: Tohu refers to the green line; bohu alludes to the smooth stones. (Cf. Hagigah 12a. “Tohu is a green band which encompasses the whole world, out of which darkness proceeds…, and tohu consists of the smooth stones in the abyss, out of which the waters proceed.”) However, the correct meaning of these terms is found in the Aramaic translation of the Pentateuch. (That is, Onkelos. The latter renders these terms as “waste and empty.”) We similarly read, And in the waste (tohu), a howling wilderness (Deut. 32:10), and go after vain things (tohu) (I Sam. 12:21), which means worshipping things that have no substance. (That is, idols.)
The nun of tevarakhanni (may bless me) (v. 19) receives a dagesh to make up for the missing nun (According to I.E. when a verb is combined with a pronominal suffix, a nun is added to the end of the root. Since ni is the sign of the first person pronominal suffix, tevarakhanni should have been spelled with two nuns (we have spelled it with two nuns because of the dagesh. In the Hebrew it has one nun). It should be noted that I.E.’s comment is misplaced as it pertains to verse 19.) which should have been in our word, as we find in yesovevenhu (He compassed him about) (Deut. 32:10) and similarly in yeshacharuneni (they will seek Me) (Hos. 5:15). (In yesovevenhu we see that a nun is added to the root when a verb is combined with a pronominal suffix. In yeshacharuneni we see that when a verb is combined with a first person pronominal suffix, two nuns are added to the root.)
AND TO HIS FATHER HE SENT ‘KAZOTH’ (IN LIKE MANNER). I.e., according to this amount. And what was the amount? Ten asses, etc. This is the language of Rashi. It is not correct that kazoth should refer to the amount [for if it refers to cheshbon (amount), it should have said kazeh in the masculine, and not kazoth in the feminine]. But it is possible that Scripture says, in like manner, meaning “according to this gift,” [with the word minchah matching the feminine gender of kazoth] The purport thereof is, “and to his father he sent this gift: ten asses, etc.,” [with the word kazoth being understood as if it were written zoth], and the letter kaph in the word kazoth is considered redundant. However, it is the way of the Sacred Language to express it in this way, just as, And she spoke to him, [saying]: ‘ka’dvarim ha’eileh’ (after the manner of these things) did thy servant do to me. (Ibid., Verses 17 and 19.) It may be that Scripture is saying: “and to his father he sent provision (tzeidah), [which is also in the feminine gender], which was like this provision which he gave to his brothers.” But the intent of the expression is not to make them equal, but only to say that just as he gave them provision for the road when they went to Canaan, so did he send his father corn and bread and sustenance for his journey towards Egypt. And this is the correct interpretation. Scripture mentions asses and she-asses to inform us that he sent him both the provisions and the animals that carried them, and it was customary to send males and females, as his father had done. (Ibid., 32:16.)
AND WHETHER IT BE OF THE HERD OR FLOCK, ‘OTHO V’ETH B’NO’ (Literally: “him and his young” — in the masculine. Since the law, as will be explained, applies only to the mother and the young, the question appears why Scripture uses here the masculine. Ramban will further on explain it.) (IT AND ITS YOUNG) YE SHALL NOT SLAUGHTER IN ONE DAY. “[The law] applies only in the case of the female parent, it being forbidden to slaughter the dam and its male young, or the dam and its female young, but it does not apply to the male parent, and it is therefore permissible to slaughter the male parent and his young.” This is Rashi’s language. The Rabbi [Rashi] thus decided that the conclusive decision of the law is in accordance with the opinion of the Sage (Rabbi Yehudah (Chullin 79 a).) who says that we do not take into consideration the male parentage [of animals]. And such also is the opinion of Onkelos [who translated: “and whether it be the dam or the ewe, her and her young ye shall not slaughter in one day”]. This is the correct decision [reached] in the Gemara [of Tractate Chullin] (Ibid.) concerning the law of “It and its young.” But the way of Scripture when mentioning specifically the female [of the herd], is to call it parah (cow), (Genesis 32:16, etc.) and if so it would have been proper that Scripture say, “and whether it be parah (cow) or ewe, her and her young.” But since He had mentioned [at the beginning of this section], When any of the herd, or a sheep or a goat is brought forth, (Verse 27.) and He mentioned the dam and its young by saying, then it shall be seven days under its dam, (Verse 27.) He therefore states [in the verse before us] that concerning these kinds of animals mentioned, namely, the herd and the flock, there is yet another commandment that it and its young mentioned above, must not be slaughtered in one day [and thus it is self-evident that the law applies only to the female parent].
and a foal of she-donkeys as in (Gen. 32:16) “and ten foals.”
Thirty nursing camels and their young, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys.
Arid small colts ten.
milch camels with their young ones thirty; cows forty, and bulls ten, small colts ten.
| וַיִּתֵּן֙ בְּיַד־עֲבָדָ֔יו עֵ֥דֶר עֵ֖דֶר לְבַדּ֑וֹ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֶל־עֲבָדָיו֙ עִבְר֣וּ לְפָנַ֔י וְרֶ֣וַח תָּשִׂ֔ימוּ בֵּ֥ין עֵ֖דֶר וּבֵ֥ין עֵֽדֶר׃ | 17 E | These he put in the charge of his servants, drove by drove, and he told his servants, “Go on ahead, and keep a distance between droves.” |
Genesis 32,17. “when my brother Esau will meet you and ask you to whom these herds belong, etc;” it is a rule that when a person approaches G’d with a request, that the evil urge within him tries to convince him that he is entitled to make whatever request from G’d that he has in mind, and that certain privileges on this earth are part of this entitlement as part of his serving the Lord. The evil urge, in its wisdom, acts as if it had been defeated by not immediately protesting that individual’s request by pointing out to G’d that person’s shortcomings. At a later stage, when such a person has already established a more intimate relationship vis a vis his Creator so that he realizes that his service of the Lord is not meant to secure him rewards on earth, but is meant to provide a sense of satisfaction for his Creator that one of His creatures fulfils his purpose in life, he has reached the stage where the evil urge, also known as Esau, encounters such a G’d-serving person head on. The “angels” of Yaakov, are a euphemism for this person’s thoughts. At that point, attempting to interfere with progress of such a personality towards spiritual perfection, Esau, i.e. the evil urge, asks these “angels” who are the creations of the person’s performance of G’d’s commandments, where they are headed, i.e. אנה תלך. The person is advised (the point of the Torah relating this encounter) to blunt such questions by saying that they have been created by “your servant Yaakov;” he is told to assuage the evil urge by saying that his good deeds are a “gift” to him (the evil urge), seeing that the evil urge is also one of G’d’s creatures and as such entitled to some recognition.
AND PUT A SPACE. The word revach means a space. Harevachah (respite) in That there was respite (harevachah) (Ex. 8:11) is close in meaning to it. The meaning of the latter is, there was a separation between one plague and the other. It is similar to ve-ravach (found relief) in so Saul found relief (ve-ravach le-sha’ul) (I Sam. 16:23). (Saul had space. Figuratively speaking, he went out of his straits to an open space. Thus the root resh, vav, chet can refer to physical space, or space in time, to relief.)
ורוח תשימו בין עדר ובין עדר, “and place a space between one herd and the next.” He wanted the eye of this wicked person Esau to satiate himself by these successive gifts. Yaakov hoped to impress him with the generous size of the gift. According to Bereshit Rabbah 76,8 Yaakov said to G’d: “if the Jewish people will be beset by troubles in the future, please let these troubles befall them at intervals so that they have a chance to recover between successive waves of persecution.” He referred specifically to heavy taxation which would be imposed by rulers in the countries in which Jews were going to be exiled.
ויתן, he set
ורוח, according to Bereshit Rabbah the רוח mentioned here was Yaakov’s prayer to G’d that if and when his descendants would be punished by G’d for collective wrongdoing, such punishments would be meted out at intervals and not all at once, to give the people a chance to recover from the previous disaster’s impact.
AND PUT A SPACE BETWEEN DROVE AND DROVE. I.e., in order to satisfy the covetous eye of that wicked man and to amaze him by the size of the gift. In Bereshith Rabbah (75:13.) the Rabbis express the opinion that there is an allusion to the future in this matter: “Jacob said before the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘O Master of the universe! If troubles will come upon my children, do not bring them one after another, but allow them intervals from their troubles.’” On the basis of this verse, the Rabbis thus hinted that the tributes and taxes which the children of Esau will collect from Jacob’s seed will have intervals and cessations between one another.
וריוח תשימו, a device to make each gift appear as a sign of Yaakov’s respect. When someone receives a number of gifts at intervals he appreciates them all the more.
עדר עדר לבדו EVERY DROVE BY ITSELF — each species forming a drove by itself.
עברו לפני PASS ON BEFORE ME, a day’s journey or less and I shall follow you).
ורוח תשימו AND PUT A SPACE — one drove before the other at a distance as far as the eye can see, in order to satisfy the eye (the cupidity) of that wicked man and to amaze him by the size of the gift (Genesis Rabbah 76:8).
עדר עדר לבדו. In order for Esau to realise that each species of animals had the appropriate number of males with it to ensure that these herds would continue to develop without hindrance. This is what he meant when he urged Esau קח נא את ברכתי, “please accept my blessing” (33,11) He meant that his gift was designed to be an ongoing blessing for his brother.
וריוח תשימו בין עדר לעדר, to prevent the animals form one herd to jump into the adjoining herd, so that anyone seeing this gift would not appreciate its quality and scope.
A distance of one day or less... [Rashi knows that they were] not immediately ahead of Yaakov, because it is written in v. 22: “The present passed on ahead of him, but he spent the night in the camp.” If they were just a short way from Yaakov, they could have all spent the night together. And they were not more than a day’s distance ahead, because Yaakov gave Eisov the present on the same day [after daybreak], as is evident from the coming verses.
And I will follow behind you. [Rashi knows this] because Yaakov told them to say to Eisov, “And see, he himself is also behind us.” Thus, Yaakov must have said it to them, too: “Pass on ahead of me and I will follow behind you.”
One herd was ahead of the other... Rashi is explaining that they were herd behind herd. [Rashi knows this] because if they were lined up alongside each other, how could they be described [in the coming verses as] first, second and third? They would all be “first.”
He commanded the shepherd of the first herd, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these animals before you?
ורווח תשימו בין עדר לעדר, “and place some distance between one herd of animals and the next.” This measure was also to serve as a model for the behaviour of Jews in the future; Yaakov was asking G’d that if the need would arise to chastise the Jewish people, the decrees should not all be carried out at the same time, but that G’d should allow the people to recover from one disaster before having to contend with the next one. Some commentators understand the words ורווח תשימו as ensuring that different species of animals were not to mix with one another.
“Keep a distance between droves” [32:17]. Jacob said to his servants. Do not drove the animals close to each other to Esau; in the expectation that he should think that there are many animals. When Esau will encounter you and will ask you, whose animals are these? You should say, Jacob’s and they are an offering and a present to our lord Esau. Jacob is coming behind us. If Esau will ask, why did he not come immediately to meet me? You should respond that Jacob thought that he will remove the anger from our lord Esau and then he will come before you himself. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:17–21.) Bahya writes. “Keep a distance” [32:17]. Jacob said: Lord of the Universe, when troubles and exile will come upon Israel, do not let the troubles come quickly, one after another. Let Israel have some rest between one trouble and the next one. When they will pay taxes, they should not have to give everything away at once. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:17.)
“He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will escape” (Genesis 32:9). “And Jacob said: the Lord of my father Abraham, and the Lord of my father Isaac, God who told me: Go back to your land and your birthright, and I will benefit you" (Genesis 32:10). “Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and smite me, mother, and children, alike” (Genesis 32:12). “He said: If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it” – at that moment, our patriarch Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, it is written in Your Torah: “A bull or a sheep, it and its offspring you shall not slaughter on one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If this wicked one comes and eradicates my children and their mothers as one, the Torah scroll that You are destined to give on Mount Sinai, who will read it? I implore You, deliver me from his hand, “lest he come and smite me mother and children alike,”’ as it is stated: “Deliver me, please.” “And Jacob slept there on that night, and he took from what he had as a present for his brother Esau” (Genesis 32:14). What did he [Jacob] do? He arose and sent him a gift in order to blind his eyes, as it is stated: “As the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise” (Deuteronomy 16:19), and the wise are none other than Edomites, as it is stated: “I will eliminate the wise from Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:8). “Two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams” (Genesis 32:15). “Nursing camels and their offspring thirty, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys” (Genesis 32:16). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself; he said to his servants: Go ahead of me, and maintain a distance between one drove and the other drove” (Genesis 32:17). “He placed them in the charge of his servants, each drove by itself.” What is: “Maintain a distance”? Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, if troubles will befall my descendants, do not bring them one after another, but rather, create distance for them between their troubles.’ At that moment, Jacob lifted his eyes sand saw that Esau was coming from afar, and he directed his eyes heavenward, wept, and requested mercy from before the Holy One blessed be He. He heard his prayer and promised him that he would deliver him (Him and his descendants.) from all his troubles due to Jacob’s merit, as it is stated: “The Lord will answer you at a time of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob will fortify you” (Psalms 20:2).
“And he placed them in the hands of his slaves, each flock separately, and he told them: Go before me, and leave space between the flocks” (Genesis 32:17). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these before you” (Genesis 32:18). “You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau and, behold, he too, is behind us” (Genesis 32:19). “He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau, when you find him” (Genesis 32:20). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you…You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda were walking along the way. They saw a gentile coming toward them. They said: ‘He will ask us three things: What are you? What is your trade? Where are you going?’ What are you? Jews. What is your trade? Merchants. Where are you going? To purchase wheat from the storehouses of Yavne. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] stood opposite the gentile to see what he would ask, and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda waited for him. He said: ‘If he says something, I [worry I] will say something else.’ (If the gentile asks Rabbi Yehuda a question and then asks me the same question, if I don’t hear Rabbi Yehuda’s answer and I give a different answer, we may appear suspicious.) He said to him: ‘From where do you know this?’ He said to him: ‘From Jacob our patriarch.’ (Jacob prepared his messengers for all contingencies.) “And, behold, he too, is behind us.” “He commanded the first…also the second” – Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Ḥilkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon: “When you find him” in his greatness. (But if he is no longer in his greatness, approach him differently.) “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us. For he said: I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me” (Genesis 32:21). “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us” – that is what is written: “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked one; he covers the faces of its judges…” (Job 9:24). (This verse is quoted in response to the fact that the righteous Jacob calls himself the slave of the wicked Esau.) “He placed them in the charge of the servants, each drove by itself” – why did he not introduce them intermingled? It was in order to astonish him with his gift. (So he would see the variety and the number of each of the species.) Why did he not introduce them all at once? It was in order to satiate the eyes of the wicked one. He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive’; He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive.’ (Each time Esau thought that the gift was complete, Jacob’s servant would say: There is more for you to receive.) “The gift went before him and he stayed that night in the camp” (Genesis 32:22). “The gift went before him [al panav]” – he, too, was distressed. (The word panav is found in the context of distress. See I Samuel 1:18.)
You will find that the number 400 is prominent in matters concerning the עין רע, “the evil eye.” The numerical value of the words עין רע is 400. The last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the letter ת is equal to 400. As such it embodies all the letters in the alphabet. Similarly, עין רע is an all inclusive destructive concept. Seeing that the letter ה was added to Avram’s name (Avraham), a letter which represents the attribute of Justice, the evil eye gained power over him, and the attribute of Justice decreed exile on his descendants for four hundred years, corresponding to the עין רע, the eye of Satan. We may now understand the words ידוע תדע כי גר יהיה זרעך, “you must surely know that your descendants will be strangers” [they will be subject to a hitherto unknown attribute of G-d in their lives. Ed.], i.e. the ones who will be born as the result of the two letters ה which will be added to both your and Sarai’s name respectively, and which represent the attribute of Justice, will be subject to the evil eye. As a result of such a development ועבדום וענו אותם ארבע מאות שנה, they will be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years. You will encounter this number again in connection with Efron, עפרן, whose name equals 400 and who demanded 400 shekel from Avraham before he allowed him to bury Sarah in the cave of Machpelah. What we learn from this is that עפרן also represented the “evil eye.” You will also find this in connection with עשו, who based his success in life on that of his father Yitzchak who represented the attribute of Justice. He too possessed עין רע, an evil eye. Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 76,8 claims that the reason Yaakov (Genesis 32,15) instructed the attendants of the herds and flocks he sent to his brother Esau as gifts to place a substantial distance between one flock and another was to satisfy Esau’s evil eye which could never get enough of anything. This may be the reason that Esau had taken precisely 400 men with him when he set out to meet (and maybe to kill) Yaakov.
He placed them in the hand of his servants, each herd by itself. He said to his servants, Pass on ahead of me, and keep a space between each herd.
And he made them ready by the hand of his servants in flocks apart, and said to his servants, Pass over before me, and put much (room) between flock and flock.
| וַיְצַ֥ו אֶת־הָרִאשׁ֖וֹן לֵאמֹ֑ר כִּ֣י יִֽפְגׇשְׁךָ֞ עֵשָׂ֣ו אָחִ֗י וּשְׁאֵֽלְךָ֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר לְמִי־אַ֙תָּה֙ וְאָ֣נָה תֵלֵ֔ךְ וּלְמִ֖י אֵ֥לֶּה לְפָנֶֽיךָ׃ | 18 E | He instructed the one in front as follows, “When my brother Esau meets you and asks you, ‘Who’s your master? Where are you going? And whose [animals] are these ahead of you?’ |
Genesis 32,17. “when my brother Esau will meet you and ask you to whom these herds belong, etc;” it is a rule that when a person approaches G’d with a request, that the evil urge within him tries to convince him that he is entitled to make whatever request from G’d that he has in mind, and that certain privileges on this earth are part of this entitlement as part of his serving the Lord. The evil urge, in its wisdom, acts as if it had been defeated by not immediately protesting that individual’s request by pointing out to G’d that person’s shortcomings. At a later stage, when such a person has already established a more intimate relationship vis a vis his Creator so that he realizes that his service of the Lord is not meant to secure him rewards on earth, but is meant to provide a sense of satisfaction for his Creator that one of His creatures fulfils his purpose in life, he has reached the stage where the evil urge, also known as Esau, encounters such a G’d-serving person head on. The “angels” of Yaakov, are a euphemism for this person’s thoughts. At that point, attempting to interfere with progress of such a personality towards spiritual perfection, Esau, i.e. the evil urge, asks these “angels” who are the creations of the person’s performance of G’d’s commandments, where they are headed, i.e. אנה תלך. The person is advised (the point of the Torah relating this encounter) to blunt such questions by saying that they have been created by “your servant Yaakov;” he is told to assuage the evil urge by saying that his good deeds are a “gift” to him (the evil urge), seeing that the evil urge is also one of G’d’s creatures and as such entitled to some recognition.
I will appease him. He told them to relate to Eisov how ashamed he was about the injustice he had done him and to request forgiveness on his behalf.
AND ASKETH THEE SAYING. U-she’elekha (when a kal in the third person has the suffix kha added to it, the second root letter is usually vocalized with a kamatz, hence I.E.’s comment.) (and asketh thee) is vocalized the same as ahevekha (he loveth thee). (Deut. 15:16. It, too, is vocalized with a tzere rather than with a kamatz beneath the second root letter (the heh).)
ויצו את הראשון לאמור, He instructed the first one (messenger) to say, etc. The apparently superfluous word לאמו was that even if Esau were not to phrase his enquiry in exactly the words Jacob assumed he would, he would no doubt use words to that effect.
Jacob may also have used the word לאמור to tell his messengers to use exactly this formula even if they would not be asked directly by Esau but by some intermediary. He added the word ושאלך, "and if he will ask you," to indicate that such a question might be addressed to the messenger second hand, not by Esau himself.
ויצו, for each species of animal formed a herd by itself supervised by a separate servant. Yaakov instructed the one walking with the first herd to reply to Esau’s enquiry in the manner a servant answers his master.
יפגשך, the letter ג with the vowel kametz is a long drawn out vowel and is weak, does not have a dagesh.
אלה לפניך, as if it said אלה אשר לפניך, “these which preceded you?”
למי אתה, the word עבד is implied, i.e. Esau would ask: “whose servant are you?”
למי אתה means TO WHOM DO YOU BELONG, implying who has sent thee? The Targum should be דמאן את “of whom are you” and not למאן את as some editions have.
ולמי אלה לפניך means and these which are before you whose are they; i.e. to whom is this present being sent? The letter ל is used as a prefix in place of של “belonging to”; e.g., (31:43) “and all that thou seest is mine (לי)” i.e. belongs to me; (Psalms 24:1) “The earth is the Lord’s (לה') and the fullness thereof” i.e. belongs to the Lord.
To whom is this gift being sent... I.e., the second למי conveys [“to whom”, which is] its primary meaning. But למי אתה does not convey its primary meaning, which would be: “To whom are you bringing it.” [Rashi knows this] because it says afterward, “You should say, ‘They belong to your servant, Yaakov.’” This is answering Eisov’s first question first, as Rashi explains there. But if the first למי conveyed its simple meaning, then it should say afterward, “To my master, Eisov” — for that would be the answer to Eisov’s [first] question.
You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; and as for this collection of animals, it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau, and behold, he, Jacob, too, is behind us. He is sending you these gifts in anticipation of your meeting.
כי יפגשך עשו אחי, “when Esau my brother will encounter you,“ My father of sainted memory, the ר'אש, commented on this that Yaakov instructed his messengers not to open a conversation with Esau, but only to reply to him if he engaged them in conversation first. If Esau did not begin a conversation they should simply proceed on their way to Esau’s home.
“And he placed them in the hands of his slaves, each flock separately, and he told them: Go before me, and leave space between the flocks” (Genesis 32:17). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these before you” (Genesis 32:18). “You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau and, behold, he too, is behind us” (Genesis 32:19). “He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau, when you find him” (Genesis 32:20). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you…You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda were walking along the way. They saw a gentile coming toward them. They said: ‘He will ask us three things: What are you? What is your trade? Where are you going?’ What are you? Jews. What is your trade? Merchants. Where are you going? To purchase wheat from the storehouses of Yavne. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] stood opposite the gentile to see what he would ask, and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda waited for him. He said: ‘If he says something, I [worry I] will say something else.’ (If the gentile asks Rabbi Yehuda a question and then asks me the same question, if I don’t hear Rabbi Yehuda’s answer and I give a different answer, we may appear suspicious.) He said to him: ‘From where do you know this?’ He said to him: ‘From Jacob our patriarch.’ (Jacob prepared his messengers for all contingencies.) “And, behold, he too, is behind us.” “He commanded the first…also the second” – Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Ḥilkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon: “When you find him” in his greatness. (But if he is no longer in his greatness, approach him differently.) “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us. For he said: I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me” (Genesis 32:21). “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us” – that is what is written: “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked one; he covers the faces of its judges…” (Job 9:24). (This verse is quoted in response to the fact that the righteous Jacob calls himself the slave of the wicked Esau.) “He placed them in the charge of the servants, each drove by itself” – why did he not introduce them intermingled? It was in order to astonish him with his gift. (So he would see the variety and the number of each of the species.) Why did he not introduce them all at once? It was in order to satiate the eyes of the wicked one. He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive’; He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive.’ (Each time Esau thought that the gift was complete, Jacob’s servant would say: There is more for you to receive.) “The gift went before him and he stayed that night in the camp” (Genesis 32:22). “The gift went before him [al panav]” – he, too, was distressed. (The word panav is found in the context of distress. See I Samuel 1:18.)
(Numb. 5:17), “Then the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel and some of the dust.” And, why does he take water and dust and test her? Because he was created from the dust, and she was formed from the water. (Cf. Gen. R. 14:7.) Therefore she was tested by water and by dust as to whether she was as pure as when she was created or not. Another interpretation: Why is she tested with water and with dust? Because they are her witnesses. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 30:19), “I have called the heavens and the earth to witness against you today.” Another interpretation: Why is she tested with water [and with dust]? Because a person who sows some seeds in the dust does not know what they are, until the water comes down upon them and makes known whether they belong to the owner of the field, or [whether they are] what others have sown. [(Numb. 5:12), “If anyone has his wife go astray.”] This text is related (to Job 24:15), “The eye of an adulterer watches for twilight, saying, ‘No eye shall see me.’” And so the adulterer says, “No human being knows about me”; but the Holy One, blessed be He, has His eyes ranging over all the earth. (Numb. R. 9:1.) So it says (in Jer. 23:24), “’If someone hides in secret places, shall I not see him; do I not fill heaven and earth,’ says the Lord.” Such is the way of those who commit transgression. They wait for a time of darkness, so that no one will see them. It is therefore stated (in Job 24:15), “The eye of the adulterer watches for twilight.” So also thieves watch for an hour of darkness, as stated (in vs. 16), “He breaks into houses in the dark.” And so it says (in Is. 29:15), “Woe to those who delve deeply to hide a plan from the Lord, for their works are in darkness; [so they say, ‘Who sees us and who knows about us?’]” The thief and the adulterer are obdurate, because they remove the Divine Presence. The Holy One, blessed be He, as it were, fills the realms above and the realms below, as stated (in Jer. 23:24), “’do I not fill heaven and earth,’ says the Lord.” Also in regard to the place where the adulterer comes to commit adultery, the Holy One, blessed be He, is there in His glory. It is so stated (in Is. 6:3), “the whole earth is full of His glory.” Now the adulterer says to the Holy One, blessed be He, “Remove Yourself, and give way to me for a while.” The matter is exceedingly difficult, as it were. Since He is slow to anger, He gives way to him; for (according to Job 11:11) “He knows those who are worthless; so when He sees iniquity, [does He not discern it?]” It also says (in Job 24:15, cont.), “He (i.e., the Holy One, blessed be He) turns a secret into a face.” (This rendering fits the context of what follows in the midrash. A more traditional rendering, which fits the context of Job, would read, “AND HE (i.e., the adulterer) PUTS A VEIL ON HIS FACE.) Ergo (in Job 24:15), “When the eye of an adulterer watches for twilight, saying, ‘No eye shall see me.’” So what does the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He turns a secret into a face. He puts the face of [the] adulterer on that fetus. (Lev. R. 23:12.) While the adulterer and the adulteress do not want her to become pregnant but only to satisfy their sexual desire, the Holy One, blessed be He, proclaims (Gk.: parresiazesthai.) them to the world. Ergo, “He turns a secret into a face,” so that the people may know [about him] and say, “Surely this one's face resembles the face of [the] adulterer”; for [the Holy One, blessed be He,] has formed the image of the fetus in the likeness of the adulterer. Ergo (ibid.), “He turns a secret into a face.” It is therefore called whoredom (zimmah); for they both deny and say, “We do not know what this is (zeh mah).” (Literally: “This is what?” The Hebrew uses the unusual word order to make the parallel with “whoredom” (zimmah).) R. Isaac said, “The power of the adulterer is strong, because it weakens the power of the Divine Presence. How? When the fetus is conceived from the husband, the Holy One, blessed be He, forms its image in forty days. For thus have our masters taught, ‘In forty days the image of the fetus is recognizable.’ After forty days, when the adulterer comes into her, the Holy One, blessed be He, stands wondering and says, ‘After whom shall I form [the fetus]? The image (rt.: tswr) of the husband or the image of the adulterer?’ (According to Deut. 32:18,) As it were, ‘You were unmindful of (tshy) the Rock (tswr) that bore you.’ (I.e., the adulterer forgot that the Holy One would expose him.) The yod (= y) is [here written] small. [Thus, you] weaken (tsh, without the yod) the hands (yad in the dual) of the Creator (tsayyar).” R. Abbahu said, “To what is the matter comparable? To a sculptor (tsayyar, rt.: tsyr), who was fashioning (rt.: tsyr) an image (Gk.: eikonion.) of a king. When he came to finish the face, (Gk.: prosopon.) they said to him, “The king is dead, and another king has arisen.” When the sculptor heard that, his hands failed. He began to say, “What shall I do with these colors (In the ancient world statues were painted.) which I have? Shall I fashion [them] in the form of the former king or in the form of the second king?” He began to be bewildered. Now similarly, when the husband has marital relations with his wife, the Holy One, blessed be He, forms the fetus in the likeness of its father. [Then] in turn the adulterer comes into her. Ergo, the colors are mingled. Thus it is stated (in Hos. 4:2), “Swearing, lying, murdering, stealing, committing adultery break out; bloodshed follows bloodshed.” What does the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He returns, as it were, and changes the face into the likeness of the adulterer. Ergo (in Job 24:15) “He turns a secret into a face.”
It is also possible to interpret this verse as a promise for the future. G’d is saying: “if you do what is right in the eyes of the Lord there will not be any murders of innocent people.” This in turn will serve to hasten the arrival of a period when murder, warfare, etc., will be banished from this earth. At that time the prophecy of Isaiah 2,4: ”and they beat their swords into plowshares,” will be fulfilled. People will no longer teach the art of warfare; no nation will raise a hand against its neighbor. There will be an abundance of peace and serenity, as alluded to in Song of Songs 7,1. People will offer their sacrifices to the attribute Hashem which is also known as שלום as we know from Genesis 32,18 ויבא יעקב שלם. The author cites a few more verses implying that G’d’s name is שלום.
THUS SHALL YE SAY UNTO MY LORD ESAU: THUS SAITH THY SERVANT JACOB. He commanded them that they should say “to my lord Esau we belong,” or “we were sent to him,” (The intent of Ramban is to state that Jacob, speaking to his servants, did not refer to Esau as “my lord Esau,” but rather he commanded them to use the expression in Esau’s presence.) and to say to him, Thus saith thy servant Jacob: I have sojourned with Laban. A similar example in this section is the verse: When Esau my brother meeteth thee, and asketh thee, saying, Whose art thou? (Further, Verse 18. The verse concludes that they are to tell him that it is a gift “to my lord Esau.” Again Jacob is telling them what to say.) It may be that in their presence Jacob called Esau “my lord Esau” in order to caution them not to mention Esau in any other but a respectful way even when not in his presence, inasmuch as their lord calls him “my lord.” Know that this respect which Jacob showed for his brother by fearfully saying “my lord” and “thy servant” was due to it being the custom of the younger brother to give recognition and respect to the firstborn as if he were his father, just as the Torah also hints to us on this matter: (Kethuboth 103a. Commenting on the letter vav in the expression, ve’eth imecha (“honor thy father ‘and’ thy mother“), our Rabbis said: “This includes your oldest brother!”) “This includes your oldest brother.” Now Jacob had taken his birthright and his blessing, for which Esau hated him, and now he is acting towards Esau as if the effect of that sale was nil as far as he was concerned, and he is conducting himself towards him as to a firstborn and father in order to remove the hatred from his heart.
Or of wool. The ל is like the ל of (Bereishis 32:18): “למי אתה” which means: To whom do you belong?
He commanded the first one, saying, When my brother, Eisov meets you and asks you saying, To whom do you belong, and where are you going; and who is the owner of this that is before you?
And he instructed the first, Saying, When Esau my brother shall meet thee, and ask of thee, saying, Whose art thou, and whither art thou journeying and whose are these before thee?
| וְאָֽמַרְתָּ֙ לְעַבְדְּךָ֣ לְיַעֲקֹ֔ב מִנְחָ֥ה הִוא֙ שְׁלוּחָ֔ה לַֽאדֹנִ֖י לְעֵשָׂ֑ו וְהִנֵּ֥ה גַם־ה֖וּא אַחֲרֵֽינוּ׃ | 19 E | you shall answer, ‘Your servant Jacob’s; they are a gift sent to my lord Esau; and [Jacob] himself is right behind us.’” |
?למי אתה, “Who do you belong to?” ואמרת: ״לעבדך וגו׳״, “you will say: ‘to your servant, etc.” Yaakov ordered his servants, the ones who accompanied the herds of gifts, to answer each question in the order in which it had been asked. To the question of: “who do these herds belong to?” the answer was to be: “they belong to your servant Yaakov and are a gift for my lord Esau.” In response to the question: ולמי אלה לפניך, “and to whom do these animals in front of you belong?” They were all to answer: “and he (Yaakov) is also following a short distance behind us.”
ואמרת לעבדך ליעקב, you will say: "to your servant, to Jacob." This means that the appropriate answer to the question: "who do you belong to?" would be: "to your servant Jacob;" the appropriate reply to the question: "where are you headed for?" is "to bring a gift which has been despatched." The appropriate answer to the question: "who is the gift for?" is "for my lord, for Esau."
מנחה, we explained this term in connection with Genesis 4,3.
ואמרת לעבדך ליעקב THEN SHALT THOU SAY THEY ARE THY SERVANT JACOB’S — You shall answer the first question first and the last question last, saying :”In reply to what you have asked”, “Whose art thou?”, “I belong to thy servant Jacob” — and it should be rendered in the Targum דעבדך דיעקב belonging to your servant, belonging to Jacob” —and in reply to what you have asked, “And whose are these before thee?” “It is a present sent etc.”
והנה גם הוא AND, BEHOLD, ALSO HE IS BEHIND US — The word “he” refers to Jacob.
(19-21) Einen ganz besonderen Wert legt Jakob darauf, daß jeder Herdenführer bei Esau die Erwartung anrege, daß er nun sogleich Jakob begegnen werde, und ihm dann statt Jakob erst wieder ein Geschenk entgegentrete. Indem so wiederholt der Zorn zum Ausbruch sich sammeln durfte, und dann statt Gelegenheit zum Ausbruch eine neue Beschwichtigung finde, hoffte er — gewiss mit tief psychologischem Blicke — am sichersten eine allmähliche Kühlung und Besänftigung erwarten zu dürfen.
ואמרת: "לעבדך ליעקב". He instructed his shepherds not to give the impression that they knew Esau was on the way in their direction and that they had been sent to him. The phrasing Yaakov instructed his messengers to use was meant to give the impression that Yaakov had no knowledge that Esau was marching toward him with hostile intentions. The messenger should give the impression that he had been sent by Yaakov to Seir where Esau lived, with a gift for him.
Referring to Yaakov. [How does Rashi know this? Because] it is written, “He commanded the first one... and to all who followed after....” If so, the last one also said, “He is also behind us” — although there was no [group] behind him. Perforce, it referred to Yaakov. Consequently, all [the groups must have meant] the same. [You might ask: If so,] why does it then say, “You should also say, ‘See, your servant Yaakov is behind us”? [This is repetitious, as] all the servants already said this! The answer is: Yaakov was saying to them as follows. Regarding what I commanded you to say to Eisov — “And see, he is also behind us” — do not say it vaguely, by concealing my name. Rather, say it expressly, like this: “See, your servant Yaakov is behind us.” I.e., mention to him [also my] servility.
He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau when you find him. You shall tell him that you are Jacob’s servants, and that this entire herd is a gift to his lord, Esau.
On seeing that it is so, Edom's guardian angel will think that Botzrah is a refuge like Betzer. (Betzer was one of the cities of refuge prescribed by the Torah.) That an angel, like a man, is protected within it, and that the premeditated [killer] like the unpremeditated [killer] is held in the refuge. (The Talmud (Makos 12a) says that the guardian angel of Esau will make three mistakes in fleeing to Botzrah. All three are enumerated in this stanza.) “Love Adonoy, all His pious ones, the faithful ones whom He preserves.” (Psalms 31:24.)
“And he placed them in the hands of his slaves, each flock separately, and he told them: Go before me, and leave space between the flocks” (Genesis 32:17). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these before you” (Genesis 32:18). “You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau and, behold, he too, is behind us” (Genesis 32:19). “He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau, when you find him” (Genesis 32:20). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you…You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda were walking along the way. They saw a gentile coming toward them. They said: ‘He will ask us three things: What are you? What is your trade? Where are you going?’ What are you? Jews. What is your trade? Merchants. Where are you going? To purchase wheat from the storehouses of Yavne. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] stood opposite the gentile to see what he would ask, and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda waited for him. He said: ‘If he says something, I [worry I] will say something else.’ (If the gentile asks Rabbi Yehuda a question and then asks me the same question, if I don’t hear Rabbi Yehuda’s answer and I give a different answer, we may appear suspicious.) He said to him: ‘From where do you know this?’ He said to him: ‘From Jacob our patriarch.’ (Jacob prepared his messengers for all contingencies.) “And, behold, he too, is behind us.” “He commanded the first…also the second” – Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Ḥilkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon: “When you find him” in his greatness. (But if he is no longer in his greatness, approach him differently.) “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us. For he said: I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me” (Genesis 32:21). “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us” – that is what is written: “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked one; he covers the faces of its judges…” (Job 9:24). (This verse is quoted in response to the fact that the righteous Jacob calls himself the slave of the wicked Esau.) “He placed them in the charge of the servants, each drove by itself” – why did he not introduce them intermingled? It was in order to astonish him with his gift. (So he would see the variety and the number of each of the species.) Why did he not introduce them all at once? It was in order to satiate the eyes of the wicked one. He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive’; He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive.’ (Each time Esau thought that the gift was complete, Jacob’s servant would say: There is more for you to receive.) “The gift went before him and he stayed that night in the camp” (Genesis 32:22). “The gift went before him [al panav]” – he, too, was distressed. (The word panav is found in the context of distress. See I Samuel 1:18.)
“Wisdom is better than instruments of battle, and one sinner destroys much good” (Ecclesiastes 9:18). “Wisdom is better than instruments of battle” – this is the wisdom of Jacob; “than instruments of battle” – of Esau the wicked. Rabbi Levi said: He armed them (Jacob armed his sons and the other members of his camp.) with weapons on the inside and dressed them in white garments on the outside, and he prepared himself for three matters: for prayer, for a gift, and for war. For prayer, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “Please rescue me from the hand of my brother” (Genesis 32:12). For a gift, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “You shall say: From your servant Jacob, it is a gift sent” (Genesis 32:19). For war, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “He placed the maidservants [and their children first, and Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last.] He passed before them and prostrated himself earthward” (Genesis 33:2–3). He said: It is preferable that he harm me and not my children. (Thus, Jacob was prepared for the fact that Esau might act violently upon their encounter.) “Esau returned on that day on his way to Se’ir” (Genesis 33:16). Why to Se’ir? Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani, Rabbi Elazar said: It was due to a promissory note. (The descendants of Isaac were to receiv the Land of Israel and were to be enslaved in Egypt. Esau preferred to forgo the Land of Israel and forgo the enslavement in Egypt. The midrash refers to the coming enslavement as though it were a debt set forth in a promissory note.) Rabbi Shmuel said: It was due to shame. (He was ashamed for having sold his birthright.) “And one sinner destroys much good” – this is Esau who lost all the goodness and the gifts of the World to Come.
When Jacob instructed the men accompanying the gifts to reply: לעבדך ליעקב, "they belong to your servant, to Jacob," the word “ליעקב,” was the reply intended for terrestrial Esau; the word “לעבדך,” was the answer intended to Samael's enquiry for whom the gift was intended. Samael is meant to accept our sins when we send them to him as a gift. This is the whole secret of the שעיר המשתלח, the scapegoat that is dispatched to the desert and has its neck broken on the Day of Atonement.
There is another mystical aspect to this which is used by בעלי כשוף, those that cast spells and practice sorcery. Their activities do not involve females and perversions involving females. In consideration of this we present Samael with a male goat, acknowledging the fact that he is king in a certain domain and has not wasted his strength on self-gratification of a sexual nature. We treat Samael as if he were still a "son" eating at his father's (G–d's) table. We present two he-goats on the Day of Atonement. Samael does not realize that this very gift serves to remove him from the Sanctuary, the Holy Regions. Samael's experience may be compared to that of Haman whom Esther invited to share the meal she tendered for the king. Haman believed that he received a great distinction, little realizing that he was being set up for a fall. Our gift to Samael on the Day of Atonement is designed to produce a similar effect on him. Just as Haman left the meal with Esther and the king on the first occasion full of joy and self-esteem, so Samael reacts to our gift as if we had acknowledged his authority and the need to placate him. As a result, he does not feel that he could present accusations against people who had shown him that much honor (cf. Esther 5,9). G–d accepts Samael's testimony concerning the overall conduct of the Jewish people, and immediately grants them atonement. G–d "dumps" all of Israel's sins on to the head of Samael, who in turn distributes them among his underlings as described in Micah 7,19: "You will hurl all their (meaning "our") sins into the depths of the sea." Samael is viewed as the ruler of these "depths of the sea." Thus far the Tolaat Yaakov. Jacob's gift to Samael is to be understood in a similar way.
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה THEN THE REMAINING CAMP MAY ESCAPE in spite of him, for I will fight against him He prepared himself for three things: to give him a present — as it states (Genesis 32:22) “So, the present passed before him”; for prayer — as it states (Genesis 32:10), “And he said, ‘O God of my father Abraham”; for war — as it states in this verse, “then the remaining camp may escape”, for I will fight against him (Tanchuma Yashan 1:8:6).
I am not aware. You might ask: How did it occur to Hashem that Aharon and Miriam would speak in this way? The answer is that it was because they said “Is it only to Moshe that Hashem has spoken? Did He not also speak with us?” yet we have not abstained from marital relations. Why did Rashi add “… from marital relations”? — because it was a product of their haughtiness. They said “the Divine Presence rests upon him, but since Scripture writes “I will rest upon the contrite and the humble” (Yeshayahu 57:15), given that Moshe is haughty, why then does the Divine Presence rest upon him? It is as if Hashem is not aware that he is haughty.” Consequently Rashi says that this statement is worse than the first, and this is also why it is written here “the man Moshe was exceedingly modest” (v. 3) – in response to what Aharon and Miriam said that Moshe was haughty. This is in contrast to the explanation of Re’m who expounds this from the extra beis of בעבדי (about my servant). However, this presents a difficulty: Why not expound the extra lamed in לעבדך ליעקב “to your servant, to Yaakov” (Bereishis 32:19) and also לאדוני לעשו “to my master, to Eisav” (ibid. v. 5)? He brings a different [version of Rashi’s] text there in order to answer the difficulty, but according to our explanation it is not necessary to modify our version of Rashi.
This excludes that of an animal. Meaning that once it is written “a corpse” it is obvious that it is “a soul”! Rashi answers that this is an explanation of the word “corpse,” meaning that the verse says “whoever touches a corpse” and [then explains] which type – “the corpse of a human soul…” [One might ask:] Above it is also written, “The corpse of any human soul” (v. 11)! The answer is that above it is written במת לכל נפש (lit. "The corpse to any [human] soul") and this is the equivalent of writing במת של כל נפש האדם ("The corpse of any human soul"). There the meaning of the lamed is like the lamed in Parshas Vayishlach (Bereishis 32:18-19): למי אתה (lit. "To whom are you?") meaning, “Of whom are you?” Also like the lamed in [the verse following] לעבדך ליעקב (lit. "To your servant, to Yaakov") meaning “Of your servant, of Yaakov.” But here the word מת ("corpse") and the word נפש ("soul") are both prefixed by a beis, thus it appears that the phrase “whoever touches” refers to both, [implying that they are independent of each other], as in the manner of a verb in a construct with a subsequent beis. Therefore, Rashi says that even so, the phrase “whoever touches” refers only to the word מת (corpse) and consequently he comments that “soul” is an explanation of the word “corpse.”
You should [then] say, [They belong] to your servant, Yaakov. It is a present sent to my master, Eisov, and see, he is also [coming] behind us.
Thou shalt say it is a gift of thy servant Jakob, which he sends to my lord Esau, and, behold, he also cometh after us.
| וַיְצַ֞ו גַּ֣ם אֶת־הַשֵּׁנִ֗י גַּ֚ם אֶת־הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֔י גַּ֚ם אֶת־כׇּל־הַהֹ֣לְכִ֔ים אַחֲרֵ֥י הָעֲדָרִ֖ים לֵאמֹ֑ר כַּדָּבָ֤ר הַזֶּה֙ תְּדַבְּר֣וּן אֶל־עֵשָׂ֔ו בְּמֹצַאֲכֶ֖ם אֹתֽוֹ׃ | 20 E | He gave similar instructions to the second one, and the third, and all the others who followed the droves, namely, “Thus and so shall you say to Esau when you reach him. |
AND ALL THAT FOLLOWED. Scripture says this because there were five groups. (Goats, sheep, camels, cattle and asses. Scripture notes that Jacob commanded the foremost, the second and the third group, and all that followed what to tell Esau because there were five groups and each group was instructed what to say.)
WHEN YE FIND HIM. The tzadi of be-motza’akhem (when ye find) is vocalized with a pattach because it precedes a guttural. (When an infinitive is combined with a pronominal suffix, the second root letter is vocalized with a sheva, as in be-shovbekha (Deut. 6:7) or tofsekhem (Josh. 8:8). However, in our case rather than being vocalized with a sheva, the second root letter is vocalized with a pattach. We thus read, motza’akhem rather than motzakhem. I.E. explains that this is so because the tsadi precedes a guttural (the alef) (Cherez).) This is so even though we do not find another example of this in the Bible. (In all other similar cases, i.e., even preceding a guttural, the second root letter is vocalized with a sheva. Compare, shomakhem (Deut. 5:20), where the mem is vocalized with a sheva even though it precedes an ayin, a guttural (Cherez). Thus I.E. notes that while his explanation is correct with regard to our word it does not hold for similar words in Scripture.)
ויצו...במצאכם, the letter מ has the vowel cholem, and the letter צ has the vowel patach in order to lengthen the letter א. If not for this consideration the letter מ would have required the vowel chataf kametz (short) and the letter צ would have required a semi vowel sheva, as in Joshua 8,8 בתפשכם את העיר, “when you seize the city.”
כדבר הזה תדברון אל עשו, he instructed each one what to reply to Esau’s enquiry. He should simply mention that he belonged to the other herds following him, all of them being Yaakov’s a gift for his older brother Esau.
You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob coming behind us to meet you. He is not running away, and there is no need to chase him. For he, Jacob, said to himself: I will appease him, Esau, with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter, when he has received the gift, I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me for what I have done for him.
“And he placed them in the hands of his slaves, each flock separately, and he told them: Go before me, and leave space between the flocks” (Genesis 32:17). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these before you” (Genesis 32:18). “You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau and, behold, he too, is behind us” (Genesis 32:19). “He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau, when you find him” (Genesis 32:20). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you…You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda were walking along the way. They saw a gentile coming toward them. They said: ‘He will ask us three things: What are you? What is your trade? Where are you going?’ What are you? Jews. What is your trade? Merchants. Where are you going? To purchase wheat from the storehouses of Yavne. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] stood opposite the gentile to see what he would ask, and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda waited for him. He said: ‘If he says something, I [worry I] will say something else.’ (If the gentile asks Rabbi Yehuda a question and then asks me the same question, if I don’t hear Rabbi Yehuda’s answer and I give a different answer, we may appear suspicious.) He said to him: ‘From where do you know this?’ He said to him: ‘From Jacob our patriarch.’ (Jacob prepared his messengers for all contingencies.) “And, behold, he too, is behind us.” “He commanded the first…also the second” – Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Ḥilkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon: “When you find him” in his greatness. (But if he is no longer in his greatness, approach him differently.) “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us. For he said: I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me” (Genesis 32:21). “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us” – that is what is written: “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked one; he covers the faces of its judges…” (Job 9:24). (This verse is quoted in response to the fact that the righteous Jacob calls himself the slave of the wicked Esau.) “He placed them in the charge of the servants, each drove by itself” – why did he not introduce them intermingled? It was in order to astonish him with his gift. (So he would see the variety and the number of each of the species.) Why did he not introduce them all at once? It was in order to satiate the eyes of the wicked one. He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive’; He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive.’ (Each time Esau thought that the gift was complete, Jacob’s servant would say: There is more for you to receive.) “The gift went before him and he stayed that night in the camp” (Genesis 32:22). “The gift went before him [al panav]” – he, too, was distressed. (The word panav is found in the context of distress. See I Samuel 1:18.)
In the stories of Jacob, however, the Torah always uses “Lord,” for he was more complete than was Isaac. Thus, unlike Isaac, who had not been as | complete as Abraham, (36. Kaspi says that in the following verses, which refer to Isaac, the memory and merits of Abraham are invoked in order to increase the well-being of Isaac. This indicates that Abraham was the greater of the two.) it is not said of Jacob, “because that Abraham hearkened to my voice,” (37. Gen. 26:5.) or “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” (38. Gen. 26:24.) The exception (where “God” appears in the stories of Jacob) is “the house of God,” (39. Gen. 28:17.) and that is on account of its being followed by “and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob said that because he recognized that the place was conducive to prophecy and perception because of the celestial cause that predominated there, as Ibn Ezra noted. (40. Ibn Ezra says on this verse: “This is the house of God—in which a person can pray in time of need, for his prayer will be heard on account of its being a special place.”) He continued to say, “If God will be with me …” (41. Gen. 28:20.) (using ’Elokim) in accordance with the opinion of our Torah that the world of Separate Intelligences is the first cause. (42. As explained above, ’Elokim refers to the upper two worlds, which are here referred to by Kaspi as ha-sekhel ha-nifrad (“the separate intellect”), which as an entity influences the events of the sublunar world below them.) The proof of this is provided by the opening verse of the Torah, “In the beginning God created …” as I have explained. (43. See above chap. II, n. 1.) When Jacob’s wives speak, and when Jacob speaks to them, they mention “God,” (44. Gen. 31:5, 9, 11, 16.) for that is appropriate for them, as we have already mentioned. This is especially the case as they are the daughters of (the pagan) Laban, as is proved by Rachel when she coveted the teraphim. (45. Gen. 31:19.) When on occasion they do mention “Lord,” (46. Gen. 29:32–33, 30:24.) it is only because they learnt this from Jacob. Notice the precision regarding Laban when the Torah says, “and God came to Laban,” (47. Gen. 31:24.) similar to what was written of Abimelech, (48. Gen. 20:3.) in accordance with his confused belief in the power of the Heavenly Sphere and that of the imagination. Laban said to Jacob, “the God of your father spoke unto me yesternight saying …,” (49. Gen. 31:29.) for how could the god of Laban assist Jacob when (Jacob) did not believe in him. Similarly he said, “the Lord watch between me and thee,” (50. Gen. 31:49.) in accordance with Jacob’s belief. Furthermore Laban made Jacob swear by the Lord, for Jacob feared Him, and not God. In summarizing in conclusion, Laban said, “The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor … judge betwixt us …” (51. Gen. 31:53.) whereas “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.” (52. Ibid.) Jacob uses “God” when saying “and the angels of God met him,” (53. Gen. 32:2.) and “this is God’s camp,” (54. Ibid.) as well as “I have seen God face to face” (55. Gen. 32:28.) and “for thou hast striven with God,” (56. Gen. 32:20.) for all of them are in a prophetic use of the imagination. (57. He means that they take place in a prophetic vision, which with the exception of Moses, necessarily involves the imaginative faculty.) It is similar with “And God said unto Jacob,” (58. Gen. 35:1.) | and “there God was revealed unto him,” (59. Gen. 35:7.) as well as “and God appeared unto Jacob again” (60. Gen. 35:9.) and “where God spoke with him.” (61. Gen. 35:15.)
And this is the law of the sacrifice of peace-offerings which one shall offer to the Lord: It does not state which one shall offer to the Lord with any of the sacrifices besides the peace-offerings, which are desired without iniquity (alluding to Psalms 59:5) — since they are closer to the Lord than all of the sacrifices that come for a sin. And for that reason, it is written adjacently, Whoever shall bring the sacrifice of his peace-offering to the Lord, he shall bring his offering to the Lord [...]. His hands shall bring the fire-offerings of the Lord (Leviticus 7:29–-30). It mentioned, to the Lord, in all of [these verses], since, "These are what I have desired," said the Lord (alluding to Jeremiah 9:23). And look to the right and see (alluding to Psalms 142:5) that it did not mention that the owner should bring the portion for the High One with his hands with any [other] sacrifice. Only [here] with the peace-offerings, his hands shall bring it. That is because anyone who bears the king's anger and wants to atone and to wipe away the anger from his face sends a gift before him with a messenger; in the way that Jacob said , I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and afterward I will see his face (Genesis 32:20). But someone who brings the king a present as a favor and a show of honor would then bring his gift in his hands, by himself and not with a messenger. And that is the difference between the sin- and guilt-offerings that come from a sinful act, the burnt-offering that comes from a sinful thought, and the peace-offerings. For it is not fitting that his hands should bring those sacrifices which come to remove God's face of anger, may He be blessed, as it appears like brazenness towards the Heavens. Hence he sends them through the priests. But his hands do bring the peace-offerings, which are a favor and a present.
He also commanded the second and also the third, and to all who followed after the herds, saying, In like manner must you speak to Eisov when you find [meet] him.
And so he instructed the second, and the third, and all them who followed the flock, saying According to these words You must speak with Esau when you find him,
| וַאֲמַרְתֶּ֕ם גַּ֗ם הִנֵּ֛ה עַבְדְּךָ֥ יַעֲקֹ֖ב אַחֲרֵ֑ינוּ כִּֽי־אָמַ֞ר אֲכַפְּרָ֣ה פָנָ֗יו בַּמִּנְחָה֙ הַהֹלֶ֣כֶת לְפָנָ֔י וְאַחֲרֵי־כֵן֙ אֶרְאֶ֣ה פָנָ֔יו אוּלַ֖י יִשָּׂ֥א פָנָֽי׃ | 21 E | And you shall add, ‘And your servant Jacob himself is right behind us.’” For he reasoned, “If I propitiate him with presents in advance, and then face him, perhaps he will show me favor.” |
[The author continues at length to explain the report of Moses’ charging the firstborn, נערי בני ישראל, with offering sacrifices, while he sprinkled the blood on the altar, etc; all these activities are explained in terms of paralleling the “charging of spiritual batteries” that we explained above. I have decided not to continue with this part of his presentation as it extends all the way to the half shekel the male Israelites in chapter 30, were to give as ransom for their souls. Ed.]
ואמרתם גם הנה עבדך יעקב אחרינו, you are to say: “your servant Yaakov is also not far behind us.” He made them repeat this answer twice. He told his servants that when they would see Esau they should not be afraid to address him in such a manner, i.e. by referring to their own master as Esau’s servant. In the event Esau would ask them why Yaakov did not precede them in order to welcome him, as befits a younger brother when he meets his older brother, you will say: etc.: he reasoned that he wanted Esau to be in a good frame of mind concerning him before actually setting eyes on him.” They were to reveal that Yaakov had felt the need to appease his older brother by means of the gift he had sent ahead of himself. He hoped that in view of this substantial gift Esau would be good tempered when they came face to face after so many years. These latter words were not spoken by the servants of Yaakov who walked with the animals, but are to be understood as editorial comment by the author of the Torah. If they had done so, Yaakov would have committed the psychological error of reminding Esau of how he had once deceived him.
FOR HE SAID. He said in his heart. (Jacob thought this. He did not instruct his messengers to say this to Esau, as one might gather from the verse.) These are the words of Moses. (Moses in writing the Torah explained what motivated Jacob to send these gifts to Esau.)
[I WILL APPEASE HIM.] Akhapperah (I will appease him) means I will cover or hide. (The root of akhapperah is caf, peh, resh, which means to cover.) Panav (him) (Panav usually means face or countenance. Here it means anger. Jacob said, “I will cover his anger”; i.e., I will appease him. Weiser suggests that since anger is expressed in the face, face is, by extension, occasionally used as a synonym for anger.) means his anger. Peneha (her countenance) in and her countenance (u-faneha) was no more sad (According to I.E. this should be rendered: her anger was no more, i.e., she was pacified.) (I Sam. 1:18) is similar.
ואמרתם גם הנה עבדך יעקב אחרנו, you will say: "your servant Jacob is also following behind us." The messengers explained why Jacob neither preceded nor accompanied them. The reason was simply that Jacob wanted to appease Esau's anger so that the latter would receive him in a good frame of mind.
ואמרתם, even though this instruction had already been given both collectively and individually, he repeated it again until they would remember to add “your servant Yaakov is following behind us.” Esau was to have the impression that Yaakov followed these shepherds, his servants, on his way to Seir in order to present himself to him.
אכפרה פניו, I want to remove his anger. Every time the word כפרה appears it means the removal of something. For instance, in Isaiah 28,18 וכפר בריתכם את מות, “your covenant with death will be removed, cancelled.” The expression כפרת עון means “the removal of sin.” Compare also Isaiah 46,11.
פניו, a reference to anger, seeing that anger is visible in one’s face. The idea of אכפרה פניו is to accomplish that his face no longer reflect his feeling of anger. We find this expression with Chanah, Samuel’s mother, after she had poured out her angry heart to G’d, having been deliberately goaded by Peninah, Elkanah’s other wife. (Samuel I 1,18) We also find this usage in Job 9,26.
‘ACHAPRAH’ (I WILL APPEASE) HIM WITH THE PRESENT. I.e., “I will dissipate his anger.” Similarly: ‘Vechupar’ (and annulled shall be) your covenant with death; (Isaiah 28:18.) Thou shalt not be able ‘kaprah’ (to put it away). (Ibid., 47:11.) I am of the opinion that whenever the word kaparah is used in association with iniquity and sin and in association with the word panim (anger), it always signifies erasing and removing. It is an Aramaic expression occurring frequently in the Talmud: “He wished to wipe his hands on that man.” (Gittin 56a.) In Biblical Hebrew, also, the bowls in the Sanctuary are called ‘Kipurei’ of gold (Ezra 1:10.) because the priest wiped his hand on them, that is, on the rims of the bowl. These are the words of our Rabbi Shlomo [Rashi]. And so also did Onkelos translate: “I will calm his anger.” If so, the explanation of the verse will [not] be that Jacob said these words, but that Jacob thought to himself, “I will appease him.” It is Scripture that tells us this [but it is not part of Jacob’s instructions to his messengers], for it would have been improper for the messengers to do so and thereby remind Esau of his antagonism towards Jacob. And so did Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explain it. But it does not appear to me to be correct that Scripture should find it necessary to tell us Jacob’s thought at this time when it is a well known matter pertaining to all who send presents. Besides, if it were so, Scripture should have mentioned this originally [in connection with the first drove, in Verse 19] , And, behold, he is also behind us, for he thought, “I will appease him with the present,” for now [when commanding the leaders of the second and third droves] he did not add to that instruction [which he gave the leader of the first drove]. However, the correct interpretation is that now Jacob additionally explained to them that they should say in a respectful manner, Behold, he is also behind us, that is to say, “Behold, your servant Jacob is also behind us, and he has sent us before him in order to give a ransom for his life, (Exodus 30:12.) using this present as a means of seeing your honor’s face, just as servants present their ransom when they are given permission to see the king’s face. And afterward I will see his face, for perhaps he will accept me and honor me by permitting me to be among those who see the king’s face.” (Esther 1:14.) This was a way of expressing Esau’s exalted status and was due to Jacob’s fear of him. The expression achaprah panav is then being used as it is used in the verse, The wrath of a king is as messengers of death; but a wise man ‘yechaprenah,’ (Proverbs 16:14. ) meaning he will give ransom to allay the wrath. And the connotation of “wiping away” attached to forgiveness is not valid in the Sacred Language but rather in the Aramaic tongue. Similarly, ‘kipurei’ of gold (Ezra 1:10.) is the Babylonian name for bowls, for the word kaparah is never used in association with “sin,” meaning “wipe away,” but instead Scripture says: ‘lechapeir’ (to make atonement) for your souls; (Exodus 30:15.) ‘lechapeir’ (to make atonement) for him, and he shall be forgiven, (Numbers 15:28.) i.e., for his soul. And Scripture also says: ‘achaprah’ (I shall make atonement) for your sin. (Exodus 32:30.) All of these are related to the expression, Then shall they give every man ‘kopher’ for his soul, (Exodus 30:12.) which means a ransom.
כי אמר אכפרה פניו, this is not what Yaakov said but what he thought in his heart. This line does not belong to the instructions he had given to his emisssaries.
וגם הנה הוא אחרינו, actually Yaakov had intended to flee in a different direction during the night if the angel had not delayed him. At the time he issued the instructions to his emissaries this had been intended as a stratagem to make Esau think that he was following on the heels of his gift whereas in fact he was not.
אכפרה פניו I WILL APPEASE HIM — I will remove his anger. Similarly, (Isaiah 28:18) "and your covenant with death shall be annulled (וכפר)”; (Isaiah 47:11) “Thou shalt not be able to put it away (וכפרה”. I am of the opinion that wherever the verb כפר is used in association with iniquity and sin and in association with anger (פנים), it always signifies wiping away, removing. It is an Aramaic expression occurring frequently in the Talmud: “He wiped his hand off (כפר ידיה)”, and (Gittin 56a) ‘‘he wants to wipe (לכפורי) his hands off on this man” (i.e. he desires to put the responsibility upon me). In Biblical Hebrew, also, the bowls of the Sanctuary are called, (Ezra 1:10) "כפורי of gold” — and they are so called because the priest wiped his hands on them — on the rim of the bowl (Zevachim 93b).
אכפרה פניו: Da פנים, von פנה, wenden, sich wenden, eine Richtung irgendwo hin nehmen, eigentlich allgemein: die Wendungen, die Richtungen bedeutet, die jemand in Beziehung zu einem Gegenstande zu nehmen im Begriffe ist, und davon erst der Begriff פנים, Angesicht, als desjenigen Körperteils stammt, in dessen Stellung, Bewegung und Blick diese Beziehungen ihren Ausdruck finden, so ist פנים der Ausdruck sowohl für die freundliche als unfreundliche Gesinnung. Es heißt ebenso: באור פני מלך חיים (Prov. 16, 15) als: פני ד׳ בעושי רע (Ps. 34, 17) . אכפרה פניו heißt daher eigentlich: ich möchte die in ihm gegen mich vorhandene Gesinnung beschwichtigen. (כפר siehe zu Kap. 6, 19.)
אולי ישא פני. Nach den verschiedenen Bedeutungen der Wurzel נשא erscheint auch der Ausdruck נשא פנים in verschiedener Bedeutung. Insbesondere sind es die beiden: aufheben und auf sich nehmen, die hier in Betracht kommen. Hier: vielleicht wird er mein Angesicht, das jetzt נופל ist, niedergeschlagen, und das ich nicht zu erheben wage, aufheben, d. h. durch Vergeben und Vergessen machen, daß ich wieder zu ihm auf- schauen könne. לא תשא פני דל, überhaupt נשא פנים במשפט, ist in der Bedeutung auf sich nehmen, wovon: in sich aufnehmen, in den Kreis seiner Wahrnehmungen und Vorstellungen aufnehmen, daher: כי תשא את ראש, zählen, d. h. ja: die Existenzen mehrerer sich irgend einem gemeinsamen Begriff unterordnender Individuen nach einander ins Bewusstsein aufnehmen. Ebenso: נשא פנים במשפט, die Individualität, die Persönlichkeit der Partei mit unter die Faktoren des Urteils aufnehmen, Rücksicht darauf nehmen, wer vor Gericht steht.
ואמרתם גם הנה עבדך יעקב אחרינו, he told each of them to reply with the same words in addition to the words that each one had been instructed to answer individually. The purpose behind these detailed instructions was to convince Esau that Yaakov was indeed not far behind on his way to Seir the destination of these gifts which he had sent ahead of him.
כי אמר אכפרה פניו במנחה, these were the words he had instructed the shepherds leading the gift to say, in order to soften Esau’s attitude by Yaakov assuming a somewhat servile attitude prior to their coming face to face with one another.
אראה פניו, an expression denoting the “paying of a visit,” as we know from Exodus 34,23 where the Jewish people is instructed to visit the Temple three times annually with the same formula, i.e. יראה כל זכורך...ולא יראו פני ריקם, “every male of you is to visit Me; when they pay this visit they shall not come empty-handed.” Yaakov himself confirmed the meaning of the formula אראה פניך when he said to Esau in 33,10 על כן ראיתי פניך כראות פני אלוקים, “inasmuch as visiting you is akin to visiting the presence of G’d.” It was an accepted custom for a visitor to highly placed persons to arrive bearing gifts.
The gift went before him, Jacob, for his inspection; and he stayed that night in the camp.
כי אמר: אכפרה פניו, “for he had said: ”I want to gain his goodwill.” Rashi understands this as an attempt to mollify Esau’s anger. Whenever the word כפרה occurs in connection with sin, either intentional or inadvertent, this is its primary meaning. Nachmanides comments that if we accept Rashi’s explanation the words are not words spoken by Yaakov at all, but are the Torah’s report of what motivated Yaakov’s entire conduct in offering a gift to his brother. Why would the Torah spell out Yaakov’s thoughts, when we had already read in verse 15 what was the reason for his preparing this gift. Not only that; most people who send gifts ahead of themselves do so for precisely the same reason, namely to put the recipient in a good mood so that they can be certain of a friendly reception. Another difficulty with Rashi’s comment raised by Nachmanides is that this consideration by Yaakov should have appeared at the beginning of this paragraph. Moreover, what possible reason is there for the Torah to quote the messengers as saying והנה גם הוא אחרינו, ”and lo he is also behind us?” Surely, this is not part of Yaakov’s thoughts at that time! For these various reasons Nachmanides explains that Yaakov now added as an afterthought that the messengers should add the words: “here he is also behind us,” as a polite way of explaining that the gift was indeed something preparatory to Yaakov’s personal arrival, designed to ensure that Esau would grant him an audience. Yaakov’s entire behaviour reflects Proverbs 16,14: ואיש חכם יכפרנה, “a wise man can appease it.” (the king’s anger)
In Biblical Hebrew, the Day of Atonement is called “Yom Ha-kippurim”; colloquially, we call it “Yom Kippur.” The root of “kippurim,” K-P-R, has many meanings, all of which are relevant to Yom Kippur. First, “kapara” can indicate covering. This was the function of the kaporet, the lid that covered the ark in the Temple; likewise, kapara covers up sins. A second meaning of “kapara” is an exchange or ransom (kofer). Sin, which originates in impure forces, is “exchanged” and returned to its place via the goat of Azazel. Third, “kapara” can mean cleansing or wiping clean. Atonement wipes us clean of the foulness of sin. Fourth, “kapara” can indicate neutralization or renouncement. As Yaakov says, “I will neutralize (akhapra) [Esav’s anger]” (Bereishit 32:21); Yaakov sought to counter Esav’s wrath with gifts (Rashi ad loc.). Fifth, “kapara” indicates appeasement. Neutralizing a sin can appease an injured party or heavenly accuser. (See Rashi, Mishlei 16:14.) Finally, “kapara” can connote fragrance, as one might understand the phrase “eshkol ha-kofer” (Shir Ha-shirim 1:14) to mean “a spray of fragrant blooms.” So too, repentance out of love transforms unknowing sins into merits, releasing a pleasant scent.
This did not satisfy the moon, since it originally possessed a superior quality and had lost it. Therefore, God said that kaparah, translated as “an atonement offering,” should be brought for Him. Here, however, the intent of the term kaparah is not “atonement for sin,” i.e., that a person becomes aware that he has sinned, feels regret, and brings an offering so that the one against whom he has sinned will forgive him. All of this is not appropriate when speaking about God. In this context, the term kaparah means to wash away and remove, as Rashi explains in his commentary to the verse, (Bereishis 32:21.) אולי אכפרה פניו “Perhaps I will cause his mien to change.” Moreover, even the fundamental meaning of the term chatas, “sin,” is “lack,” as in the verses, ( I Melachim 1:21.) אני ובני שלמה חטאים, “I and Shlomoh my son will be lacking,” and אנכי אחטנה, “I would compensate for the lack.” (Bereishis 31:39.) Similarly, a sin-offering is called a chatas because of the deficiency created, for every sin is due to a lack. On this basis, the passage can be understood as stating that God asked that a kaparah – i.e., a cleansing and a removal of the complaints – be brought to appease the moon because of the lack brought about by its diminishment.
“And he placed them in the hands of his slaves, each flock separately, and he told them: Go before me, and leave space between the flocks” (Genesis 32:17). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these before you” (Genesis 32:18). “You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau and, behold, he too, is behind us” (Genesis 32:19). “He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau, when you find him” (Genesis 32:20). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you…You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda were walking along the way. They saw a gentile coming toward them. They said: ‘He will ask us three things: What are you? What is your trade? Where are you going?’ What are you? Jews. What is your trade? Merchants. Where are you going? To purchase wheat from the storehouses of Yavne. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] stood opposite the gentile to see what he would ask, and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda waited for him. He said: ‘If he says something, I [worry I] will say something else.’ (If the gentile asks Rabbi Yehuda a question and then asks me the same question, if I don’t hear Rabbi Yehuda’s answer and I give a different answer, we may appear suspicious.) He said to him: ‘From where do you know this?’ He said to him: ‘From Jacob our patriarch.’ (Jacob prepared his messengers for all contingencies.) “And, behold, he too, is behind us.” “He commanded the first…also the second” – Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Ḥilkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon: “When you find him” in his greatness. (But if he is no longer in his greatness, approach him differently.) “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us. For he said: I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me” (Genesis 32:21). “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us” – that is what is written: “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked one; he covers the faces of its judges…” (Job 9:24). (This verse is quoted in response to the fact that the righteous Jacob calls himself the slave of the wicked Esau.) “He placed them in the charge of the servants, each drove by itself” – why did he not introduce them intermingled? It was in order to astonish him with his gift. (So he would see the variety and the number of each of the species.) Why did he not introduce them all at once? It was in order to satiate the eyes of the wicked one. He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive’; He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive.’ (Each time Esau thought that the gift was complete, Jacob’s servant would say: There is more for you to receive.) “The gift went before him and he stayed that night in the camp” (Genesis 32:22). “The gift went before him [al panav]” – he, too, was distressed. (The word panav is found in the context of distress. See I Samuel 1:18.)
This is why he instructed Israel to offer a male goat as a sin offering each New Moon in compensation for having reduced the moon's size (i.e. Israel's size in this world). The Rekanati, in his commentary on Exodus 12,2, explains at length that the function of this sin-offering on the New Moon is very similar to the function of the scapegoat which is tendered to Azzazel on the Day of Atonement. Allegorically speaking, the reduction in size symbolizes the diminution of the forces of holiness due to Adam's sin. This results in the powers we call חיצוניות experiencing an uplift, increased strength. By sacrificing the male goat on the New Moon as a sin-offering to G–d we are symbolically sacrificing the קליפה, the symbol of negative influences which in turn undermines the influence of this קליפה. By doing this we re-convert some of the forces that though they originated in a holy domain had become active as negative forces. Such a positive act results in atonement. Rashi describing Genesis 32,2,1 explains Jacob's motive in sending gifts to Esau with the words: אכפרה פניו, to mean קנוח, "wiping clean." Atonement then is a way of "wiping the slate clean." Sin is considered to be a stain on our soul or character. Atonement is the removal of the stain in question. We follow this procedure every month whenever the moon renews itself. This process will continue until the קליפה has been reduced so much that the moon can regain its former size and its light equals that of the sun. At such a time, when the world will be filled with knowledge of G–d, the physical part of our bodies as well as matter in the universe will be imbued with sanctity similar to that intangible part of man, his soul.
וכפר, “and make expiation;” the word is used as one indicating pacification, appeasement. Compare Genesis 32,21, when Yaakov sends costly gifts to his brother Esau in order to make him forget that he had once taken his blessing The word by which he described this was אכפרה פניו, “I wish to appease him.”
One classic example in the Torah is Jacob’s conduct towards Esau when they meet again after more than twenty years, during which time Jacob had been away in the home of Laban. He knew that Esau felt wronged by him and had declared his intention to take revenge after their father Isaac died. That is why Jacob fled in the first place. When they meet again, Jacob does not mention the earlier incident. But he does attempt to appease (Note that the word Jacob uses to himself (Gen. 32:21) comes from the verb k-p-r which will later be used in Leviticus to mean atonement, and is the source of the phrase Yom Kippur. It means literally to “cover over.” It is what Noah does when he covers the ark with pitch (Gen. 6:14). It also means a ransom (Num. 35:32) such as might be paid to compensate a family for the murder of one of its members, a payment forbidden in Jewish law.) Esau by sending him an enormous gift of livestock, and by abasing himself, bowing down to him seven times, and calling him “my lord,” and himself “your servant” (Gen. 32). For his part, Esau does not mention the earlier episode, whether because he had forgotten it, or it no longer rankled with him, or because he was mollified by Jacob’s self-abasement. This was not remorse and forgiveness, but submission and appeasement.
וכפר עליו הכהן....ונסלח לו, “and the Priest will provide him atonement....and it shall be forgiven him.” Forgiveness will originate in heaven as the guilt will disappear together with the burning up of the sacrifice. The meaning of וכפר as making atonement occurs for the first time when Yaakov brought gifts (similar to sacrifices) to his brother Esau hoping that he would forgive him (ואכפרה פניו) for obtaining the birthright by trickery (Genesis 32,21). There is a difference between what is described as כפרה “atonement,” and סליחה, “forgiveness.” The latter means that the guilt has been totally forgiven, is now “non-existent” whereas the former is merely concerned with culpability for the sin committed. It is not within the capacity of human beings to grant forgiveness; only G’d Himself can wipe the slate clean completely. This is why David writes in Psalms 130,4: “forgiveness rests with You.” The High Priest, while initiating the process of forgiveness, cannot complete it, only G’d can. When someone was guilty of שבועת בטוי, (verse 4) “a false oath,” there is atonement only. The Torah does not add the words that “it will be forgiven him.” [Swearing a false oath is hardly an unintentional sin qualifying for total forgiveness. Ed.]
IS IT NOT THUS, IF THOU MENDEST ‘SE’EITH’. In the opinion of the commentators, (Reference is here to R’dak. So also in Onkelos.) this means there is a “lifting” or forgiveness of your sin. And in the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra it means a “lifting” of your face in contrast to [the question G-d asked of Cain]: Why is thy face fallen? (Verse 6.) For he who is ashamed presses his face downward. Similarly, it is said, And the light of my countenance they cast not down, (Job 29:24.) whereas one who honors him is as if he raises his face upward. This is the sense of the verses: Perhaps he will lift my face; (Genesis 32:21. Meaning, perhaps he will accept me.) Do not lift the face of the poor. (Leviticus 19:15. Meaning, do not respect the person of the poor in judgment, but judge in righteousness.) In my opinion the verse means: “If you will mend your ways you will have your rightful superiority in se’eith (dignity) over your brother since you are the firstborn.” And this is the meaning of [G-d’s question to him]: Why art thou wroth? (Verse 6.) For by virtue of his feeling ashamed before his brother, his face fell, and because of his jealousy of him he killed him, and now the Eternal told him: Why art thou wroth regarding your brother, and why is thy face fallen on account of him? Is it not thus! If thou mendest, you will have superiority in dignity over your brother, and if thou dost not mend, evil will come upon you not only because of him [your brother], for at the door of your house your sin lurks causing you to stumble in all your endeavors.
AND IF HIS OFFERING BE A SACRIFICE OF PEACE-OFFERINGS: IF HE OFFER OF THE HERD, WHETHER MALE OR FEMALE. The reason why the burnt-offering may only be male, (Above, Chapter 1, Verses 3 and 10.) whereas in the case of the peace-offering it can be male or female, and the sin-offering must only be female, (Further, 4:28. This applies only to the sin-offering of an ordinary individual. See further on in the text for the sin-offering of the prince (4:23).) is very clear, since the olah (the burnt-offering) is as its name indicates, [i.e., “ascension” — being that it reaches above all Divine attributes], whilst sh’lamim (the peace-offering) is of the expressions: and all My pleasures ‘yashlim’ (he will perform — literally: he will “perfect”); (Isaiah 44:28.) ‘avanim sh’leimoth’ (whole stones). (Deuteronomy 27:6. Since the peace-offering is brought in order to bring peace into the world, it performs the function of harmonizing all attributes, such as justice and mercy. Hence it may be brought from the male or female (Ricanti). See my Hebrew commentary, p. 19; also Note 240 further.) The sin-offering is in order to appease Him with the present that goeth before (Genesis 32:21.) Him. I have already written on this matter. (Ibid., 46:1 (Vol. I, p. 542): “Jacob offered peace-offerings in order to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him …”. See also ibid., 32:21 (pp. 402-403).) The guilt-offering must be a male, (Further, Chapter 5, Verses 15 and 25.) because the sin-offering is brought for those transgressions [for which, if committed wilfully, the sinner] incurs the penalty of excision, in order that the spirit return unto G-d who gave it, (Ecclesiastes 12:7.) but the guilt-offering is not brought for those transgressions for which [if committed wilfully] one incurs excision, and therefore it is as if it were for a pleasing odor just like the burnt-offering. (Hence just like the burnt-offering is a male [for the reason explained above], so is the guilt-offering.) The sin-offering of the prince is a he-goat, (Further, 4:23; although the sin-offering of a common person is a female, as explained above.) because the prince is the sovereign unto whom judgment [rightfully] belongs, (See Ezekiel 21:32.) and he fights the battles of G-d and lives by his sword; (See Genesis 27:40.) therefore his offering is the same as the he-goat brought in case of idol-worship [by the congregation]. (Numbers 15:24.)
וכפר is an expression denoting appeasing and calming, as e.g. (Genesis 32:21) אכפרה פניו which is rendered in the Targum by “I will appease his anger” (cf. Rashi on that verse).
And your treaty with death shall be nullified The treaty about which you said, “We have made a treaty with death,” shall be nullified. Every expression of כַּפָּרָה, atonement, is really an expression of wiping or removing something. Compare (Gen. 32:21): “I shall appease (אֲכַפְּרָה) his anger,” (lit., I will wipe away his anger.)
You should also say, See, your servant Yaakov is [coming] behind us. For he said, I will appease him [quieten his anger] with the present that goes before me, and afterwards I will see his face, perhaps he will forgive me.
and say, And, behold, thy servant Jakob also cometh after us. For he said, I will make his countenance friendly by the gift which goeth before me, and afterward will see his face: peradventure he may accept me.
| וַתַּעֲבֹ֥ר הַמִּנְחָ֖ה עַל־פָּנָ֑יו וְה֛וּא לָ֥ן בַּלַּֽיְלָה־הַה֖וּא בַּֽמַּחֲנֶֽה׃ | 22 E | And so the gift went on ahead, while he remained in camp that night. |
והוא לן בלילה ההוא במחנה, “and he (Yaakov) spent that night in the camp.” This is a reference to what we have read in verse14: וילן שם בלילה ההוא, “he spent the night there.” It has been repeated, as the gift that Yaakov sent to Esau has been reported in the meantime in detail.
ותעבור המנחה על פניו, the words על פניו are equivalent to לפניו, “ahead of him, past him.” We encounter this expression in Samuel II 15,18 עוברים על פני המלך, “marching past the king.” According to Bereshit Rabbah 76,8 the words על פניו mean “under pressure.” In other words, the entire stratagem reflected Yaakov’s dire straits at the time.
והא לן בלילה ההוא במחנה. He spent the night with the people of his encampment as he was not walking behind the herds he had sent ahead.
AND HE HIMSELF LODGED THAT NIGHT IN THE CAMP. Scripture states that he did not enter his tent that night but lodged in the camp together with his servants and the shepherds of the flocks, set in array, as a man for war, (Jeremiah 6:23.) lest his brother come at night and attack him.
The Midrash connects the word פניו in על פניו with פנים anger — he (Jacob) was also in an angry mood that it should be necessary for him to do all this (Genesis Rabbah 76:8).
ותעבור המנחה על פניו, Yaakov rehearsed the proceedings in order to satisfy himself that it would accomplish to give the impression he had meant for it to convey.
He was also angry that he had to resort to all this. [Rashi knows this] because it is written על פניו — similar to על אפו (in his anger) — instead of לפניו. (Gur Aryeh)
He, Jacob, arose during that night, after sending off the gifts, and he personally took his two wives, his two maidservants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Yabok. 1 The exact location of the ford is unknown, but there is still a stream called Yabok in central present-day Jordan, nowadays also called the Zarqa River. The river, which is not deep, can be crossed by foot.
והוא לן בלילה ההוא במחנה, “whereas he himself spent that night in the camp.” He did not enter his tent but spent the night in the company of the shepherds, in order not to become the victim of a surprise attack by his brother.
“He remained in camp that night” [32:22]. He spent the night among his people and not in his tent, since Jacob wanted to wage war with Esau if he would come at night. (Ramban, Genesis, 32:22.)
Onkelos, in translating this verse, adopts the same method which he applies to the explanation of similar passages, viz., every expression implying corporeality or corporal properties, when referring to God, he explains by assuming an ellipsis of a nomen regens before “God,” thus connecting the expression (of corporeality) with another word which is supplied, and which governs the genitive “God”: e.g., “And behold the Lord stood upon it” (Gen. 28:13), he explains, “The glory of the Lord stood arrayed above it.” Again, “The Lord watch between me and thee” (Gen. 31:49), he paraphrases, “The word of the Lord shall watch.” This is his ordinary method in explaining Scripture. He applies it also to Exod. 34:6, which he paraphrases, “The Lord caused his Presence to pass before his face and called.” According to this rendering the thing which passed was unquestionably some physical object, the pronoun “his” refers to Moses, and the phrase ‘al panav is identical with lefanav, “before him.” Comp. “So went the present over before him” (‘al panav) (Gen. 32:22). This is likewise an appropriate and satisfactory explanation: and I can adduce still further support for the opinion of Onkelos from the words “while my glory passeth by” (ba-‘abor) (Exod. 33:22), which expressly state that the passing object was something ascribed to God, not God Himself: and of this Divine glory it is also said, “until I pass by,” and “And the Lord passed by before him.”
“And he placed them in the hands of his slaves, each flock separately, and he told them: Go before me, and leave space between the flocks” (Genesis 32:17). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you, and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and whose are these before you” (Genesis 32:18). “You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau and, behold, he too, is behind us” (Genesis 32:19). “He commanded also the second, and also the third, and also all that followed the droves, saying: In this manner shall you speak to Esau, when you find him” (Genesis 32:20). “He commanded the first, saying: When Esau my brother meets you…You shall say: They are from your servant, Jacob; it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esau” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda were walking along the way. They saw a gentile coming toward them. They said: ‘He will ask us three things: What are you? What is your trade? Where are you going?’ What are you? Jews. What is your trade? Merchants. Where are you going? To purchase wheat from the storehouses of Yavne. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] stood opposite the gentile to see what he would ask, and Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Yehuda waited for him. He said: ‘If he says something, I [worry I] will say something else.’ (If the gentile asks Rabbi Yehuda a question and then asks me the same question, if I don’t hear Rabbi Yehuda’s answer and I give a different answer, we may appear suspicious.) He said to him: ‘From where do you know this?’ He said to him: ‘From Jacob our patriarch.’ (Jacob prepared his messengers for all contingencies.) “And, behold, he too, is behind us.” “He commanded the first…also the second” – Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Ḥilkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon: “When you find him” in his greatness. (But if he is no longer in his greatness, approach him differently.) “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us. For he said: I will appease him with the gift that goes before me, and thereafter I will see his face; perhaps he will favor me” (Genesis 32:21). “You shall say: Moreover, here is your servant Jacob, behind us” – that is what is written: “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked one; he covers the faces of its judges…” (Job 9:24). (This verse is quoted in response to the fact that the righteous Jacob calls himself the slave of the wicked Esau.) “He placed them in the charge of the servants, each drove by itself” – why did he not introduce them intermingled? It was in order to astonish him with his gift. (So he would see the variety and the number of each of the species.) Why did he not introduce them all at once? It was in order to satiate the eyes of the wicked one. He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive’; He came to end it, but he said: ‘Receive.’ (Each time Esau thought that the gift was complete, Jacob’s servant would say: There is more for you to receive.) “The gift went before him and he stayed that night in the camp” (Genesis 32:22). “The gift went before him [al panav]” – he, too, was distressed. (The word panav is found in the context of distress. See I Samuel 1:18.)
Another interpretation (of Gen. 32:8 [7]): AND JACOB WAS < GREATLY > AFRAID. Our masters have said: His body became like wax. (See Gen. R. 44:3; 65:19.) Moreover, the Holy Spirit cries out (in Prov. 24:10): IF YOU ARE INDOLENT IN THE DAY OF DISTRESS (TsRH), YOUR STRENGTH IS WANTING (TsR). At that time the Holy One said to him (in Is. 41:10): FEAR NOT, FOR I AM WITH YOU; BE NOT DISMAYED, FOR I AM YOUR GOD. I STRENGTHEN YOU, I HELP YOU…. I STRENGTHEN YOU through Michael; I HELP YOU through Gabriel. (Ibid., cont.:) AND I ALSO UPHOLD YOU THROUGH MY VICTORIOUS RIGHT HAND. (Gen. 28:15:) SEE, I AM WITH YOU. At that time (according to Gen. 32:8 [7]) HE DIVIDED THE PEOPLE WHO WERE WITH HIM. What did he do? He armed them within and clothed them with linen without. He prepared himself in three things: in prayer, with a gift, (Gk.: doron.) and for war. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > with a gift? (In Gen. 32:22 [21]:) AND SO THE GIFT (MNHH) PASSED ON BEFORE HIM…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > for war? (In Gen. 32:9 [8]:) IF ESAU SHOULD COME < TO ONE CAMP (MHNH) AND DESTROY IT >…. Where is it shown < that he prepared himself > in prayer? (In Gen. 32:10 [9]:) THEN JACOB SAID: O GOD OF MY FATHER ABRAHAM, AND GOD OF MY FATHER ISAAC…. What is written after that (in vss. 11-12 [10-111])? I AM UNWORTHY OF ALL THE KINDNESSES AND ALL THE FIDELITY…. PLEASE DELIVER ME FROM THE HAND OF MY BROTHER, FROM THE HAND OF ESAU. The Holy One said to him: You have called to me. By your life, I will save you, according to what is stated (in Ps. 89:27 [26]): HE SHALL CRY TO ME, YOU ARE MY FATHER, MY GOD, AND THE ROCK OF MY SALVATION.
In order to make it quite clear to Moses that these latter insights had been denied him, the Torah writes (34,6) that ויעבור ה' על פניו. In this instance the meaning of the word ויעבור is equivalent to Samuel I 20,36 והוא ירה החצי להעבירו, “he shot the arrows past him (compare Moreh Nevuchim 1,21). It means that someone has failed to achieve a certain objective and reached a different objective instead. In other words, G’d deliberately deflected Moses’ request and channeled it into something else. The words על פניו in 34,6 are a substitute for the name of the Lord. The message of the whole verse is that the Lord, the Creator, withheld from Moses the type (the ability to foresee) of Divine supervision accorded to the beings which are described as על פני. The fact that Moses had requested to be granted these types of insights becomes clear from the response of G’d rather than from the words הראני נא את כבודך which Moses used in 33,19. Instead of complying with Moses’ request, G’d responded by revealing to Him the thirteen attributes, i.e. G’d fulfilled his request הודיעני נא את דרכיך, “please make me familiar with Your attributes.” According to Onkelos who translates the words ויעבור ה' על פניו in 34,6 as ואעבר ה' שכנתיה, G’d’s Shechinah passed in front of Moses, something also known as כבוד נברא. When G’d spoke of והיה בעבור כבודי in 33,22, this lends strong support to Onkelos’ interpretation. In that event the wordsעל פניו in 34,6 refer to Moses. The meaning of על פניו would be the same as לפניו, “in front of him.” We have similar construction of the expression על פניו in Genesis 32,22 ותעבור המנחה על פניו, “the gift passed before him.” Another way of explaining the words ויעבור ה' על פניו is that the voice of the Lord passed in front of Moses. It is not unusual to find the ,עבר or העברה in connection with a voice or with a sound. We find an example of this in Exodus 36,6 ויעבירו קול במחנה, “they made a voice (command) traverse the camp.” The word ויקרא in 34,8 refers to that voice which called out. The repetition of the word השם is similar to the repetition of the word אברהם אברהם in Genesis 22,11 or the word משה משה in Exodus 3,4. This, at any rate, is the opinion of Maimonides in his Moreh Nevuchim 1,21.
FOR ASK NOW OF THE DAYS PAST. He states “G-d will not forgive you, nor will He be long-suffering with you for idolatry and corruption with graven images and all forms of likenesses, for He has done with you what He has never done with any nation. He has made you hear the voice of G-d speaking out of the midst of the fire (Verse 33.) so that His fear may be before you (Exodus 20:17.) and that you declare His Unity and not corrupt yourselves. He has taken you to Him a nation from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs and by wonders (Verse 34.) so that you should not worship anything beside Him. Thus you have been shown all this with your eyes that thou mightest know that the Eternal, He is G-d, (Verse 35.) that He is One, and His Name One, (Zechariah 14:9.) and there is none else beside Him. (Verse 35.) For out of heaven He made thee to hear His voice (Verse 36.) to teach you the discipline of wisdom; (Proverbs 1:3.) and upon the earth He made thee to see His great fire (Verse 36.) burning unto the heart of heaven, (Above, Verse 11.) and all His words thou didst hear out of the midst of the fire. (Verse 36.) And He brought thee out ‘b’phanav’ (with His presence), (Verse 37.) similar to ‘al panav’ (before His presence), with His great power which is in His presence. And since the Great Name is G-d in heaven above and upon the earth beneath, and there is none else (Verse 39.) you shall keep His commandments and His statutes so that it may be well with thee (Verse 40.) in heaven above, and that thou mayest prolong thy days (Verse 40.) upon the earth beneath.”
AL PANAI’ (BEFORE MY FACE). This is similar in meaning to these expressions: Surely ‘al panecha’ (to Thy face) he will blaspheme Thee; (Job 1:11.) Now therefore be pleased to look upon me; for surely I shall not lie ‘al p’neichem’ (to your face). (Ibid., 6:28.) He thus admonishes here: “Do not make unto yourselves other gods, for they are before My face, as I look and gaze at all times and in all places at those who make them.” A thing which is done in the face of a person when he is aware thereof is called al panav (before his face). Thus: So the present passed over ‘al panav’ (before him). (Genesis 32:22.) So also: And Nadab and Abihu died… and Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priest’s office ‘al p’nei’ (in the presence of) Aaron their father, (Numbers 3:4.) meaning that Aaron their father saw it and was aware thereof. In the Book of Chronicles it is written: And Nadab and Abihu died ‘liphnei’ (before) their father, and had no children. (I Chronicles 24:2. Since in the above verse (Numbers 3:4), it says that Nadab and Abihu died before the Eternal, Ramban therefore also quotes the verse from Chronicles, where it is stated that they died before their father. Hence the significance of the statement that he saw the remaining two sons performing the Divine Service in his presence.) Thus the purport of the verse here is: “Do not make other gods unto yourselves, for I am present with you always and see you in private and in public.” By way of the Truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], you will understand the secret of panim (face) from that which we have written (Above, 19:20.) that Scripture warned concerning the Revelation: (See above, Note 17.) ‘Panim b’phanim’ (face to face) did the Eternal speak with you. (Deuteronomy 5:4.) And you will know the secret of the word acheirim (others), and then the entire verse will come [to light] in its plain meaning and purport. And so did Onkelos say it. (Onkelos translated al panai as bar mini (outside of Me). Thus the sense of the verse is as follows: “Do not worship elohim acheirim, since they were all created, excepting G-d, Who is eternal and has not been created by any being.” See also Note 285 above.) It is this which is said, Ye shall not make with Me. (Verse 20. And as Rashi explains it: “Do not make any likeness of My ministers that serve Me.”) “For I the Eternal thy G-d am a jealous G-d, (Verse 5.) i.e., to be worshipped alone, and it is not fitting that you join others to Me. And I am E-il, (Ramban now continues to explain the two Hebrew words in the above Verse: E-il kana (a jealous G-d).) the Mighty One, (See Ramban on Genesis 17:1 (Vol. I, pp. 214-215).) Who has the power in My hand; (See ibid., 31:29.) and I am, furthermore, kana, avenging from the one who gives My glory to another and My praise to graven images.” (See Isaiah 42:8.) Now in no place in Scripture is an expression of ‘jealousy’ found in reference to the Glorious Name except in the matter of idol-worship. Thus the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] wrote in the Moreh Nebuchim (Guide of the Perplexed, I, 36.) that in the entire Torah and in all the books of the Prophets, you will not find the term burning anger, wrath, or jealousy [applied to G-d] except in reference to idolatry. But of the holy ones of the Supreme One it is written: And the anger of the Eternal was kindled against Moses; (Exodus 4:14.) And the anger of the Eternal was kindled against them [i.e., Aaron and Miriam] and He departed! (Numbers 12:9.) And it is further written, My wrath is kindled against thee [i.e., Eliphaz the Temanite] and against thy two friends, for ye have not spoken of Me the thing that is right, as My servant Job has. (Job 42:7.) However, as far as the term ‘jealousy’ is concerned, [Rambam] is correct [in maintaining that it is not applied to G-d except in reference to idolatry]. And so did the Rabbis say in the Mechilta: (Mechilta on Verse 5 here.) “I zealously exact punishment for idolatry, but in other matters, I am gracious and merciful.” In my opinion, jealousy is mentioned only with reference to idolatry in Israel. The reason for the jealousy is that Israel is the treasured possession of the Glorious Name, which He has separated to Himself, as I have explained above. (Above, 19:4.) Now if His people, His servants, turn to other gods, G-d is ‘jealous’ of them even as a man is jealous of his wife when she goes to other men, and of a servant who makes another master for himself. But Scripture uses no such term of jealousy with reference to other peoples to whom He has allotted the hosts of heaven. (See Deuteronomy 4:19.) At this point, I make mention of what Scripture teaches concerning idolatry. There were three kinds of idol-worship. The first [group of idol-worshippers] began to worship the angels, who are the Separate Intelligences, (“For the angels are not material bodies but only forms distinguished from each other… All these forms live and realize the Creator, and their knowledge of Him is exceedingly great” (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah 2:3-8). For Rambam’s version of the development of idolatry, see his first chapter in Hilchoth Akum. See also Guide of the Perplexed I, 49, on figurative expressions applied to angels.) because it is known that some of them have rulership over the peoples, something like it is written, the prince of the kingdom of Greece, (Daniel 10:20.) the prince of the kingdom of Persia. (Ibid., Verse 13.) They thought that [these angels] have power over them to do good or to do evil, and so each people began to worship the prince appointed over them, as the first [peoples] knew how to identify them. Now these are referred to in the Torah and in all the Writings as other gods, the gods of the peoples, (Deuteronomy 6:14.) for angels are called elohim, as it is said, He is G-d of gods; (Ibid., 10:17.) Bow down to Him, all ye gods; (Psalms 97:7.) For the Eternal is greater than all gods. (Above, 18:11.) They worshipped the angels even though they admitted that supreme strength and infinite power belonged only to G-d the Most High. Thus did the Rabbis say, (Menachoth 110a.) [with reference to the peoples of the world], that they call G-d the Most High “G-d of gods.” Regarding this kind of idol-worship, Scripture has said, He that sacrificeth ‘la’elohim’ (to the gods) shall be utterly destroyed. (Further, 22:19.) It thus mentioned them by the name with which they were known. The second kind of idolatry appeared when people began worshipping the visible hosts of heaven, some worshipping the sun or the moon, and others worshipping one of the constellations. Each of the nations knew the power of the constellation according to the dominion thereof in their land, (See Job 38:33.) and they thought that by worshipping them, the constellation would be strengthened and it would help them, something like it is written, or the sun, or the moon, or any of the host of heaven, etc. (Deuteronomy 17:3.) And it is further written, And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and to whom they have bowed, (Jeremiah 8:2.) and as it is said in the Torah with reference to the prohibition of idolatry: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun and the moon and the stars, even all the host of heaven, thou be drawn away and worship them and serve them, which the Eternal thy G-d hath allotted unto all the peoples under the whole heaven. (See Deuteronomy 4:19.) That is to say, because G-d allotted them to all the peoples and gave each people a star or constellation, you should not let yourself be allured to worshipping them. Now these are the people who began making the many forms of graven images, Asheirim and the sun-images. (Isaiah 27:9.) They would make the forms of the constellations in the hours of their strength according to their rank, and in the opinion of the people, it bestowed power and success upon them. It appears likely to me that this [form of idolatry] began in the Generation of the Dispersion, (See Ramban, Genesis 11:2 (Vol. I, pp. 154-155). In describing the beginnings of this second stage of idolatry, Rambam introduces it with this statement: “In the course of time, there arose among men false prophets who said that G-d commanded them, saying ‘Worship that particular star’” (Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Akum 1:2). Ramban here is more specific and suggests that the beginnings of this kind of idolatry took place in the age of the dispersion of the nations. This would seem to be the intent of Ramban’s words, “It appears likely to me…”) when G-d scattered the nations to various countries and the stars and the constellations began holding sway over them according to their divisions. The builders of the Tower had declared their intention to make themselves a name (Genesis 11:4.) and not be scattered, as I have hinted in its place. (See Ramban, Genesis 11:2 (Vol. I, pp. 154-155). In describing the beginnings of this second stage of idolatry, Rambam introduces it with this statement: “In the course of time, there arose among men false prophets who said that G-d commanded them, saying ‘Worship that particular star’” (Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Akum 1:2). Ramban here is more specific and suggests that the beginnings of this kind of idolatry took place in the age of the dispersion of the nations. This would seem to be the intent of Ramban’s words, “It appears likely to me…”) Now all these groups had false prophets who foretold them future events and informed them through the arts of sorcery and divination some of the things that were to come upon them. The constellations also have lords who abide in the atmosphere as the angels do in the heavens, and know the things that are to come. Closely related to this kind of idolatry was the worship of human beings. When people of a country saw that a certain individual — such as Nebuchadnezzar — had great power and that his star was very much in the ascendancy, they thought that by accepting his worship upon themselves and directing their thought towards him, their star would also ascend together with his. He would also think that by their attaching their thoughts to him, his success would be augmented on account of the power of their souls directed towards him. This was the opinion of Pharaoh, who, according to the words of our Rabbis, [looked upon himself as a god], (Shemoth Rabbah 9:7.) and of Sennacherib, concerning whose ideas Scripture says, I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High, (Isaiah 14:14. It is to be noted though that this prophecy was said with reference to the king of Babylon (ibid., Verses 4, and 22). Accordingly, it is difficult to understand why Ramban here mentions Sennacherib who was king of Assyria, and not Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. See however, in Sefer Hage’ulah (Kithvei Haramban I, p. 274) where Ramban writes that Scripture sometimes “interchanges from the name of the king of Babylon to the king of Assyria” and he quotes various verses to prove it. In this sense it may be understood here that Ramban mentioned “Sennacherib” when his intent was really to the king of Babylon.) and of Hiram (Ezekiel 28:2.) and his companions (Such as Nimrod. See Chullin 89a.) who made themselves gods. They were wicked, but they were not absolute fools. The third kind of idolatry appeared afterwards when people began worshipping the demons which are spirits, as I will explain with G-d’s help. (In Seder Acharei Moth (Leviticus 17:6).) Some of them too are appointed over the peoples to be masters in their lands and to harm their beleagured ones and those who have stumbled, as is known of their activity through the art of necromancy, as well as through the words of our Rabbis. (Berachoth 6a. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 393.) It is with reference to this [third kind of idolatry] that Scripture says, They sacrificed unto demons, no-gods, gods that they knew not, new gods that came up of late, which your fathers dreaded not. (Deuteronomy 32:17.) Scripture ridicules them, [i.e., the Israelites], saying they sacrifice also to the demons who are no gods at all. That is to say, they are not like the angels who are called eloha. Instead, they are gods that they knew not, meaning that they found in them no trace of might or power of rulership. Furthermore, they are new to them, having learned only lately to worship them from the Egyptian sorcerers, and even their wicked forefathers such as Terach and Nimrod (Genesis 10:9. See Ramban there (Vol. I, p. 147).) did not dread them at all. Of this [kind of idolatry] Scripture warns, And they shall no more sacrifice their sacrifices unto the demons, after whom they go astray. (Leviticus 17:7.) Thus in this second commandment, the Torah prohibited all [kinds of] worship, save unto the Eternal only. (Further, 22:19.) It is for this reason that He first admonished, Thou shalt have no other gods ‘al panai’ (before My face), which is a reference to the first kind of idolatry, namely, the worship of the angels. This is the intent of al panai, whose secret I have alluded to. Then He further admonished against graven images and any manner of likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, (Verse 4.) which also alludes to mental images of spiritual phenomena, something like it is written, It stood still, but I could not discern the appearance thereof; a form was before mine eyes. (Job 4:16.) And so have the Rabbis said: (Rosh Hashanah 24b.) “That is in heaven. This includes the sun, moon, stars, and constellations. Above. This includes the ministering angels.” Of them, too, [the worshippers] would make figures representing the Separate Intelligences (“For the angels are not material bodies but only forms distinguished from each other… All these forms live and realize the Creator, and their knowledge of Him is exceedingly great” (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah 2:3-8). For Rambam’s version of the development of idolatry, see his first chapter in Hilchoth Akum. See also Guide of the Perplexed I, 49, on figurative expressions applied to angels.) which are the souls of the constellations, as happened in the case of the [golden calf], as I am prepared to explain there with the help of G-d. (Further, 32:1.)
והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה THEN THE REMAINING CAMP MAY ESCAPE in spite of him, for I will fight against him He prepared himself for three things: to give him a present — as it states (Genesis 32:22) “So, the present passed before him”; for prayer — as it states (Genesis 32:10), “And he said, ‘O God of my father Abraham”; for war — as it states in this verse, “then the remaining camp may escape”, for I will fight against him (Tanchuma Yashan 1:8:6).
The present passed on ahead of him, but he spent the night in the camp.
And the present passed over before him, and he abode that night in the camp.
| וַיָּ֣קׇם ׀ בַּלַּ֣יְלָה ה֗וּא וַיִּקַּ֞ח אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֤י נָשָׁיו֙ וְאֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י שִׁפְחֹתָ֔יו וְאֶת־אַחַ֥ד עָשָׂ֖ר יְלָדָ֑יו וַֽיַּעֲבֹ֔ר אֵ֖ת מַעֲבַ֥ר יַבֹּֽק׃ | 23 E | That same night he arose, and taking his two wives, his two maidservants, and his eleven sons, (sons NJPS “children”; Heb. yeladim. Given the specified number, the reference cannot include Jacob’s daughter(s). English idiom warrants the greater gender specificity.) he crossed the ford of the Jabbok. |
ויקם בלילה, “he arose during that night;” he intended to flee via a different route. (Rash’bam)
ויקם בלילה, “he arose during that night;” he intended to flee via a different route. (Rash’bam) ויקם בלילה הוא, “a truncated phrase, which if grammatically correct should have been: ויקם הוא בלילה, “he arose during the night.” ויקח את שתי נשיו ואת שתי שפחותיו ואת אחד עשר ילדיו, “he took hold of his two wives, his two servant maids and his eleven children;” the wives are mentioned before the children, i.e. he transported them across the river first; he transported the wives across the river first, as he was more concerned with the children than with his wives; if Esau by chance should already have reached the far side of the river and was bent on killing him and his family, he would meet his wives first. At the time when Lavan had chased Yaakov, (from behind), Yaakov had positioned his wives, Lavan’s daughters behind him, so that Lavan would meet up with his daughters first.
ויקם בלילה הוא, “a truncated phrase, which if grammatically correct should have been: ויקם הוא בלילה, “he arose during the night.” ויקח את שתי נשיו ואת שתי שפחותיו ואת אחד עשר ילדיו, “he took hold of his two wives, his two servant maids and his eleven children;” the wives are mentioned before the children, i.e. he transported them across the river first; he transported the wives across the river first, as he was more concerned with the children than with his wives; if Esau by chance should already have reached the far side of the river and was bent on killing him and his family, he would meet his wives first. At the time when Lavan had chased Yaakov, (from behind), Yaakov had positioned his wives, Lavan’s daughters behind him, so that Lavan would meet up with his daughters first.
יבק, “the name of the river.” There are some commentators who claim that this is an alternate name for the river Jordan. They arrive at this conclusion by quoting Yaakov as saying to G-d in verse 11: “I have crossed the river Jordan the first time equipped only with my walking stick, and by now I have become two camps.” Here the river has been called: Yabbok.
AND PASSED OVER THE FORD OF THE JABBOK. Jacob passed over first. (Scripture reads: And he rose up that night and took his two wives, and his two handmaids, and his eleven children, and (he) passed over the ford Jabbok (v. 23). And he took them, and sent them over the stream (v. 24). This is difficult to understand. Why interrupt the sequence of the narrative with and (he) passed over the ford Jabbok? Furthermore, if Jacob passed over the ford by himself, how could he take his wives and children over? Hence I.E. interprets that Scripture tells us that Jacob took his wives and children over but prior to this he had gone over himself (to see if it was safe for the others to pass-Nachmanides). Scripture then resumes the narrative by relating, And he took them and sent them over the stream, and sent over that which he had (Cherez).) He then returned and took his wives and children and brought them over the ford. Thus the meaning of and passed over is and he had already passed over. He then went back for a final look to see if anything was forgotten. (After taking his family across the river Jacob went back for a final look. Hence he was left alone.)
ויעבר את מעבר היבוק , “he crossed the ford of the Yabok.” He wanted to test if the river bed would rise for him (according to Nachmanides) and would enable him to cross on foot. Once he saw that the water level was shallow enough — ויקחם ויעבירם את הנחל, “he took them and brought them across the river.” He then retraced his steps and — ויעבר את אשר לו, “and he brought his belongings across.” He commanded his servants to do this. As a result he himself was the last one left on the wrong side of the river.
ויקם בלילה הוא, the letter ה before the word הוא, indicating which night the verse speaks about, is missing here. The reason is that it was not a different night, but that Yaakov got up during the night already mentioned after having slept only briefly.
ויקח, he made them ready at the banks of the river to cross, while he himself crossed to test the depth of the water. This is the meaning of the words: ויעבר את מעבר יבוק, he brought them across the fording in the river Yabbok. Most rivers have points at which they are shallow, allowing people and animals to cross on foot. These locations are generally well known.
ואת אחד עשר ילדיו, Dinah was included in the words “and his two wives,” as she was always close to Leah, her mother. Bereshit Rabbah 76,9 raises the question of where Dinah was in all this, and answers that Yaakov had put her into a box that he had locked. His concern had been that if Esau would see her he would take her by force. Rabbi Hunna, quoting Rabbi Abba Cohen son of Bar Delah, said that G’d reacted to this by quoting Job 6,14 למס מרעהו חסר, that he had thereby withheld an opportunity from Esau to become a penitent sinner. Moreover, if Esau had indeed married Dinah she would not have been raped by Shechem. Because Yaakov did not want her to become married to a circumcised person she wound up sleeping with an uncircumcised one. (compare 34,1)
AND HE TOOK HIS TWO WIVES, AND HIS TWO HANDMAIDS. There is no significance to being mentioned earlier or later in this verse with respect to rescue work. [Hence even though his wives are mentioned here first, from which you might infer that they appeared before Esau first, Scripture later states — 33:6 — that the handmaids came first.] Instead, Scripture states that he gathered his wives and handmaids and children at the edge of the brook, and he alone traversed the ford of the Jabbok to see if the waters were high, and then he returned and took them all with him at one time and made them pass the brook, (Verse 24 here.) and after that he made pass that which was his, (Verse 24 here.) namely, his camp and his belongings.
ויקם בלילה ההוא , he crossed the river at night because he intended to change direction to avoid a meeting with Esau. We find that David did something similar when he was fleeing from his son Avshalom at the same location of Machanyim as reported in Samuel II 17,21-24. At that time, coming from the direction of Jerusalem, David crossed the river Jordan, a more formidable river than the Yabbok, a mere tributary of the Jordan which could be crossed relatively easily. [flight by crossing a river, eliminating footprints and wading along the bank before crossing to the other side slows down the pursuers who first have to find in which direction the fugitive continued. Ed.].
ואת אחד עשר ילדיו AND HIS ELEVEN CHILDREN — But where was Dinah? He placed her in a chest and locked her in so that Esau should not set his fancy upon her (desire to marry her). On this account Jacob was punished — because he had kept her away from his brother for she might have led him back to the right path; she therefore fell into the power of Shechem (Genesis Rabbah 76:9).
יבק JABBOK — the name of the river.
ויקם. Er hatte erst die Absicht, über Nacht diesseits des Jabbok zu bleiben. Allein die Unruhe gönnte ihm keine Rast.
Where was Deenah? You might ask: How does Rashi know this? Perhaps Deenah was among the eleven, and one of the sons was missing. The answer is: It is written in v. 43:29, “Hashem be gracious to you, my son.” Yoseif said this to Binyamin. And, as Rashi explains, Yoseif blessed him so because for the other brothers it had already been said (v. 33:5), “The children whom Hashem has graciously granted your servant”. [Yaakov said this to Eisov when they met.] Since Binyomin was not yet born at that time, Yoseif blessed him now with grace. This clearly shows that “his eleven children” were the eleven sons, without Deenah. For otherwise, the question stands: why did Yoseif bless only Binyomin with grace, and not the other son who was missing at the time [that Yaakov met Eisov]?
So that Eisov could not set eyes on her... I.e., for this reason we must say that it was Deenah who was missing, and that Yaakov placed her in a box because of Eisov. For otherwise, why was Yaakov punished through Deenah [i.e., the episode with Shechem]? Perforce, he was punished because he feared Eisov, and Yaakov therefore put her in a box. And this answers the question in the previous entry.
Yaakov was thus punished... You might ask: It is written in v. 35:1, “Arise, go up to Beis Eil,” on which Rashi explains, “Because you lingered on your journey you have been punished and this trouble of your daughter has come to you.” [Does this not imply that Yaakov was not punished for withholding Deenah?] The answer is: Each of thee matters caused [Yaakov’s punishment].
He took them, and brought them over the stream, and brought over that which he had in order to meet Esau south of the Yabok River. Obviously, Jacob did not cross the river with all his wives, children of different ages, and his belongings all at once. Instead, he made the crossing several times.
ויקח את שתי נשיו ואת שתי שפחותיו, “he took his two wives and his two maid servants, etc.” Nachmanides comments that we must remember that the Torah is not obliged to report events in chronological order, and that therefore the order in which the people in this verse are mentioned is not indicative of any order of priorities. The Torah simply mentions the steps taken to save the lives of these people by transporting them across the river. He himself remained on what was considered the exposed bank of that river. Yaakov’s crossing the fording of the river was designed to establish whether the water level was low enough to cross that fording safely without danger of drowning. After having satisfied himself on that score, he made all his people and livestock cross the river.
“He took his two wives, his two maid servants and his eleven children” [32:23]. Hizkuni writes here. Why did he place the wives in front and then the children? The explanation is that he thought to himself, if Esau approaches to kill, it is better the wives than the children. However, when Jacob was running away from Laban he placed the children in front and then the wives, since Jacob thought that Laban is coming from behind toward me. It is better that Laban encounter his daughters first. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:23.) So writes Hizkuni. However, Rabbi Isserl gives a different explanation. He says that the wives were in front, because the waters were split. The children did not want to go through the water first. They were afraid, as we find by the sea. Israel did not want to go into the sea until they were similarly split, until Nachshon ben Aminadav came and started to go first, and the Holy One gave him a good reward. (Be’ure Maharai, Genesis, 32:23.) So writes Rabbi Isserl.
“And his eleven children” [32:23]. He took eleven children. Rashi asks a question here. The verse only mentions eleven children. Here he certainly means the eleven sons, and where was Dinah? The explanation is that Jacob had locked Dinah in a box so that Esau should not see her and want to take her as a wife. Therefore, the Holy One punished Jacob that he did not give her as a wife to Esau. Perhaps Dinah might have made Esau pious. Therefore, because of Jacob’s sin, Dinah fell into the hands of Shechem. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:23.)
“He crossed the ford of Jabbok” [32:23]. Jacob tested the water first and afterwards he took his household across the water. (Ramban, Genesis, 32:23.)
You were a contemporary of Jacob,4 who wrestled with Laban, Esau, and the angel at the stream of Yabok (Genesis 32:23–32). Did you help Jacob with advice? Who was Jacob? A poor shepherd. And you? You were rich and a man of influence. Had you related to Jacob with appropriate sympathy and with steadfast loving kindness, he would not have had to pass through such a multitude of tribulations.
“He arose during that night and he took his two wives, and his two maidservants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Yabok” (Genesis 32:23). “He arose during that night and he took his two wives, and his two maidservants…” – but where was Dina? He placed her in a chest and locked it with her in it. He said: ‘This wicked one has a covetous eye; [I do this] so he will not direct his eyes, see her, and take her from me.’ Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Abba HaKohen Bardela: The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘“For the sake of one who deprives his neighbor of kindness” (Job 6:14) – you withheld kindness from your neighbor, you withheld kindness from your brother. (Jacob should have allowed his brother to marry Dina.) Had she married the man, she would not have engaged in licentiousness. You did not seek to marry her to a circumcised man, so she married an uncircumcised man. You did not seek to marry her in a permitted fashion, so she married in a prohibited fashion.’ That is what is written: “Dina daughter of Leah…went out” (Genesis 34:1). “He took them, and crossed them over the stream, and brought over that which he had” (Genesis 32:24). “He took them, and crossed them over the stream” – Rav Huna in the name of Rabbi Idi: He made himself like a bridge, taking from here and placing it here.
The numerical values of the names משה, and the name עקיבא, when we ignore the zeros, i.e use the system of מספר קטן, are identical. We would write it thus: משה=300+40+5=12. עקיבא=70+100+10+2+1=12. When you use the regular system of arriving at numerical values, you will, of course, find that the name משה=345, adds up to more than the name עקיבא=183.
Continuing the allegory, Jacob, "concealed" the letter ע in his name when he crossed the river יבק, (which is יעקב minus the letter ע), as reported in 32, 23: ויעבר את מעבר יבק. The Kabbalists say that the remaining letters of his name, i.e. י-ב-ק stand for יעננו ביום קראנו, "May He respond to us on the day we call upon Him." The letter ע is "swallowed up," concealed in the word יעננו. Since the letter ע, when following the letter י, is practically not heard, it supplements the word יבק as if the former had been spelled יעקב. The expression יעננו ביום קראנו can then be perceived as a call by Jacob. I have elaborated elsewhere on the numerical value of the word ויעבור being equivalent to the Ineffable Four-Lettered Name being spelled in words i.e. 72 + 216, both permutations of the name of G–d.
וישכב עמה בלילה הוא, “he slept with her on that night.” [In order to be grammatically correct, the Torah should have written: בלילה ההוא. Our author points out that this is not a scribe’s error, but that we have a similar formulation in Genesis 32,23: ויקם לילה הוא, “he got up during that night,” where we also would have expected to find: בלילה ההוא. [Perhaps the missing letter is to indicate that in both instances Yaakov made the decision hastily. Ed.]
ועיניכם אל תחוס על כליכם, “and do not concern yourselves with your chattels;” Joseph knew that his father had been reluctant to abandon any chattels, from the time he crossed the river Yabok at night to retrieve anything he had left behind. (Genesis 32,23-25) Attributed to Rabbi Yaakov.
עד יבוק עד בני עמון, as far as Yabok (a river) as we know from Genesis 32,23) Sichon had conquered these parts of what was formerly a much larger land of Moav. The river had acted as a boundary.
THAT WILT SWEEP AWAY. Tispeh (thou wilt sweep away) is a transitive verb. It means is thou wilt destroy (or finish). Aspeh (finish) in I will finish (aspeh) evils upon them (Deut. 32:23) is similar. (I will spend (finish) all evil upon them. That is, there will be no further evil left to bring upon them. Cf. I.E. on Deut. 32:23 (translated according to I.E.).) Both words (tispeh and aspeh) mean the same thing even though they belong to different conjugations. (Tispeh is a kal, aspeh a hifil.)
According to the views of Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Shimon in Bereshit Rabbah 21,5 the words כאחד ממנו, “like one of Us” mean “like the Unique One in the world.” The word אחד in Deut 6,4 שמע ישראל ה' אלוקינו ה' אחד, means “the One, the Unique One.” The other Rabbis quoted in that Midrash believed that the word אחד in our verse refers to the archangel Gavriel seeing we have a verse in Ezekiel 9,2 where that angel is referred to as אחד. The full text there is ואיש אחד בתוכם לבוש בדים וקסת הספר במתניו, “and one man amongst them clothed in linen with a slate of the scribe at his hips, etc.” According to Shabbat 55 the man referred to in that verse is the archangel Gavriel. This is based on the emphasis of the verse in Ezekiel on that angel’s “clothing.” Bereshit Rabbah 21,8 understands this as something which is integral to that angel, not something peripheral such as when we describe a human being’s clothing. It is similar to a certain insect called קמצא, snail, whose clothing is an integral part of it. Similarly, Adam’s original clothing (the divine rays of light) were an integral part of him. It is well known that the meaning of the word אחד when spelled with the vowel segol is different from the same word when spelled with the vowel patach. The former is intransitive whereas the latter is transitive, i.e. it is always a genitive, a possessive form. An example of the latter is found in Daniel 10,13 אחד השרים הראשונים, “one of the foremost princes.” Daniel describes the angel Michael as one belonging to the hierarchy of the other angels. We have a similar verse in Genesis 32,23 where the Torah speaks about Yaakov taking his eleven children across the river Yabok. The wording is אחד עשר ילדיו. There are many other examples of the word when spelled with the vowel patach meaning that the “one-ness” of the word אחד is really only relative. In the verse in Ezekiel where the word אחד appears with the vowel segol, however, Rabbi Yehudah views this as justification to compare the angel Gavriel in some respects to the “Unique One of the world,” i.e. G-d. Rabbi Yehudah was of course aware that the Torah scrolls from which we read do not distinguish in the spelling of the word Echad and the word Achad, seeing that there are no vowels shown in the text. It is therefore possible to read our verse as “here man has become like echad of Us,” i.e. “like the Unique One amongst us,” instead of as achad of Us.” The other sages who understand the word “of us,” as referring to the angel Gavriel simply base themselves on the fact that the traditional reading of the verse has the word אחד read as achad, and not as echad. There could not therefore be an allusion here to G-d the Unique One. This still requires that these sages deal with the vocalisation of the verse in Ezekiel where even the angel Gavriel seems to be accorded a status of being “unique,” seeing the word אחד there is vocalised with the vowel segol. We must conclude that they saw in this wording only something metaphorical. They understood the word as symbolising the clothing of the snail we mentioned previously. Just as that clothing is integral to the creature, so, even though the angel Gavriel represents the punishing agency of G-d both when he went to destroy Sodom, as well as in the story in Ezekiel, he has attached to him least a smattering of the attribute of Mercy. This attribute is alluded to by mention of the white linen he is garbed in. The important lesson in all this is that the attribute of Justice even when predominant is always tempered by the attribute of Mercy.
AND THE ANGELS OF G-D MET HIM. Rashi comments: “The angels who minister in the Land of Israel came to meet him. And he called the name of that place Mahanaim: the plural form implies two camps, one consisting of the angels ministering outside of the Land of Israel who had accompanied him thus far, the other consisting of those ministering in the Land of Israel who had come forth to meet him.” But I wonder at this, for Jacob had not yet reached the Land of Israel and was still distant from there for he sent messengers to Esau from afar. And then it says there, And he passed over the ford of the Jabbok, (Further, 32:23.) which is the river Jabbok which is the border of the children of Ammon. (Deuteronomy 3:16.) This is to the southeast of the Land of Israel, and he still had to pass the boundary of the children of Ammon and Moab, and then the land of Edom, and his first entry into the Land was at Shechem, as it is said, And Jacob came in peace to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. (Further 33:18. This poses a difficulty to Rashi’s interpretation of “Mahanaim.”) Instead, we must say this vision came to Jacob as he arrived in enemy territory in order to inform him that “they that are with him are more than they that are with them.” (See II Kings 6:16.) And the name of the place was called “Mahanaim” in the plural, for such is the way of Scripture with names. (For a single event or person, a plural name is given, as for example, “Mitzraim”.) It may be that “Mahanaim” refers to His camp and the camp of the higher beings, (In that case the plural in the word Mahanaim is naturally justified.) that is to say that His camp on earth is as the camp of the angels, all of them being camps of G-d, blessing Him and confessing His Unity, may His name be blessed forever. Vayishlach This section was written in order to inform us that the Holy One, blessed be He, delivered His servant, and He redeemed him from the hand of him that is stronger than he, (Jeremiah 31:11.) and he sent an angel (Numbers 20:16.) and saved him, and in order to further teach us that Jacob did not place his trust in his righteousness and that he strove for delivery with all his might. There is yet in this section a hint for future generations, for everything that happened to our father with his brother Esau will constantly occur to us with Esau’s children, and it is proper for us to adhere to the way of the righteous (See Job 17:9.) by preparing ourselves in the three things for which he prepared himself: for prayer, for giving him a present, and for rescue by methods of warfare, to flee and to be saved. Our Rabbis have already derived this hint from this section, as I shall mention.
Looking up, Jacob saw Esau coming, with a retinue (retinue See note at 32.7.) of four hundred. He divided the children (children Heb. yeladim, referring here only to Jacob’s sons (see 32.23) in anticipation of their becoming the progenitors of Israel’s tribes; and so through v. 14.) among Leah, Rachel, and the two maids,
He got up that night and took his two wives, his two handmaids [concubines], and his eleven children, and crossed over the ford of the Yabbok [River].
And he arose in the night and took his two wives, and his two concubines, and eleven children, and went over the ford Jubeka.
| וַיִּ֨קָּחֵ֔ם וַיַּֽעֲבִרֵ֖ם אֶת־הַנָּ֑חַל וַֽיַּעֲבֵ֖ר אֶת־אֲשֶׁר־לֽוֹ׃ | 24 E | After taking them across the stream, he sent across all his possessions. |
ויקחם ויעברם, after he had first crossed by himself to test the depth of the water he returned to the original bank and led his people and flocks across. Those who needed to be carried on his shoulders he carried, the ones old enough to cross by themselves he took by the hand and led them across. According to Bereshit Rabbah 76,9 quoting Rav Hunna, Yaakov made himself into a bridge taking hold of the children on one side and depositing them on the other side of the river.
ויעבר את אשר לו, after having transferred the children, wives, etc, he transferred his property, inert objects, the animals having swum across. After he had safely seen to it that everything had crossed he remained solitary on the far bank to check if anything had been left behind inadvertently. Our sages in Chulin 91 explain that the righteous who are so concerned with not laying claim to anything which is not absolutely theirs, are also careful not to waste any hard earned acquisitions, even if small. This is not a sign of being miserly.
את אשר לו [HE MADE PASS] THAT WHICH WAS HIS — the cattle and movables. He acted as a ferry-man taking them from one side and setting them down on the other.
ויעבר את אשר לו, he ordered all of them to precede him in crossing the river; we have a similar construction in Samuel II 18,23 ויעבור את הכושי, “he passed the Cushite.”
The cattle and movable property. He acted as a bridge... [How does Rashi know he acted as a bridge? The answer is:] Scripture writes [only once] that he “crossed over the ford of the Yabbok.” Otherwise [i.e., if he did not act as a bridge] Scripture should have written that he crossed back to where his wives were, before saying, “He took them....” [Perforce, he merely stretched his arms back over the river.] Another answer is: Rashi deduced this because it is written, “He took them and crossed them,” instead of simply saying, “He crossed them.” Perforce, he acted as a bridge.
Eventually, after the entire camp had crossed, Jacob remained alone on the riverbank; and a mysterious, unnamed man wrestled with him until dawn.
“He arose during that night and he took his two wives, and his two maidservants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Yabok” (Genesis 32:23). “He arose during that night and he took his two wives, and his two maidservants…” – but where was Dina? He placed her in a chest and locked it with her in it. He said: ‘This wicked one has a covetous eye; [I do this] so he will not direct his eyes, see her, and take her from me.’ Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Abba HaKohen Bardela: The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘“For the sake of one who deprives his neighbor of kindness” (Job 6:14) – you withheld kindness from your neighbor, you withheld kindness from your brother. (Jacob should have allowed his brother to marry Dina.) Had she married the man, she would not have engaged in licentiousness. You did not seek to marry her to a circumcised man, so she married an uncircumcised man. You did not seek to marry her in a permitted fashion, so she married in a prohibited fashion.’ That is what is written: “Dina daughter of Leah…went out” (Genesis 34:1). “He took them, and crossed them over the stream, and brought over that which he had” (Genesis 32:24). “He took them, and crossed them over the stream” – Rav Huna in the name of Rabbi Idi: He made himself like a bridge, taking from here and placing it here.
What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He sent an angel to him to deliver him, and to save him from the hand of Esau; and he appeared unto him like a man, as it is said, "And there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day" (Gen. 32:24). As soon as the dawn appeared, the angel said to him: Let me go, for the time has arrived when I must stand to sing and to chant praises before the Holy One, blessed be He. But Jacob did not wish to let him go. What did the angel do? He began to sing and to chant praises from the earth, || and when the angels (on high) heard the voice of the angel who was singing and praising from the earth, they said: Because of the honour of the righteous (one) do we hear the voice of the angel who is singing and praising from the earth; and concerning him the verse says, "From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, glory to the righteous" (Isa. 24:16).
Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Ḥelbo: It is written: “A man wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:25). We do not know who was dominated by whom; whether the angel was dominated by Jacob or Jacob was dominated by the angel, except from what is written: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken” (Genesis 32:27). The angel said to Jacob: ‘Release me, as the time for my lauding has arrived.’ Thus, the angel was dominated by Jacob. In what guise did he appear to him? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He appeared to him in the guise of Esau’s guardian angel. That is what is written: “For I have therefore seen your face like seeing the face of an angel” (Genesis 33:10). [Jacob] said to [Esau]: ‘Your face is like that of your angel.’ This is analogous to a king who had a tamed lion and a wild dog. What did the king do? He brought the lion and incited it against his son. He would say: If the dog comes upon my son, my son will say: If I overcame the lion will I not be able to overcome the dog? So too, when the nations of the world come upon Israel, the Holy One blessed be He says to then: ‘Your guardian angel was not able to withstand their ancestor, will you be able to overcome them?’ Rabbi Huna said: He appeared to him as a herdsman; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: (The angel said to Jacob.) ‘Cross mine and I will cross yours.’ (Help me cross the stream with my livestock, and I will help you cross with your livestock. Some suggest that the text should read: Cross yours and I will cross mine. This is consistent with the version of the text in Bereshit Rabba 77:3 and with the continuation of the midrash here (Etz Yosef).) After Jacob our patriarch crossed his, he said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ Once he returned, “a man wrestled with him.” (The angel, appearing as a herdsman, fought with Jacob under the pretense that after crossing his own livestock, Jacob had come to take some of his livestock.) Rabbi Ḥiyya the Great and Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi were engaged in commerce and were dealing silk fabric. They entered Tyre and engaged in their labor. When they exited the city gates, they said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ They returned and found a bundle of silk fabric. They said: This matter is from Jacob our grandfather, as it is written: “A man wrestled with him.” (This event occurred after Jacob had returned to see if he forgot anything. They derived from Jacob’s behavior that checking if one forgot anything is a good habit.) The Rabbis say: He appeared to him as an arch robber; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: Cross mine and I will cross yours. The angel crossed Jacob’s flocks in the blink of an eye. Our patriarch Jacob was crossing the flocks of the angel, and he was returning and finding other flocks all that night. What did Jacob our patriarch do? Rabbi Pinḥas said: At that moment, Jacob wrapped a soft woolen scarf around his neck. He said to him: ‘Sorcerer, sorcerer, you are a wizard, but wizardry is not effective at night.’ Rabbi Huna said: At that moment the angel said: ‘Shall I not inform him with whom he is dealing?’ What did he do? He placed a finger on a rock and it began bursting into flames. [Jacob] said to him: ‘With this you are seeking to frighten me? I am constituted entirely from it,’ as it is stated: “The house of Jacob will be fire” (Obadiah 1:18). Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to Esau’s guardian angel: ‘Are you standing against him? He is coming against you with five amulets in his hand: His merit, the merit of his father, the merit of his mother, the merit of his grandfather, and the merit of his grandmother. Assess yourself relative to him, as you are unable to stand even against his own merit.’ Immediately, “he saw that he could not overcome him” (Genesis 32:26). Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. [This is analogous] to an arch robber who was struggling with the son of a king. He lifted his eyes and saw that his father the king was standing over him, and he submitted to him. So too, when the angel saw the Divine Presence standing over Jacob, he submitted before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not overcome him.” Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. “He touched the socket of his thigh” (Genesis 32:26), the righteous men and the righteous women and the prophets and the prophetesses who were destined to emerge from him and his sons. What is that? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived after the destruction of the Temple, when the Romans persecuted the residents of the Land of Israel.) “The socket of Jacob’s thigh was dislocated [vateka]” (Genesis 32:26), Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Eliezer says: He smoothed it. (The bone that protrudes from the thigh no longer protruded.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rav Asi: (The Hebrew text says Ravasa, which is short for Rav Asi.) He fractured it like [one splits] a fish. (Lengthwise.) Rabbi Naḥman bar Yaakov said: He dislocated it, just as you say: “My soul was alienated [vateka] from her” (Ezekiel 23:18).
Genesis 32:2-24
As if to portend something momentous, Yaakov’s first act upon setting out for home is an encounter with “messengers of God.” From this starting point everything is subsequently a matter of “two camps” (v.8) or two levels: the divine and the human. This is the key to understanding the meeting between Yaakov and his brother in its entirety: Yaakov will have to deal with God before he can resolve his problem with Esav. With an obsequiousness whose language reflects both the culture and the emotional setting, Yaakov prepares a gift for Esav, but finds to his dismay that his brother is “coming to meet him,” with seemingly hostile intent. Once again stealth (or at least extreme caution) is the rule, with Yaakov taking elaborate precautions.
He [then] took them and crossed them over the stream. He [also] brought over all that he possessed.
And taking them he made them pass over the torrent, and all that he had went over.
| וַיִּוָּתֵ֥ר יַעֲקֹ֖ב לְבַדּ֑וֹ וַיֵּאָבֵ֥ק אִישׁ֙ עִמּ֔וֹ עַ֖ד עֲל֥וֹת הַשָּֽׁחַר׃ | 25 E | Jacob was left alone. And a figure (figure Or “[divine] agent.” The expectation of divine intervention (see 28.15; 32.10–13) via a nearby agent (see 32.2–3) evokes this extended sense. Cf. 18.2; see further the Dictionary under ’ish; Agent.) wrestled with him until the break of dawn. |
Genesis 32,25. “when he realized that he could not overcome him he injured his hip joint.” The subjects alluded to here are the three parts of the universe, 1) the world of the disembodied spirits, angels, collectively known as שרפים 2) the inert “stars,” planets and galaxies in outer space, and 3) the living creatures in our own “lower” part of the universe. In our part of the universe, i.e. in man, the head represents the domain of the angels in the “upper” part of the universe, the part of man that enables him to recognize his Creator. The heart (within man) symbolizes the region we call outer space, home to galaxies in the domain known as עולם הגלגלים, the world of the orbiting planets and galaxies. According to the Sefer Yetzirah, heart, soul, enable man to recognise the recurring seasons, and what makes up a year by observing them in motion and realizing that a Creator must have directed their orbits. Finally, the thighs of man ירכים, represent the “lower universe,” a domain in which G’d must be served by means of His creatures having faith in their Creator. ירכים, thighs, are viewed as tools by means of which man is able to recognize the presence and power of a Creator. ירכים is another word for רגלים, which does not only mean “legs,” but is related to הרגל, habit, the danger that man serves G’d only from rote, lip service. When Yaakov is described as “the sun was shining for him”, ויזרח לו השמש, this is a hint that from that point on Yaakov worshipped G’d also by means of his intellect. His faith henceforth was more or less secure against arguments by the evil urge that could have confused him in his faith. The word י-עקב, was an allusion to his serving G’d as an עקב, an appendix, similar to the heel; once he had the name ישראל added to his name, he had acquired the letters ראש, (head) as part of his name, signifying the far loftier spiritual plateau that formed the basis of his faith.
“And a man fought with him” (Genesis 32:25). Our sages explain that the dust from this battle reached the throne of Hashem. This signifies that while other nations receive sustenance through their angels, Bnei Yisrael are directly connected to Hashem. Yaakov had to assert dominance even over these angels, demonstrating the potential power of humans over celestial beings. The term ויאבק (wrestled) is linked to אביקה (a fire), as the Midrash explains the angel's attempt to intimidate Yaakov with fire. Yaakov, representing truth and completeness, was unafraid, embodying the prophecy “the house of Yaakov will be a fire” (Ovadia 1:18). Thus, Yaakov, embodying truth, achieved a higher spiritual level than the angel, as indicated by “You give truth to Yaakov.”
Now, in the “other side” of Kelipah there [also] is an aspect of the form of man. He is called, “Man without a yoke-Adam Bleeya’al-אדם בליעל,” and is the aspect of Zeir Anpin of Kelipah, like it states, (Genesis 32:25; Shaar HaTeshuvah 49c) “And there wrestled a man with him etc.”
ויאבק איש עמו, “a man began to wrestle with him.” The “man,” was an angel who had assumed the form of a human being. The angel, Esau’s protective power, had come to prevent Yaakov from escaping from Esau. He realised soon that G-d’s assurances to Yaakov were strong enough to protect him against being harmed by Esau. (Rash’bam)
עד עלות השחר, “until dawn.”
ויותר יעקב לבדו, “Yaakov remained behind all alone;” according to Rashi, Yaakov remained behind on the far bank of the Yabbok, to check if any insignificant item had been overlooked when they took all their belongings across. (Talmud, tractate Chulin, folio 91.) The letter ב in the word לבדו is supposed to be exchanged for the letter כ so that the word is to be read as לכדו. (small cans.) An alternate interpretation: it refers to בית הבד, a container in which small quantities of olive oil would be stored and which could be hidden easily.
AND THERE WRESTLED A MAN. Va-ye’avek (and there wrestled) comes from the same root as avak (dust). They struggled so that dust arose between them.
UNTIL THE BREAKING OF THE DAY. Ad alot ha-shachar (until the breaking of the day) means until the darkness of the night went away. (I.E. interprets alot (breaking) to mean go up, i.e., to depart, and shacher (dawn) to mean darkness, for this is what the root of shachar means.) Others say that shachar (dawn) refers to the image of light that appears in the clouds before sunrise. (According to this interpretation shachar means dawn and alot the rising. Alot ha-shachar thus means the breaking of dawn.) Shacher (light) in wherein there is no light (shacher) (Is. 8:20) is similar.
ויותר יעקב לבדו, “when Yaakov had remained alone, etc.” Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 77,3 state that these words should be read as if Yaakov returned for his jug (read לכדו instead of לבדו). This teaches that Yaakov went back across the river to retrieve small vessels which had been overlooked. This teaches that the righteous are very meticulous even with relatively low-cost items seeing that when you acquire things by making certain none of them has been tainted by being stolen or otherwise illegally acquired, one does treasure what one has more than do other people who do not mind to acquire things less honestly. This is Rashi’s approach to our verse. Another approach: the vessels were used to drink out of and Yaakov was concerned that the younger children should have a chance to drink from them on the journey. [According to this interpretation, the correct translation of the words פכים קטנים, would be “vessels that the little ones drink from,” rather than “small vessels.”] He endangered himself in order to have convenient drinking vessels for his small children.
ויאבק איש עמו, “a man wrestled with him.” According to the plain meaning of the text, the meaning of ויאבק is the same as ויחבק seeing that the letters אהע"ח are frequently interchangeable. Our sages in Sotah 21 use the word אבוקה and חבוקה interchangeably. An אבוקה, torch, is so called as it is composed of pieces of wood which “embrace” each other, i.e. חבוקה.
A Midrashic approach. (Bereshit Rabbah 76,3 and 77, 2) The word ויאבק is derived from אבק, “dust.” It means that Yaakov became enveloped by the dust of the person engaging him in a struggle. The “man” was the celestial representative of Esau. It is well known that had it not been for the original sin in Gan Eden there would not be a noticeable difference between man and angel. On the contrary, man would outrank the angel in every respect. We base this on Sanhedrin 93 “the righteous are greater than the angels.” Accordingly, the “angel” came to try and find a sin Yaakov was guilty of in order to use the sin as a weapon to overpower him. However, he did not succeed. The only “sin” he could find was that Yaakov had married two sisters during their lifetime, something which had not yet been forbidden The Torah alludes to this when writing: “he inflicted an injury on Yaakov’s hip joint.” This was a euphemism for his sexual organs and the seat of sexual desire. The “punishment,” such as it was, was administered near that organ so that Yaakov limped for a while. Another allusion included in the words ויגע בכף ירכו, “he struck the socket of his hip,” is that the damage inflicted by the celestial representative of Esau would manifest itself in later generations, amongst descendants of Yaakov who would suffer under the Romans. When the Torah wrote that the “angel” was unable to harm Yaakov, i.e. כי לא יכול לו, the meaning is that he was unable to harm Yaakov personally. He did not have permission to do so as Yaakov was unblemished. Later generations who would not be so unblemished would become victims of Esau, however. This happened in the generation of Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava and his colleagues when that Rabbi became a martyr in order to save his students during the period when the Romans tried to wipe out Jews and Judaism (Sanhedrin 13). The Talmud tells the following story. Rabbi Chiyah bar Abba said: “if someone were to tell me to offer my life for the holy name of G’d I would be prepared to do so on condition that they would kill me quickly. If I had been asked to do the same during the period of שמד, [the persecutions of Jews and Judaism under Emperor Hadrianus] I would not be able to do so as I am not able to undergo such tortures.” What did they do in that generation? They brought iron bars which had been made white-hot. They then placed these bars under the arm pits of the victims and this is the way these people died.
ויאבק איש עמו, he wrestled with him so intensely that a cloud of dust enveloped them while they were struggling.
איש, the same type of איש as in Joshua 5,13, i.e. an angel. This was the angel Gavriel, described as איש par excellence in Daniel 9,21. The reason why these angels are called איש is because they appear to the people with whom they converse in human guise. The types of angels who speak with man are referred to as איש, as they appear either in a vision or while the person to whom they appear is fully awake. G’d had sent this angel to Yaakov to strengthen his courage, not to fear Esau. If Yaakov could prevail over an angel, surely he had no reason to be afraid of an encounter with someone like Esau! The fact that the struggle lasted until daybreak was an allusion to Yaakov that after a period of night, i.e. problems, adversity, there would come a period of light, peace and prosperity coupled with security..
AND JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE. That is, for he had forgotten some small jars, and he returned for them. These are the words of Rashi. But in line with the plain meaning of Scripture, the verse, And he took them, and made them pass the brook, (Verse 24 here.) means that he made them [his family] pass together with him, and he made pass that which was his (Verse 24 here.) — [i.e., his camp and his belongings] — by commanding others to do it. He returned [to his camp after ferrying his family across], and he commanded that all others pass over the brook before him, and so he remained behind them.
‘VAYEI’AVEIK’ A MAN WITH HIM, A man covered himself with dust. So Menachem ben Saruk explained it, being derived from the word avak (dust); by their movements, they were raising dust with their feet. I, however, am of the opinion that it means “and he attached himself to,” and that it is an Aramaic word, as in, “After they have joined (aviku) it;” (Sanhedrin 63b.) “And they twined the Fringes with loops.” (Menachoth 42a.) This is all the language of Rashi.In the language of the Sages, avikah is often used to convey the sense of chavikah (loop), as in: “There are avkso (loops) in the punishing scourge;” (Makkoth 23a.) , “A couch is called dargesh when it is set up and taken apart by means of loops, through which the cords are fastened.” (Nedarim 56b.) Similarly the word avukah (a torch) is so called in the language of the Sages because it is made up of small pieces of wood which are tied and bound together. This is because the letter cheth is difficult to pronounce in their language and so they used the easier aleph. Many times the cheth disappears completely as in tuteich (Chullin 7 b: metutei (from beneath her feet).) (underneath) in place of techuteich; mesuta (Kiddushin 33a.) (a bath) in place of maschuta; asita (Shabbath 77b.) (a mortar) in place of chasita. And it is possible that the word vayei’aveik is actually vayeichaveik, as vayechabkeihu (and he embraced him), (Genesis 33:4.) for perhaps it is the way of the Hebrew language to interchange the aleph and cheth. Thus we find: And in the fourth chariot grizzled ‘amutzim’ horses, (Zechariah 6:3.) which is the same as chamitzim, derived from the expression, ‘chamutz’ (crimsoned) garments. (Isaiah 63:1.) Commentators (R’dak in his Book of Roots, under the root erez.) have said that ‘va’aruzim’ for thy merchandise (Ezekiel 27:24.) is like vecharuzim, derived from the expression, thy neck ‘bacharuzim’ (with beads). (Song of Songs 1:10.) So too did they say concerning the word vate’altzeihu (Judges 16:16.) that it is like vatechaltzeihu (and she pressed him), this being an inverted form of vatilchatzeihu, [the root of which is lachatz (oppression)]. Perhaps this is the opinion of Onkelos who said, in translation of the word vayei’aveik, ve’ishtadeil, and so also he translated the expression, And if a man ‘yephateh’ (Exodus 22:15.) “as if yeshadeil,” if he embraces and kisses which is the manner of seduction. It may be that Onkelos found no word comparable to vayei’aveik, and so he considered it a matter of cunning, for all effort implies cunning and a clarification of circumstances. In Bereshith Rabbah (77:3.) the Sages said: “Who became filled with dust? The man that was with him.” This agrees with the words of Menachem [ben Saruk, who said that vayei’aveik means “he covered himself with dust] “, and this is the correct interpretation.
ויותר יעקב לבדו, after he had transferred all his belongings to the other side of the river, so that the only one still to be brought across was he himself. The reason that he wanted to cross only after everyone else had already crossed was that he intended to flee in a different direction so as to avoid a face to face encounter with Esau.
ויאבק, an angel engaged him in a physical fight, his purpose being to prevent Yaakov from fleeing. Only in this way could G’d’s promise to Yaakov that Esau would not harm him be fulfilled.
ויותר יעקב AND JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE — He had forgotten some small jars and he returned for them (Chullin 91a).
ויאבק איש AND A MAN WRESTLED — Menachem (ben Seruk) explains: “a man covered himself with dust”, taking the verb as connected in sense with אבק “dust”. It would mean that they were raising the dust with their feet through their movements. I, however, am of opinion that is means “he fastened himself on”, and that it is an Aramaic word, as (Sanhedrin 63b) “after they have joined (אביקו) it", and (Menachot 42a) “and he twined (the “Fringes”) with loops”. It denotes “intertwining”, for such is the manner of two people who make strong efforts to throw each other — one clasps the other and twines himself round him with his arms. Our Rabbis of blessed memory explained that he was Esau’s guardian angel (Genesis Rabbah 77:3).
Da er bereits alles Seine und all die Seinigen über den Fluß gebracht hatte, so erklärt sich das Allein zurückbleiben nur, wie die Weisen lehren: נשתייר על פכים קטנים, daß, nachdem er bereits alles hinüber gebracht hatte, er noch einmal zurückkehrte, um nachzusehen, ob er nichts vergessen. Und hieran knüpfen sie das bedeutsame Wort: ומכאן לצדיקים שחביב עליהם ממונם יותר מגופן וכל כך למה לפי שאין פושטין ידיהם בגזל (Chulin 91a): daß der Gerechte auch in dem kleinsten Werte rechtlich erworbenen Vermögens ein Heiligtum erblickt, das er weder vergeuden, noch nutzlos umkommen lassen dürfe, für dessen Verwendung er Rechenschaft zu geben habe. Eine Million hat für ihn den Wert einer Stecknadel, wenn es gilt, sie für gottgefällige Zwecke zu verausgaben, eine Stecknadel den Wert einer Million, wenn sie nutz- und zwecklos umkommen soll. Das geringste erworbene Gut ist dem, der nicht פושט ירו בגזל, der nichts gewaltsam, sondern nur das sein eigen nennt, was seinem redlichen Bemühen zu erwerben gelungen, ein Denkmal der ihm fürsorgenden Allmacht und Güte, das Kleinste ein Produkt redlichen Schweißes und göttlichen Segens, und darum von unnennbarem Werte.
Es hatte Jakob die Winzigkeit des Beistandes, den er von den Seinigen zu erwarten hatte, gegen die diesem gegenüber riesige Macht Esaus gemessen, und das Resultat dieser Erwägung hatte ihm einen Angstruf zu Gott entlockt, auf welchen ihm noch erst die Antwort werden sollte. Diesen Angstruf "הצילני נא" bezeichnen die Andeutungen der Propheten, als das dritte Merkzeichen der Geula, als der Geula, die sich in der vollendeten, preisgebenden Machtlosigkeit des Galut bewährt. Das Erlebnis, das ihm die so bedeutungsvolle Antwort bringen sollte, traf ihn entsprechend in einem solchen Momente, wo er auch noch des winzigen Beistandes, dessen er gewärtig sein konnte, beraubt, völlig allein sich befand, und nur auf das seiner Persönlichkeit Inwohnende angewiesen war.
עם הֵאָבֵק kommt nur bei diesem Ereignis vor. אבק: Staub. Man übersetzt auch עפר: Staub, allein עפר ist nicht das, was wir Staub nennen, sondern der Humus, die fruchtbare lockere Erdhülle; verwandt mit עֵבר, Außenseite, עור Haut. So wie עור, die Haut am Körper das Organ ist, wodurch die Außenwelt auf den Körper einwirkt — (עור wach werden ist der Zustand, in welchem die, im Schlaf in sich zurückgezogene Seele wieder gleichsam in die Haut tritt) — so ist עפר derjenige Teil des Erdkörpers, in welchem sich durch kosmische Reize von außen irdisches Leben entwickelt. אבק aber ist ganz eigentlich das, was wir "Staub" nennen, also: solche Teile irdischer Masse, die, losgelöst, fast alle Schwere verloren haben, und bei leichtester Veranlassung emporwirbeln. Verwandt ist אפק, das aus seinem Halt Herausstürzende, von פוק: herausgehen mit individ. אי, oder auch der Raum, aus welchem es hervorstürzt. So auch בוק und בקק leer werden, בקבוק: ein Gefäß, aus welchem Flüssigkeit herausstürzt. So scheint denn auch der Wurzel אבק die Bedeutung: etwas rasch seinem Standpunkte entrücken, inne zu wohnen. Analogie dafür bietet: ויתאבכו גאות עשן (Jes. 9, 17) sie wirbeln majestätisch empor, aber es ist die Majestät des Rauches! — הֵאָבֵק עם wäre demnach: das gegenseitige Bestreben, dem andern seinen Stand auf der Erde zu entziehen, ihn zum אבק zu machen. Verwandt damit חבק, das Bestreben, jemanden fest an sich zu ziehen, umarmen.
Der von diesen beiden Kämpfern "emporwirbelnde Staub" — lautet ein Ausspruch der Weisen — war ein Staub, der zum Weltenthron Gottes emporstieg — מלמד שהעלו אבק רנליהם עד כסא הכבוד — (Chulin 91a); denn dieser Kampf ist ein Prototyp des Kampfes, der die ganze Geschichte hindurch dauert, ja, er ist der eigentliche Inhalt der Weltgeschichte.
שחר, von שחר suchen, die Zeit, wo man schon suchen kann, aber noch suchen muss; die beginnende Dämmerung, die dem בקר, der Zeit des deutlichen Erkennens und Unterscheidens, vorangeht.
So lange es Nacht auf Erden, so lange das Bewusstsein der Menschen getrübt ist, und die Dinge, unkenntlich verschlungen, nicht in ihrer Wahrheit und Klarheit erkannt werden, so lange — also spricht sich die Bedeutung dieses nächtlichen Erlebnisses als Antwort auf Jakobs Angstruf aus — so lange wird er freilich auf Kampf und Gegensatz zu rechnen haben. Und es ist der mit Reichsapfel, Zepter und Schwert gerüstete Genius Esaus, שרו של עשו, nach dem Worte der Weisen — hat ja auch Jakob ausdrücklich in ihm ein höheres Wesen erkannt (V. 31) und diese Erkenntnis im Namen des Ortes verewigt — mit dem Jakob zu ringen haben wird, bis die Nacht von der Erde weicht. ויאבק איש עמו, nicht Jakob, der Gegner ist der Angreifende, Jakob ringt nur im Verteidigungskampf.
ויותר יעקב לבדו, he was the last one to leave from the camp as he was busy directing all his family and servants and chattels to cross the fording so that nothing would be left behind.
ויאבק איש עמו, this was the work of an angel at the instigation of G’d (that is why he is called איש). The description is parallel to Kings II 13,17 It is immaterial whether the instrument of the salvation is a merely symbolic one such as the arrows described in the Book of Kings which Elisha instructed King Yoash to shoot in the direction of the far away Kingdom of Aram. Salvation occurs at the end of a period of ups and downs, and though Yaakov/Israel suffered many reverses in his struggle with Esau, (in the historical global struggle between the two philosophies) in the end Yaakov triumphs. [freely translated as the author is ambiguous to my mind. Ed.] The blessing given by the angel here to Yaakov at the end of the struggle, at daybreak, symbolises the synopsis of Jewish history.
He had forgotten some small jars and he returned for them. [Rashi knows this] because he had already brought over all the important utensils, as it is written, “He brought over all that he possessed.” It does not mean literally jars, as all unimportant utensils are called פכים. Much has been said on this in Gur Aryeh and R. Noson, but Rashi explained it this way in Chulin 91a. (Kitzur Mizrachi)
Our Sages have explained that this was Eisov’s guardian angel. Rashi proves this on, “If I have found favor in your eyes... like seeing the face of a Godly being” (33:10). Maharshal writes: You might ask: What caused Rashi make the forced explanation that ויאבק is of Aramaic origin, instead of saying like Menachem did? The answer is: It is because our Sages say that this was Eisov’s guardian angel. [And it says in Chulin 91a that according to the view that they kicked up dust,] they raised dust until the Throne of Glory. But Eisov’s guardian angel, [could not reach such a lofty level].
He, the man, saw that he could not prevail against him, and therefore he touched, struck, Jacob and injured the joint of his thigh; and the joint of Jacob’s thigh was dislocated as he wrestled with him. Despite the great pain, Jacob remained standing and refused to be defeated.
ויותר יעקב לבדו. “Yaakov remained alone.” According to Rashi, Yaakov had gone back in order to retrieve small and inexpensive utensils. Nachmanides explains the plain meaning of the statement to be that Yaakov had accompanied his family and folk and livestock across the river. After having done so, he commanded his servants to ferry the chattels across, while he supervised the work personally.
ויאבק איש עמו, “a man wrestled with him, etc..” The word ויאבק descries an activity similar to ויחבק, “he embraced him,” presumably in a kind of bear hug. The letter א frequently substitutes for the letter ח.
“Jacob was left alone” [32:25]. Jacob remained behind alone, since he had forgotten a small jug out of which the small children drank, so that they should not die of thirst. This teaches us that money is important in the eyes of the righteous. The righteous one remembers that [acquiring] money faithfully and justly is very difficult, and they will not steal. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:25.) Because he tarried, an angel came and wrestled with him until the dust of the earth rose up [in a cloud]. They wrestled until dawn and the angel was the angel of Esau. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:25.) He searched for a sin that he had committed, so that he could harm Jacob and kill him. He found no sin; only that Jacob had married two sisters during their lifetime. (The Torah permits marrying two sisters serially, the second after the death of the first, but not while both are still alive.) This is the meaning of the verse “he saw that he had not prevailed against him” [32:26]. That is to say, the angel saw that he could find no sin in Jacob, and he could do nothing to him. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:25.)
This important principle was adopted by one of our Sages, one of the most distinguished among them, R. Ḥiya the Great (Bereshit Rabba, xlviii.), in the exposition of the Scriptural passage commencing, “And the Lord appeared unto him in the plain of Mamre” (Gen. xviii.). The general statement that the Lord appeared to Abraham is followed by the description in what manner that appearance of the Lord took place; namely, Abraham saw first three men; he ran and spoke to them. R. Hiya, the author of the explanation, holds that the words of Abraham, “My Lord, if now I have found grace in thy sight, do not, I pray thee, pass from thy servant,” were spoken by him in a prophetic vision to one of the men; for he says that Abraham addressed these words to the chief of these men. Note this well, for it is one of the great mysteries [of the Law].
And Israel struggled with an angel and overcame him at night IT HAPPENED AT MIDNIGHT.
When he was attacked by an angel (See Genesis 32:25.)
When he was attacked by an angel (See Genesis 32:25.) comprised of fire and water, (All angels are created from fire and water.)
“Jacob remained alone, and a man wrestled with him until the break of dawn” (Genesis 32:25). “Jacob remained alone, and a man wrestled with him.” “Yeshurun, there is none like God, Who rides the heavens in your assistance” (Deuteronomy 33:26). Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon: “There is none like God,” but who is like God? It is Yeshurun, (The Jewish nation.) the best and most praiseworthy among you. You find that everything that the Holy One blessed be He is destined to perform in the future, He had them performed earlier, by means of the righteous in this world. The Holy One blessed be He revives the dead and Elijah revives the dead. (I Kings 17:22.) The Holy One blessed be He withholds rain and Elijah withholds rain. (I Kings 17:1.) The Holy One blessed be He blesses the scarce and Elijah blesses the scarce. (I Kings 17:14–16.) The Holy One blessed be He revives the dead and Elisha revives the dead. (II Kings 4:33–35.) The Holy One blessed be He remembers the barren and Elisha remembers the barren. (II Kings 4:16.) The Holy One blessed be He blesses the scarce [to increase it] and Elisha blesses the scarce [to increase it]. (II Kings 4:2–7.) The Holy One blessed be He sweetens the bitter and Elisha sweetens the bitter. (II Kings 2:19–22.) The Holy One blessed be He sweetens the bitter with bitter (Shemot Rabba 23:3.) and Elisha sweetened the bitter with bitter. Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Simon: “There is none like God,” but who is like God? It is Yeshurun, Israel the elder. Just as the Holy One blessed be He, it is written in His regard: “The Lord alone will be exalted [on that day]” (Isaiah 2:17), Jacob, too: “Jacob remained alone.”
Rabbi Ḥunya said: He appeared to him in the image of a herdsman; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: 'Cross yours and then I will cross mine.' Jacob crossed his. He said: 'Let us return and see, whether, perhaps, we forgot something.' When he returned, “a man wrestled with him.” Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba and Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi were negotiating the sale of these silk fabrics. They entered Tyre and did their business. When they exited the city gates, they said: ‘Let us go and adopt the craft of our ancestors. Let us return and see if we forgot something.’ They returned and found a package of silk fabrics. They said to them: 'From where do you have this practice?' (The practice of returning to check if anything was left behind.) They said: 'From Jacob our ancestor, as it is written: “Jacob remained alone.”' The Rabbis say: He appeared to him as the leader of robbers; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: 'Cross mine (To the other side of the river.) and I will cross yours.' The angel crossed that of our patriarch Jacob in the blink of an eye. Jacob was crossing, returning, and finding, crossing, returning and finding all night. He said to him: 'Sorcerer' . Rabbi Pinḥas said: At that moment, Jacob took a scarf and placed it around his (The angel’s neck.) neck, He said to him: ‘Parkamos parkamos.’ (Jacob was saying to the angel: ‘You do not intimidate me.’) Rav Huna said: Ultimately the angel said: ‘I will inform him with whom he is engaging.’ What did he do? He placed his finger on the ground and the ground began boiling with fire. Jacob said to him. 'With that you seek to scare me? I am completely constituted from it.' That is what is written: “The house of Jacob will be fire…” (Obadiah 1:18).
Rabbi Ḥama ben Rabbi Ḥanina said: It was Esau’s guardian angel. That is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels, and you welcomed me” (Genesis 33:10). “He saw that he could not prevail against him, and he touched the joint of his thigh; the joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated as he wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:26). This is analogous to an athlete who was standing and wrestling with the king’s son. He lifted his eyes, saw the king standing over him, and cast himself down before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not prevail against him” – He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not prevail over him. Rabbi Berekhya said: We do not know who was victorious, whether it was the angel or Jacob, but from what is written in the verse: “A man wrestled [vaye’avek] with him” – that is, who became covered with dust [avak]; the man who was with him. (Since the man who was with him became covered with dust, that indicates that Jacob was victorious.) Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to him [to the angel]: 'He comes against you with five amulets in his possession: His merit, his father’s merit, his mother’s merit, his grandfather’s merit, and his grandmother’s merit. Evaluate yourself whether you are able even to stand against his merit.' Immediately, “he saw that he could not prevail against him.” This is analogous to a king who had a wild dog and a tame lion. The king would take his son and embolden his heart with the lion, (He was emboldened by the fact that he would emerge victorious over the lion.) so were the dog to come and confront him, the king would say to him [the dog]: ‘The lion could not stand against him, and you seek to confront him?’ So, were the nations of the world to come and confront Israel, the Holy One blessed be He will say to them: ‘Your ministering angel could not stand against him, and you seek to confront his descendants?’ “He touched the joint of his thigh” – he touched the righteous men and women, the prophets and prophetesses, who are destined to emerge from him. Which is that [generation]? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived in the wake of the Bar Kokhva rebellion.) “The joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated [vateka]” – Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Eliezer said: It was smoothed. (The bone that naturally protrudes in the thigh joint was driven inward, like a peg that is driven [tekua] into the ground.) Rabbi Berekya said in the name of Rabbi Asi: It was split like a fish. (It was split lengthwise. In this interpretation, vateka is a derivation of the word beka, meaning split.) Rav Naḥman bar Yaakov said: It was dislocated from its place, as it is written: “I was repulsed [vateka]…as My soul was repulsed [nake’a]” (Ezekiel 23:18). “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken. He said: I will not release you unless you bless me” (Genesis 32:27). Throughout that night each of them was striking the other, this one’s shield against that one’s shield. When dawn broke: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken.”
“Remember, Lord, what befell us; look, and see our disgrace” (Lamentations 5:1). “Remember, Lord, what befell us.” Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “The greyhound, or the goat” (Proverbs 30:31). The way of the world is that if a person raises two greyhounds in his house, one large and one small, he restrains the large one before the small one in order to spare his property. (He ensures that the large one does not kill the small one.) Rabbi Berekhya said: Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, You wrote for us in the Torah: “Remember what Amalek did to you” (Deuteronomy 25:17). He did to us, but did not do to You? Did he not destroy Your Temple?’ (The Romans, who destroyed the Second Temple, are identified as descendants of Edom, who descended from Esau. Amalek also descended from Esau, and therefore the Romans were viewed as descendants or relatives of Amalek.) The Rabbis say: Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘We are Yours and the nations of the world are Yours; why do You not have mercy upon Your nation?’ “And the king, against whom no one rises” (Proverbs 30:31). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘We are subject to forgetfulness but You are not subject to forgetfulness. There is no forgetfulness before You; therefore, “remember….”’ “Remember, Lord, the day of Jerusalem for the sons of Edom, who said: Tear her down, tear her down [aru aru], to her foundation” (Psalms 137:7). Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Destroy, destroy. Rabbi Levi said: Empty, empty. (These sages are offering interpretations of the phrase aru aru.) The one who said: Destroy, destroy, that is what is written: “The broad walls of Babylon will be destroyed [arer titarar]” (Jeremiah 51:58). According to the one who said: Empty empty, that is what is written: “To her foundation,” they reached even her foundations. (And they cleared them away.) “Look, and see our disgrace.” Rabbi Yudan said: Looking is from near and seeing is from afar. Looking is from near, as it is stated: “He looked and, behold, there was beside his head a cake baked on coals” (I Kings 19:6). Seeing is from afar, as it is stated: “He saw the place from afar” (Genesis 22:4). Rabbi Pinḥas said: Looking is from afar, as it is stated: “Look from Heaven and see” (Psalms 80:15). Seeing is from near, as it is stated: “He saw that he could not overcome him and he touched his hip socket” (Genesis 32:26).
(Gen. 32, 25) And Jacob was left alone. R. Elazar said: "This means that he was left alone on account of little pitchers [which he desired to take along]. Infer from this that the righteous consider their wealth even dearer than their own bodies — and why so? Because they do not put their hands unto robbery [hence they earn with hard labor]. (Ib.) And there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. "Infer from this," said R. Isaac, "that a scholar must not go out at night alone." R. Abba b. Cahana said: "From here (Ib. b) we infer the above (Ruth 3, 2) Behold, he winnoweth Barley tonight in the threshingfloor." R. Abahu said: "From here (Gen. 22, 3) And Abraham rose early in the morning, etc. "The Rabbis say: "From here (Ib. 37, 13) Go now, see whether it is well with thy brethren, and well with the flock." Rab said: "From here (Ib. 32, 32) And the sun rose upon him."
(Gen. 32:25 [24]:) SO JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE. What is written above of the matter (in vs. 8 [7])? THEN JACOB WAS VERY FRIGHTENED. WHEN THE HOLY ONE SAW HOW JACOB WAS DEPRESSED, < according to what > R. Berekhyah said, he sent four companies of angels to make war with Esau all night. (Tanh., Gen. 8:3; Gen. R. 78:11.) < When > the first company came, < one of the angels > said to them (to Esau's people): To whom do you belong? They said to them: We are children of Isaac, and < the angels > assaulted (The translation “assault,” here and in the next sentence, reads maphgi‘in for maphgishin (“bring together”).) him (Esau). He said to them: (Perhaps to another company of angels.) We are children of Abraham's children; they began assaulting him. When < Esau's people > said: We are brothers of Jacob, they began to leave them alone. Out of respect for Jacob we shall leave you alone. Thus (in Gen. 32:25 [24]): SO JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE. Now Jacob did not know how many miracles the Holy One had done for him. He did nothing; but, when he came in the morning, his brother Esau said to him (in Gen. 33:8): WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY ALL THIS HOST (MHNH) WHICH I HAVE MET? "Which I have seen" is not written here, but WHICH I HAVE MET. Now Jacob did not know that the Holy One had sent angels to him. Rather he was of the opinion that < Esau > had been occupied with the same gift (MNHH) that he had sent to him. He therefore had said to him < that it was meant > (as stated in ibid., cont.): TO FIND FAVOR IN THE EYES OF MY LORD (Esau). Then, when the Holy One saw that he was afraid, he sent Michael to him to engage in strife with him. What did the angel do with him? He appeared to him in the likeness of a shepherd. (Gen. R. 77:2.) It is so stated (in Gen. 32:25-27 [24-26]): AND SOMEONE WRESTLED WITH HIM < UNTIL THE RISING OF THE DAWN >. WHEN HE SAW THAT HE HAD NOT PREVAILED AGAINST HIM, < HE WRENCHED HIS THIGH AT ITS SOCKET >…. THEN HE SAID: SEND ME AWAY < BECAUSE THE DAWN IS RISING >….
R. Isaac stated; Our master, Moses, stood beside the flames and dropped bundles of wool into them, thus causing the flames to sink into the earth, as is said: And the fire abated (ibid., v. 15). This also teaches us that the righteous are superior to the ministering angels. Furthermore, Jacob seized the mighty angel and vanquished him, as it is said: And there wrestled a man with him, etc. (Gen. 32:25). And when it was necessary, he sent two camps of angels as his emissaries to Esau, as is stated: And Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau.
What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He sent an angel to him to deliver him, and to save him from the hand of Esau; and he appeared unto him like a man, as it is said, "And there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day" (Gen. 32:24). As soon as the dawn appeared, the angel said to him: Let me go, for the time has arrived when I must stand to sing and to chant praises before the Holy One, blessed be He. But Jacob did not wish to let him go. What did the angel do? He began to sing and to chant praises from the earth, || and when the angels (on high) heard the voice of the angel who was singing and praising from the earth, they said: Because of the honour of the righteous (one) do we hear the voice of the angel who is singing and praising from the earth; and concerning him the verse says, "From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, glory to the righteous" (Isa. 24:16).
Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Ḥelbo: It is written: “A man wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:25). We do not know who was dominated by whom; whether the angel was dominated by Jacob or Jacob was dominated by the angel, except from what is written: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken” (Genesis 32:27). The angel said to Jacob: ‘Release me, as the time for my lauding has arrived.’ Thus, the angel was dominated by Jacob. In what guise did he appear to him? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He appeared to him in the guise of Esau’s guardian angel. That is what is written: “For I have therefore seen your face like seeing the face of an angel” (Genesis 33:10). [Jacob] said to [Esau]: ‘Your face is like that of your angel.’ This is analogous to a king who had a tamed lion and a wild dog. What did the king do? He brought the lion and incited it against his son. He would say: If the dog comes upon my son, my son will say: If I overcame the lion will I not be able to overcome the dog? So too, when the nations of the world come upon Israel, the Holy One blessed be He says to then: ‘Your guardian angel was not able to withstand their ancestor, will you be able to overcome them?’ Rabbi Huna said: He appeared to him as a herdsman; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: (The angel said to Jacob.) ‘Cross mine and I will cross yours.’ (Help me cross the stream with my livestock, and I will help you cross with your livestock. Some suggest that the text should read: Cross yours and I will cross mine. This is consistent with the version of the text in Bereshit Rabba 77:3 and with the continuation of the midrash here (Etz Yosef).) After Jacob our patriarch crossed his, he said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ Once he returned, “a man wrestled with him.” (The angel, appearing as a herdsman, fought with Jacob under the pretense that after crossing his own livestock, Jacob had come to take some of his livestock.) Rabbi Ḥiyya the Great and Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi were engaged in commerce and were dealing silk fabric. They entered Tyre and engaged in their labor. When they exited the city gates, they said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ They returned and found a bundle of silk fabric. They said: This matter is from Jacob our grandfather, as it is written: “A man wrestled with him.” (This event occurred after Jacob had returned to see if he forgot anything. They derived from Jacob’s behavior that checking if one forgot anything is a good habit.) The Rabbis say: He appeared to him as an arch robber; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: Cross mine and I will cross yours. The angel crossed Jacob’s flocks in the blink of an eye. Our patriarch Jacob was crossing the flocks of the angel, and he was returning and finding other flocks all that night. What did Jacob our patriarch do? Rabbi Pinḥas said: At that moment, Jacob wrapped a soft woolen scarf around his neck. He said to him: ‘Sorcerer, sorcerer, you are a wizard, but wizardry is not effective at night.’ Rabbi Huna said: At that moment the angel said: ‘Shall I not inform him with whom he is dealing?’ What did he do? He placed a finger on a rock and it began bursting into flames. [Jacob] said to him: ‘With this you are seeking to frighten me? I am constituted entirely from it,’ as it is stated: “The house of Jacob will be fire” (Obadiah 1:18). Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to Esau’s guardian angel: ‘Are you standing against him? He is coming against you with five amulets in his hand: His merit, the merit of his father, the merit of his mother, the merit of his grandfather, and the merit of his grandmother. Assess yourself relative to him, as you are unable to stand even against his own merit.’ Immediately, “he saw that he could not overcome him” (Genesis 32:26). Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. [This is analogous] to an arch robber who was struggling with the son of a king. He lifted his eyes and saw that his father the king was standing over him, and he submitted to him. So too, when the angel saw the Divine Presence standing over Jacob, he submitted before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not overcome him.” Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. “He touched the socket of his thigh” (Genesis 32:26), the righteous men and the righteous women and the prophets and the prophetesses who were destined to emerge from him and his sons. What is that? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived after the destruction of the Temple, when the Romans persecuted the residents of the Land of Israel.) “The socket of Jacob’s thigh was dislocated [vateka]” (Genesis 32:26), Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Eliezer says: He smoothed it. (The bone that protrudes from the thigh no longer protruded.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rav Asi: (The Hebrew text says Ravasa, which is short for Rav Asi.) He fractured it like [one splits] a fish. (Lengthwise.) Rabbi Naḥman bar Yaakov said: He dislocated it, just as you say: “My soul was alienated [vateka] from her” (Ezekiel 23:18).
Let him learn from Jacob, our father, who was miserly without parallel as it is said, "And Jacob was left alone" (Gen. 32:25), and our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said that he had forgotten some small jugs and returned to get them. This teaches us that the righteous value their money more than their bodies, because they do not get their money easily through plunder (Hullin 91a). Behold this great miserliness — that a man as rich as Jacob felt compelled to return for some little jugs. Yet we find in another place that he was genereous without parallel, as our Rabbis taught, "In my grave which I have digged for me" (Gen. 50:5). This teaches us that Jacob took all the silver and gold that he had brought from Laban's house and he made a pile and said to Esau. "Take this for your share in the cave of Machpelah" (Ex. Rabbah 31:17). Was there ever anyone else as liberal as this?
Since the blessing Jacob received from his father had been of a material nature, such as "the dew of the heavens, the fat parts of the earth, etc." [seeing Isaac thought he was blessing Esau], he could not really receive Isaac's spiritual blessings until he had successfully confronted Esau, i.e. had experienced the fear of Esau approaching him with four hundred armed men. Jacob's very desire to belong to the choicest of the בני עליה, the spiritually most refined human beings, necessitated that he undergo a thorough process of refinement. His stay at Laban, i.e. physical and mental hardship for over twenty years were all part of the preparation for receiving the ultimate spiritual blessings. After Jacob had successfully confronted the spiritual power of Esau in his nocturnal encounter in Genesis 32,25 ויאבק איש עמו (compare Bereshit Rabbah 77,3), he finally obtained the consent of his adversary that he was entitled to the blessings he had received from his father. This is why Esau said in 33,9: "you may keep what is yours." Esau's spiritual counterpart had already acknowledged this during the struggle when he had bestowed a blessing on Jacob in 32,30: ויברך אותו שם, "He blessed him there." At that time Jacob was also informed about the forthcoming change of his name to ישראל. The Esau on earth, had previously called him Jacob as a slur when he had felt himself betrayed in 27,36.
Some mystical elements pertaining to the Chanukah lights: We shall now proceed to explain part of the deeper meaning of the חנוכה lights which issue forth from the ירך המנורה, the stem of the candelabra (the equivalent of ירך, thigh, in a human body). The expression רגל, foot, is also found in connection with נר, light, when the Psalmist describes הר לרגלי דברך, "Your word is a lamp to my feet" (Psalms 119,105). According to Halachah, the period during which the Chanukah lights have to burn concludes when תכלה רגל מן השוק, when the foot (pedestrian) leaves the market-place, when the streets empty out. Let us get back to the meaning of the word ירך. The Torah reported that Samael succeeded in dislocating Jacob's כף ירך, thigh joint. The immediate cause for this had been Jacob's having remained alone while he had gone to retrieve some trinkets of minor value (Rashi on 32,25). No doubt these פכים קטנים, "insignificant trinkets," are of great symbolical significance. We are reminded of the פך קטן, "small cruse" of oil which the Hasmoneans found when they entered the Temple precincts after their victory over the Greeks.
ויותר יעקב לבדו . Rabbi Eliezer in Chulin 91a learned from here that Jacob crossed the river in order to retrieve small insignificant utensils, and that righteous people are wont to endanger their lives over minor possessions. They do not do so out of excessive greed; because they are so careful not to acquire something that rightfully belonged to someone else, all the things they do acquire assume significance for them.
We are taught in Chulin 91a that the choice of that word, i.e. אבק, dust, indicates that the dust stirred up during this struggle rose all the way to the throne of Glory -which is not complete, as we shall set out to show. The meaning of the word "he touched," is similar to the English "he touched a sore point." Samael had found something in Jacob's lifestyle which he thought he could turn into an accusation against him. This was the fact that Jacob had married two sisters while both were alive. He should not have done so, since the patriarchs had accepted for themselves the laws of the Torah which had not yet been officially formulated. Nachmanides writes about this at length in his commentary on Genesis 26, 5 where the Torah credits Abraham with having observed all of G–d's statutes. According to Nachmanides the patriarchs assumed this obligation as valid only while they resided in the land of Israel; the word מפשט used in the verse is by definition legislation that varies from country to country. G–d's משפטים apply only in G–d's country, ארץ ישראל. When Jacob married two sisters he did not live in the land of Israel. Samael's accusation was by necessity based on the yardsticks that Jacob claimed to live by. He argued that a man of Jacob's stature whose features were engraved on G–d's throne should not have taken advantage of the fact that technically he was allowed to marry two sisters, for did he not carry the atmosphere of ארץ ישראל with him wherever he went? We are familiar with such expressions as אבק רבית, something not actually an interest payment but nonetheless giving the impression that someone rendered a service for free which would have been charged for had the recipient of the service not been a lender to the person rendering the service. We have a similar expression when dealing with the laws of לשון הרע, evil gossip. The Tosephta Avodah Zarah 1, 10 describes four areas in which the term אבק is used halachically. All of them are not transgressions that are dealt with by the Courts, but are matters of individual piety. When the Talmud described the "dust" of the struggle between Jacob and the guardian angel of Esau as having risen to the throne of G–d, what is meant is that the issue was such a paralegal impropriety committed by Jacob as marrying two sisters outside the boundaries of ארץ ישראל.
"strive (hishtadel)": This [word refers to] a matter of training and thought about the thing. And the [Aramaic] translation of, "and a man struggled with him" is veishtadel gavra imei - Rambam.
When the Torah continues with אם בגפו יבא, we must examine this expression more closely. Why did the Torah choose this expression instead of the word לבדו normally used to describe someone as being alone, such as when the Torah describes Jacob as remaining alone (Genesis 32,25)?
A boor (bur) is one who does not have wisdom nor [proper] traits. And an ignorant person (literally, a man of the land - am haarets) is one who does not have intellectual virtues but he would have some character virtues. And [the meaning of] a person prone to being ashamed is known. And an impatient person is one who is impatient about everything and gets angry. And the matter of striving is to accustom your soul and lead it to acquire the virtues. And since there are no wise men [there] to teach you, you should teach yourself. And the [Aramaic] translation of (Genesis 32:25), "and a man struggled with him" is "and a man strived with him" (Onkelos Genesis 32:25). And they said that the Torah is not found with men of pride and arrogance and not with those that go to far lands. And they supported this by way of a flourish with a verse and said (Eruvin 55a), "'It is not in the heavens, that you should say, etc. Neither is it beyond the sea, etc.' (Deuteronomy 30:12-13)." They said, "It is not with the arrogant (who elevate themselves like the sky) and it is not with those that go across the sea."
AND IF A MAN ‘Y’FATEH’ — “speaks to her emotions [until she submits to him]. And so did Onkelos render it arei y’shadeil, the term shidul in Aramaic being like pitui [persuasion, seduction], in the Sacred Language. ‘MAHOR YIMHARENAH’ (HE SHALL SURELY PAY A DOWRY FOR HER) TO BE HIS WIFE — he shall assign her a marriage portion as is the manner of a man to his wife by writing her a kethubah (marriage contract), and he shall marry her.” Thus far is Rashi’s language. But this is not correct, for the term pitui [does not mean “speaking to her feelings,” as Rashi put it], but winning over another person’s will by falsehood. A similar usage of the term is found in these verses: ‘yifteh l’vavchem’ (your heart will be deceived); (Deuteronomy 11:16.) ‘vayift’ (and he seduced) my heart secretly; (Job 31:27.) if my heart ‘niftah’ (have been enticed) unto a woman. (Ibid., 9.) This is why people whose minds are not adroit in discriminating matters, and whose hearts can be easily bent by a few words at the beginning of a discussion, are called p’ta’im (simple-minded ones), just as it is said, ‘peti’ (the simple-minded) believeth every word, (Proverbs 14:15.) and he who seduces a virgin in order to have sexual relations with her, bends her will to his desire by words of falsehood, and is therefore called m’fateh (seducer). Onkelos, however, divided the term pitui into two meanings. Thus here he translated it: y’shadeil, which is an expression for cunning and effort that a person exercises towards another in order to do with him as he pleases, regardless of whether this effort is by means of words or deeds. Thus Onkelos translated: ‘vayei’aveik’ a man with him (Genesis 32:25. See Vol. 1, pp. 404-405 where Ramban discusses in brief the same theme as here.) — v’ishtadeil (and a man ‘wrestled craftily’ with him). And Yonathan ben Uziel (See Vol. 1, p. 127 Note 152.) translated: ‘v’shovavticho’ (and I will turn thee about), and put hooks into thy jaws (Ezekiel 38:4.) — ‘v’ishtadlinoch.’ And in the Targum of the Scroll of Ruth we find: Where hast thou gleaned to-day? ‘v’anah asit’ (and where wroughtest thou)? (Ruth 2:19. It is of interest to note that Ramban refers to “the Targum of the Scroll of Esther” instead of ascribing it as he had done in the preceding reference to the Targum on the Book of Ezekiel. This indicates that Ramban held them to be of different authorship. Such indeed is the prevailing opinion in modern scholarship (see P. Churgin, Targum Kethuvim, pp. 140-151).) — ‘u’lan ishtadalt l’me’bad’ (and where have you ‘endeavored’ to work)? — And she said: The man’s name with whom ‘asithi’ (I wrought) to-day is Boaz, (Ruth 2:19. It is of interest to note that Ramban refers to “the Targum of the Scroll of Esther” instead of ascribing it as he had done in the preceding reference to the Targum on the Book of Ezekiel. This indicates that Ramban held them to be of different authorship. Such indeed is the prevailing opinion in modern scholarship (see P. Churgin, Targum Kethuvim, pp. 140-151).) is translated in the Targum: ‘d’ishtadalith imei’ (with whom I ‘endeavored’). For all effort involving skill, with which a person attempts to achieve something, is called hishtadluth (endeavoring). Thus the Rabbis have said in the Mishnah: (Aboth 2:5.) “And where there are no men, hishtadeil (strive) to be a man.” And in the Gemara (Berachoth 58a.) we find: “A man should always yishtadeil (strive) to go out to welcome kings of Israel.” And in Scripture it is written: and he [i.e., the king] ‘mishtadar’ (labored) to rescue him, (Daniel 6:15.) — employing every skill [to save Daniel]. In my opinion, associated with this term [hishtadluth — striving] is the expression, rebellion ‘v’eshtadur’ (and sedition) have been made therein, (Ezra 4:19.) meaning, rebellion and “much striving.” For even in the Sacred Language these letters [the lamed and the reish of y’shadeil, y’shadeir] interchange. Thus we find: mazaloth (constellations) (II Kings 23:5.) and mazaroth; (Job 38:32.) niml’tzu (sweet), (Psalms 119:103.) and nimr’tzu (forcible); (Job 6:25.) ‘mifl’sei’ (the balancing of) the clouds, (Ibid., 37:16.) and ‘mifr’sei’ (the spreadings of) the clouds. (Ibid., 36:29.) Similarly in Aramaic: va’alu (and behold), (Daniel 7:8.) and va’aru. (Ibid., Verse 7.) Sharshereth (chain) (Further, 28:14.) is termed by the Sages shalsheleth. (Mikvaoth 10:5.) There are Mishnaic texts where it is written, “hishtadeir [instead of hishtadeil — both terms meaning ‘strive’] to be a man.” (Aboth 2:5.) It is for this reason that Onkelos renders ki y’fateh — arei y’shadeil (he will endeavor); he will attempt by devious means to invest the virgin with a sense of trust in him, by many ruses, until she submits to him. And since seduction may be achieved in many ways — sometimes with words, sometimes with money, sometimes by falsehood to mislead her, and sometimes even by truth, as when he really wishes to marry her — therefore Onkelos did not use a precise term for it, but rendered it as an expression of “endeavor.” However, in the verse, lest your heart be ‘yifteh,’ (Deuteronomy 11:16.) he used the other meaning and translated it: ‘dilma yit’ei,’ for there it means, “perhaps you will be misled.” And that which the Rabbi [Rashi] explained: “‘Mahor yimharenah’ (he shall surely pay a dowry for her) to be his wife — he shall assign her a marriage portion as is the manner of a man to his wife, by writing her a kethubah (marriage contract)” — this is not correct, for if the seducer marries her, he pays no penalty, (Verse 16, and Kethuboth 39a.) and if he divorces her after the marriage, there is no monetary obligation upon him by law of the Torah, since a kethubah is a matter of Rabbinic ordinance. Rather, mohar means gifts — the gifts which a man sends to his betrothed, jewels of silver and jewels of gold (Genesis 24:53.) and clothes for the wedding ceremony and marriage, these being called sivlonoth in the language of the Rabbis. (Kiddushin 50a.) Thus they said: “Mohari go back [upon the death of the wife].” (Baba Bathra 145a. This applies to a case where the marriage was not consumated (Even Ha’ezer 50, 4).) And Onkelos rendered the verse, And Shechem said… Multiply upon me greatly ‘mohar’ and gift (Genesis 34:12.) — “multiply upon me greatly moharin [in the plural] and gifts,” and Shechem would not have vowed to write Dinah many kethuboth. Instead, mohar means gifts, as I have explained. It is possible that the word is derived from the expression ‘m’heirah chushah’ (hasten, stay not), (I Samuel 20:38.) because the mohar is the first thing which hastens the wedding, as the groom hurries and sends these presents ahead of him in eager haste and then he comes to his father-in-law’s house to make the wedding or the feast, just as the Sages have spoken of “parties of sivlonoth” (when presents are presented to the betrothed). (Pesachim 49a.) The meaning of ‘mahor yimharenah’ to be his wife is then, that the seducer should send her presents and necessities for the wedding in order to become his wife. There is thus a hint here that both the seducer and the seduced can prevent the marriage, since Scripture uses such language rather than saying expressly that he should take her to him as his wife; for there is no commandment upon him to marry her unless he so desires, and if he does not want her to begin with, he is to pay fifty shekels of silver. (Deuteronomy 22:29. As explained further on in Ramban, this fine [stated in the case of a violator] applies also to a seducer — if he or she refuses marriage.) After that Scripture states (Verse 16 here.) that if the father refuses to give her unto him, he shall pay him money according to the ‘mohar’ which men give to virgins whom they marry. The reason for this fine is that the seducer has spoiled her reputation in the eyes of young men, thus the father will have to give her many presents and they will not give her any dowry, therefore it is right that the seducer should pay it. Our Rabbis have said (Mechilta here in the verse, and Kethuboth 10a.) that the amount of this mohar was determined by Scripture in the case of the violator to be fifty shekels of silver, (Deuteronomy 22:29.) the law of the violator and of the seducer being alike in this respect. Scripture, however, did differentiate between them in that in the case of the violator it says, and she shall be his wife… he may not put her away all his days, (Deuteronomy 22:29.) the reason [for this distinction between the violator, who must marry the maiden whom he has raped, and is forbidden to divorce her ever, and the seducer, who does not have to marry the seduced girl, but may instead pay the penalty mentioned in the Torah], is that usually it is handsome young men (Ezekiel 23:6.) who seduce virgins, and the beautiful daughters of prominent families, [in the hope of marrying them]. But since it is not proper that he should gain from his sin, [i.e., that the girl should have to marry the seducer], therefore He explained that he cannot marry her against their will [hers and that of her father], but instead must pay them. Also, because she too sinned in this matter, He did not impose it on him to have to marry her against his will, but instead it is enough if he pays the penalty [of the fifty shekels of silver], and if he marries her with her consent and that of her father, she has the same status in relation to him as all women, having no claim to a kethubah from him by law of the Torah [but only by Rabbinic ordinance]. Similarly, it is usually the sons of prominent families who rape the daughters of those less-known families who have no power against them. Therefore He said in the case of the violator, and she shall be his wife (Deuteronomy 22:29.) — against his will. And in the opinion of our Rabbis, (Kethuboth 39b.) there too [in the case of the violator] the maiden and her father can withhold consent, as it would not be correct that he should marry her against her will, and thus do her two evils. Sometimes she may be of a more honorable family than he, and it is inconceivable that she should be further disgraced by his sinful act. The fair law is thus that the decision as to the marriage of the raped maiden be left to her discretion and that of her father, and not to the violator; instead, [if she desires it] he must marry her against his will, (“Even if she be lame, even if she be blind, and even if she is afflicted with boils” (ibid., 39 a).) in order that violent men should not take liberties with the daughters of Israel. Now this law of seduction only applies to a na’arah, (A na’arah is a maiden between the age of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth — past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three years and a day to twelve years and a day.) as does the law of violation [which applies only to a girl between the ages of twelve years and a day, and twelve and a half], for there Scripture expressly stated, if a man find a ‘n’arah’ that is a virgin, (Deuteronomy 22:28.) but here He did not mention na’arah. The reason for this is that the term na’arah mentioned there [in the case of a violator], is used in order to exclude the bogereth [a woman who has passed the stage of maidenhood], who is considered an adult woman, whereas a girl who is a minor [between the ages of three years and a day and twelve years and a day], is also included under the terms of the law of violation. But here [in the case of seduction], it was not necessary to exclude a bogereth, for it is self-understood that one who seduces a bogereth pays nothing, as he did it with her mature consent. Besides, a father has no rights at all in his daughter after the days of her maidenhood, as it is written, ‘bin’ureihah’ (in her maidenhood) in her father’s house, (Numbers 30:17.) and here He said, If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, (Verse 16 here.) thus indicating that he [the father] can give her to him as a wife, seeing that he has the authority to take her betrothal-money, and this applies only when she is a minor or a na’arah, (A na’arah is a maiden between the age of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth — past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three years and a day to twelve years and a day.) just as the Rabbis interpreted: (Kiddushin 3b.) “All benefits which accrue during maidenhood belong to her father.” (There was no need for Scripture here to write na’arah to exclude a bogereth from the law of seduction, since the verse if her father utterly refuse etc. could not possibly speak of a bogereth. Hence it is self-understood that the section deals here with a na’arah, and there was no need to mention it. But in the case of violation etc.) But in the case of a violation it was necessary to write na’arah, in order to exclude a bogereth (A na’arah is a maiden between the age of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth — past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three years and a day to twelve years and a day.) from that law, because we might have thought that if she were a bogereth he should pay the fifty shekels of silver to her, [instead of to her father; it was therefore necessary to state] that it is a Scriptural decree [that if she is a bogereth he is free from that penalty], the reason being that since she is in full control of herself, she should guard herself against such a mishap. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained mohar as being an expression of “binding” [that he should bind her to him as a wife], similar in usage to the verse, Let the idols of them be multiplied ‘acheir maharu’ (who bind themselves to another god). (Psalms 16:4. It is generally translated: “that make suit unto another.” According to Ibn Ezra: “that bind (or connect) themselves with another god.” Ramban’s own interpretation of that verse follows later in the text.) But this is not correct; instead, the meaning of mohar is as I have explained it on the basis of the words of our Rabbis, of blessed memory. And in my opinion acheir maharu (Psalms 16:4. It is generally translated: “that make suit unto another.” According to Ibn Ezra: “that bind (or connect) themselves with another god.” Ramban’s own interpretation of that verse follows later in the text.) means, “those who are ‘hasty’ in thought, [from the root maheir — fast] and follow another god precipitately, without consideration and without knowledge.” In the writings of the grammarians (R’dak in Sefer Hashorashim, root acheir.) [acheir maharu is explained as meaning]: “those who give mohar (gifts) to another god,” meaning that they bring him sacrifice and offering.
AND HE APPEARED TO HIM. Rashi comments: “To visit the sick man. Said Rabbi Chama the son of Chanina, ‘It was the third day after his circumcision, and the Holy One, blessed be He, came and inquired after him.’ (“After him.” In our text of Rashi: “after the state of his health.”) And, lo, three men: (Verse 2 here.) angels who came to him in the form of men. Three: one to announce to Sarah that she would bear a son, one to heal Abraham, and one to overthrow Sodom. Raphael who healed Abraham went from there to rescue Lot” for these do not constitute two commissions. (“One angel does not carry out two commissions.” (Bereshith Rabbah 50:2 and mentioned in Rashi here.) But, continues Ramban, these two missions given to the angel Raphael—healing Abraham and rescuing Lot from Sodom—do not violate the principle. See text.) This is because the second mission was in another place, and he was commanded thereon after [he had completed his first mission]. (It is as if he was sent on a new mission in another place after he had completed his mission in a different place. For it is clear that the principle of one angel not carrying out two commissions applies only to two simultaneous commissions, as explained in Mizrachi’s commentary on Rashi.) Perhaps it is because the two missions had rescue as their common goal. (Since healing and rescue are missions with a common purpose, one angel could be charged with both missions.) “And they did eat: (Verse 8 here.) they appeared to be eating.” In the book Moreh Nebuchim (Ibn Tibbon’s translation, II, 42: in Al Charizi, Chapter 43.) it is said that this portion of Scripture consists of a general statement followed by a detailed description. Thus Scripture first says that the Eternal appeared to Abraham in the form of prophetic visions, and then explains in what manner this vision took place, namely, that he [Abraham] lifted up his eyes in the vision, and lo, three men stood by him, (Verse 2 here.) and he said, if now I have found favor in thy eyes. (Verse 3 here.) This is the account of what he said in the prophetic vision to one of them, namely, their chief. Now if in the vision there appeared to Abraham only men partaking of food, how then does Scripture say, And the Eternal appeared to him, as G-d did not appear to him in vision or in thought? (In other words, why does Scripture begin the chapter with the statement, And the Eternal appeared to him, when in the detailed account of the vision it is explained that he saw only angels?) Such is not found with respect to all the prophecies. And according to his (The author of the Moreh Nebuchim.) words, Sarah did not knead cakes, nor did Abraham prepare a bullock, and also, Sarah did not laugh. It was all a vision! If so, this dream came through a multitude of business, (See Ecclesiastes 5:2.) like dreams of falsehood, for what is the purpose of showing him all this! (Since the vision concerning the preparation and the eating of the meal were not relevant to the prophecy of the birth of Isaac.) Similarly did the author of the Moreh Nebuchim say (Ibn Tibbon’s translation, II, 42: in Al Charizi, Chapter 43.) in the case of the verse, And a man wrestled with him, (Further, 32:25. The reference deals with Jacob wrestling with the angel.) that it was all a prophetic vision. But if this be the case, I do not know why Jacob limped on his thigh when he awoke! And why did Jacob say, For I have seen an angel face to face, and my life is preserved? (Ibid., Verse 31.) The prophets did not fear that they might die on account of having experienced prophetic visions. Jacob, moreover, had already seen a greater and more distinguished vision than this since many times, in prophetic visions, he had also seen the Revered Divinity. (Ibid., 28:13.) Now according to this author’s opinion, he will find it necessary for the sake of consistency to say similarly in the affair of Lot that the angels did not come to his house, nor did he bake for them unleavened bread and they did eat. (Ibid., 19:3.) Rather, it was all a vision! But if Lot could ascend to the height of a prophetic vision, how did the wicked and sinful people of Sodom become prophets? Who told them that men had come into Lot’s house? And if all these [i.e., the actions of the inhabitants of Sodom], were part of prophetic visions, then it follows that the account related in the verses, And the angels hastened Lot, saying: Arise take thy wife. …And he said, Escape for thy life… See, I have accepted thee, (Ibid., Verses 17-21.) as well as the entire chapter is but a vision, and if so, Lot could have remained in Sodom! But the author of the Moreh Nebuchim thinks that the events took place of themselves, but the conversations relating to all matters were in a vision! But such words contradict Scripture. It is forbidden to listen to them, all the more to believe in them! In truth, (Ramban partially agrees with Rambam’s position. He says that wherever seeing or hearing an angel is mentioned in Scripture, it refers to a vision since the human senses can not perceive an angel. However, wherever Scripture ascribes human appearances to the angels, as in the case of Abraham, then their presence is sensually perceived. Other differences of opinion between Ramban and Rambam regarding prophecy are mentioned further on in the text.) wherever Scripture mentions an angel being seen or heard speaking it is in a vision or in a dream for the human senses cannot perceive the angels. But these are not visions of prophecy since he who attains the vision of an angel or the hearing of his speech is not yet a prophet. For the matter is not as the Rabbi (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides). See Seder Bereshith, Note 139.) pronounced, (Moreh Nebuchim, II, 41.) i.e., that every prophet, Moses our teacher excepted, received his prophecy through the medium of an angel. The Sages have already said (Megillah 3a.) concerning Daniel: “They (Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi—three prophets who lived at the beginning of the second Temple.) were greater than he for they were prophets and he was not a prophet.” His book, likewise, was not grouped together (The Men of the Great Assembly redacted the books of the Bible. See Baba Bathra 15a. They placed the book of Daniel in the section of the Writings. (Ibid., 14 b).) with the books of the prophets since his affair was with the angel Gabriel, even though he appeared to him and spoke with him when he was awake, as it is said in the vision concerning the second Temple: Yea, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel,etc. (Daniel 9:1.) The vision concerning the ultimate redemption (From the beginning of Chapter 10 there.) also occurred when Daniel was awake as he walked with his friends beside the Tigris River. (Ibid., 10:4. As for his friends, see ibid., Verse 7. Tradition specifies that these were Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. (Megillah 3a.)) Hagar the Egyptian (She was not a prophetess even though angels appeared to her. (Above, 16: 7.) Ramban thus differs with Rambam, who had said that all prophets received the prophecy through the medium of an angel. Rambam’s position is defended as follows: Rambam’s intent was not that whenever an angel is seen it is an instance of prophecy. Rather his intent was that whenever prophecy comes to any of the prophets it comes through an angel. However, it is possible that an angel may appear for the purpose of conveying information to one who is not a prophet. This was the case with Daniel and Hagar.) is not included in the group of prophetesses. (In Megillah 14 a, the Rabbis list seven prophetesses who arose in Israel: Sarah, Miriam, Deborah, Hannah, Abigail, Huldah and Esther. Hagar however was not listed among them. See Note 103 further.) It is also clear that hers was not a case of the bath kol (prophetic echo), (Guide of the Perplexed, II, 42. See Friedlander’s note on bath kol, p. 199, n.2.) as the Rabbi (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides). See Seder Bereshith, Note 139.) would have it. Scripture, furthermore, sets apart the prophecy of Moses our teacher from that of the patriarchs, as it is said, And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by [the name of] G-d Almighty, (Exodus 6:3.) this name being one of the sacred names for the Creator, and not a designation for an angel. Our Rabbis also taught concerning the difference in the degree of prophecy between Moses and the other prophets, and they said: (Vayikra Rabbah 1:14.) “What is the difference between Moses and all the prophets? The Rabbis say that all prophets saw through unclear vision. It is to this matter that Scripture refers in saying, And I have multiplied visions, and by the ministry of the prophets have I used similitudes. (Hosea 12:11.) Moses saw through a clear vision. It is to this matter that Scripture refers in saying, And the similitudes of the Eternal doth he behold,” (Numbers 12:8.) as is explained in Vayikra Rabbah (Vayikra Rabbah 1:14.) and other places. But in no place did the Sages attribute the prophecy of the prophets to an angel. Do not expose yourself to argument by quoting the verse, I also am a prophet as thou art; and an angel spoke unto me by the word of the Eternal, saying, (I Kings 13:18. From this you might argue that the prophets themselves attributed their prophecy to an angel. This is not correct, as is explained in the text.) since its meaning is as follows: “I also am a prophet as thou art, and I know that the angel who spoke to me was by word of G-d, this being one of the degrees of prophecy, as the man of G-d said, For so was it charged me by the word of the Eternal, (Ibid., Verse 9.) and he further said, For it was said to me by the word of the Eternal. (Ibid., Verse 17.) Our Rabbis have further stated (Bamidbar Rabbah 20:13.) in the matter of Balaam, who said, Now, therefore, if it displease thee, I will get me back, (Numbers 22:34.) [that is as if Balaam commented]: “I did not go [with the messengers of Balak] until the Holy One, blessed be He, told me, Rise up, go with them, (Ibid., 22:20.) and you [i.e., an angel], tell me that I should return. Such is His conduct! Did He not tell Abraham to sacrifice his son, after which the angel of the Eternal called to Abraham, And he said, Lay not thy hand upon the lad. (Further, 22:12.) He is accustomed to saying something and to have an angel revoke it, etc.” Thus the Sages were prompted to say that the prophecy comprising the first charge where G-d is mentioned is not like the second charge of which it is said that it was through an angel, only this was not unusual, for it is customary with the prophets that He would command by a prophecy and revoke the command through an angel since the prophet knew that the revocation was the word of G-d. In the beginning of Vayikra Rabbah (1:9.) the Sages have said: “And He called to Moses, (Leviticus 1:1.) unlike Abraham. Concerning Abraham it is written, And the angel of the Eternal called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven. (Further, 22:15.) The angel called, and G-d spoke the word, but here with respect to Moses, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘It is I Who called, and it is I Who spoke the word.’” That is to say, Abraham did not attain prophecy until he prepared his soul first to perceive an angel, and from that degree he ascended to attain the word of prophecy, but Moses was prepared for prophecy at all times. Thus the Sages were prompted to inform us everywhere that seeing an angel is not prophecy, and those who see angels and speak with them are not included among the prophets, as I have mentioned concerning Daniel. Rather, this is only a vision called “opening of eyes,” as in the verse: And the Eternal opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Eternal; (Numbers 22:31.) similarly: And Elisha prayed, and said, O Eternal, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. (II Kings 6:17.) But where Scripture mentions the angels as men, as is the case in this portion, and the portion concerning Lot — likewise, And a man wrestled with him, (Further, 32:25. The reference deals with Jacob wrestling with the angel.) And a certain man found him, (Further, 37:15.) in the opinion of our Rabbis (According to the Sages the man who wrestled with Jacob was the angel of Esau (Bereshith Rabbah 77:2), and the man who found Joseph was the angel Gabriel (Tanchuma Vayeshev 2).) — in all these cases there was a special glory created in the angels, called among those who know the mysteries of the Torah “a garment,” perceptible to the human vision of such pure persons as the pious and the disciples of the prophets, and I cannot explain any further. And in those places in Scripture where you find the sight of G-d and the speech of an angel, or the sight of an angel and the speech of G-d, as is written concerning Moses at the outset of his prophecy, (Exodus 3:2.) and in the words of Zechariah, (Zechariah 1:14, etc.) I will yet disclose words of the living G-d in allusions. Concerning on the matter of the verse, And they did eat, (Verse 8 here.) the Usages have said: (Bereshith Rabbah 48:16.) “One course after the other disappeared.” (That is, the angels really did not eat. Rather as soon as a dish of food was brought, it was consumed by fire.) The matter of “disappearance” you will understand from the account about Manoah, (Judges 13:19.) if you will be worthy to attain it. Now here is the interpretation of this portion of Scripture. After it says that In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, (Above, 17:26.) Scripture says that G-d appeared to him while he was sick from the circumcision as he was sitting and cooling himself in his tent door on account of the heat of the day which weakened him. Scripture mentions this in order to inform us that Abraham had no intention for prophecy. He had neither fallen on his face nor prayed, yet this vision did come to him.
TRY [Heb. hishtadel]. The meaning is “to accustom oneself and direct one’s thoughts toward something.” Onkelos translates “and a man struggled with him” (Genesis 32:25) as ve’ishtadal gavra imeih—Rambam.
וישאו בני ישראל את יעקב אביהם, “The children of Israel carried their father.” This was the occasion when they repaid him for the time at the Yabbok when he had carried all of them across the river. (Genesis 32,25)
[130] It is then too that he confers on him the crown of victory. Now the crown has a strange and outlandish and perhaps ill-sounding name; for the name given it by the president of the contest is “numbness”; for we read that “the broad part grew numb” (Gen. 32:25), a guerdon the most wondrous of all awards ever announced in honour of a victor.
[187] For, good friend, if you believe the holy Moses, virtue is not sound-footed in our mortal and bodily nature, but limps ever so little and is subject to a sort of stiffness, for we are told that “the width of the thigh was stiffened, and he halted on it” (Gen. 32:25, 31).
The Gemara returns to the verse of Jacob wrestling with the angel. The verse states: “And Jacob was left alone; and a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day” (Genesis 32:25). Rabbi Elazar says: The reason Jacob remained alone was that he remained to collect some small pitchers that had been left behind. From here it is derived that the possessions of the righteous are dearer to them than their bodies. And why do they care so much about their possessions? It is because they do not stretch out their hands to partake of stolen property.
The verse states: “And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day.” Rabbi Yitzḥak says: From here it is derived that a Torah scholar should not go out of his house alone at night, as Jacob went out alone at night and was injured. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said that the source for this instruction is from here:
He strove with an angel and prevailed— The other had to weep and implore him. At Bethel [Jacob] would meet him, There to commune with him. (him Heb. “us.”)
Yaakov remained alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak.
And Jakob remained alone beyond the Jubeka; and an Angel contended with him in the likeness of a man. And he said, Hast thou not promised to give the tenth of all that is thine? And, behold, thou hast ten sons and one daughter: nevertheless thou hast not tithed them. Immediately he set apart the four firstborn of the four mothers, and there remained eight. And he began to number from Shimeon, and Levi came up for the tenth. Michael answered and said, Lord of the world, this is Thy lot. And on account of these things he (Michael) remained from God at the torrent till the column of the morning was ascending.
| וַיַּ֗רְא כִּ֣י לֹ֤א יָכֹל֙ ל֔וֹ וַיִּגַּ֖ע בְּכַף־יְרֵכ֑וֹ וַתֵּ֙קַע֙ כַּף־יֶ֣רֶךְ יַעֲקֹ֔ב בְּהֵאָֽבְק֖וֹ עִמּֽוֹ׃ | 26 E | When he saw that he had not prevailed against him, he wrenched Jacob’s hip at its socket, so that the socket of his hip was strained as he wrestled with him. |
It is known that the main purpose of all of our service of G-d, be it Torah study, prayer, the mystical intentions of mitzvos or of eating, is in order to sort out and uplift the sparks of holiness from the depths of the impure shells. This is reflected on the human level when “men of substance” are uplifted to the level of “form.” (The Baal Shem Tov is applying the classic philosophical distinction between substance and form, or matter and spirit (chomer and tzurah), to human beings. The spiritual leaders of the community are “men of form,” who must uplift and refine the masses, who are “men of substance.” See Baal Shem Tov on the Torah, parashas Vayishlach, on Genesis 32:26, for more on this idea.) This is the meaning of “With this shall Aharon enter the Sanctuary.” But in order to be able to uplift the lower level to the higher one, one must first conjoin with that level. Then, one can uplift it. Toldos Yaakov Yosef, Yisro, p. 59c
[The following lengthy paragraph has been omitted in several editions of the Kedushat Levi. I have included it as I am puzzled why some publishers should have taken it upon themselves to omit such an impressive proof of the author’s lofty moral concept of how a Jew can become the personality which reflects that he has thoroughly “digested” what the Torah considers him capable of. Ed.] “Here I have placed before you this day blessing and curse.” It appears somewhat strange that two opposites such as blessing and curse should have been lumped together by Moses in a single verse, instead of being treated in separate paragraphs, as is the case when the Torah, on two separate occasions in Bechukotai and Ki Tavo, lists the results of obeying or disobeying G’d’s commandments. In order to understand this let us first explain an important rule concerning the works performed by man, something designed to prevent us from becoming overbearing and taking undue credit when we do serve the Creator by performing the various commandments that He has given us for our benefit. If we were to do that, we would be only a few steps away from generating physical desires that may overwhelm us. Not only must we not compliment ourselves for our service of the Lord as being a major accomplishment on our part, but on the contrary, we must consider such service as being minimal, and as a result of this we must become conscious of the immense spiritual gap between us and the Creator, so that we wind up with a broken heart when we consider our relative impotence when compared to Him. The more we serve Him, the more will we realize that we are still at the beginning of gaining an understanding of the immensity of a Being that has called into existence the entire universe and keeps in constant touch with all His creatures, being aware of what they do at any place and at any time. If we merely take time out to contemplate that ours is not the only planet that G’d has created but that are millions like it, how can we not feel our relative insignificance in the scheme of things that G’d has created? We get a glimpse of the feelings generated by servants of Hashem in the celestial regions when we recite daily in our morning prayers that in spite of their knowing that they are beloved, pure and mighty, i.e. כלם אהובים כלם ברורים, כלם גבורים, nonetheless, in spite of their “standing at the heights of the universe,” ברום עולם, they relate to the Creator in awe and dread, i.e. באימה וביראה. If this applies to the leading angels, how much more does it apply to us mortal human beings. It appears from the version quoted in our prayers that these angels did not experience the feelings of their inadequacy until they were actively involved in performing acts of service for the Creator. Immediately following these lines in the morning prayers, the highest category of angels, the seraphim, chayot and ofanim, are described as having intensified and reinforced their worship by proclaiming the holiness of G’d three times, i.e. קדושה. When we serve the Lord in the proper manner, our spiritual progress will assume the nature of a “chain reaction,” each act of service resulting in a better understanding of the Creator by His creature. Our author sees in the command to serve the Lord by blowing shofar on New Year’s day, (Psalms 81,4) an “invitation” to spiritually improve ourselves, the word שופר from the root שפר, personifying the concept of beautifying, i.e. improving oneself. The word תקיעה, based on the root תקע, meaning “firmly pitching (tent),” see Genesis 31,25 when used with the blowing of the ram’s horn, suggests that this service of the Lord be something firmly embedded in our personality, [not an occasional visit to the synagogue. Ed.] The fact that it is performed symbolically on New Year’s especially, points to the effect it has in renewing our commitment to Hashem. The very idea that we need periodically to “renew” this commitment, suggests that we are still at the “beginning” of our spiritual ascent. This is also reflected in the psalmist urging us (psalms 98,1) to “sing a new song for the Lord.” The נפלאות, wonders, which G’d worked that the psalmist describes in psalms 98, are that He deepens the perceptive powers of His servants, the ones who sing new songs in His praise. It is worth recalling an explanation of the Baal Shem Tov on psalms 48,15 where David describes G’d’s leading us forever with the words: הוא ינהגנו על מות, “He will lead us beyond death.” The Baal Shem tov, uses a parable to explain that verse. A father, when teaching his son to walk, ensures that he does not start by running but by taking slow steps. In order to encourage his son to walk more and more assuredly, he gradually distances himself from the son, so that the latter needs to cover more distance before arriving in the embrace of his father. The fact that G’d, i.e. His essence, appears very distant to us encourages us to make greater efforts to solve this mystery by getting closer to Him through serving Him better. This in turn, creates the feeling within us that although we have not achieved our objective in unraveling all the mysteries surrounding G’d, we nonetheless no longer consider our efforts as inconsequential. Every day we feel as if we enter a new chapter in our service of the Lord.
Genesis 32,25. “when he realized that he could not overcome him he injured his hip joint.” The subjects alluded to here are the three parts of the universe, 1) the world of the disembodied spirits, angels, collectively known as שרפים 2) the inert “stars,” planets and galaxies in outer space, and 3) the living creatures in our own “lower” part of the universe. In our part of the universe, i.e. in man, the head represents the domain of the angels in the “upper” part of the universe, the part of man that enables him to recognize his Creator. The heart (within man) symbolizes the region we call outer space, home to galaxies in the domain known as עולם הגלגלים, the world of the orbiting planets and galaxies. According to the Sefer Yetzirah, heart, soul, enable man to recognise the recurring seasons, and what makes up a year by observing them in motion and realizing that a Creator must have directed their orbits. Finally, the thighs of man ירכים, represent the “lower universe,” a domain in which G’d must be served by means of His creatures having faith in their Creator. ירכים, thighs, are viewed as tools by means of which man is able to recognize the presence and power of a Creator. ירכים is another word for רגלים, which does not only mean “legs,” but is related to הרגל, habit, the danger that man serves G’d only from rote, lip service. When Yaakov is described as “the sun was shining for him”, ויזרח לו השמש, this is a hint that from that point on Yaakov worshipped G’d also by means of his intellect. His faith henceforth was more or less secure against arguments by the evil urge that could have confused him in his faith. The word י-עקב, was an allusion to his serving G’d as an עקב, an appendix, similar to the heel; once he had the name ישראל added to his name, he had acquired the letters ראש, (head) as part of his name, signifying the far loftier spiritual plateau that formed the basis of his faith.
Genesis 32,26. “He said: ‘’let me go for dawn is breaking’”. A look at Rashi on this line reveals that he considers this a request by the spiritual alter-ego of Esau to take his turn in the heavenly choir praising the Lord in the world of the שרפים, disembodied creatures, every morning. The Midrash, (Bereshit Rabbah 78,2 and Chulin 91) commented that this “angel’s” turn to recite these praises of the Lord had not previously occurred so that he was most disturbed not to miss this opportunity of doing so. We need to understand why this angel’s turn to recite these praises of the Lord had come just then. It seems that the spiritual representatives in heaven of all the nations sing the praises of the Lord. The timing of their doing so, usually coincides with whenever one of the nations on earth whom they represent in the celestial spheres, had performed an act of kindness for the Jewish people. This enables their respective representative at the heavenly court to act as a powerful advocate on behalf of their charges down on earth. Esau at that time had done a kindness for Yaakov, which enabled his celestial representative to stake his claim to take his turn in the lineup waiting to sing these praises in the heavenly choir. As this had been the first time Esau had done something kind for Yaakov, his spiritual representative had never yet had an opportunity to be part of that choir.
Therefore, we do not find their beginning in their end. This is because of the cessation of the intellectual radiance, so that there can be a complete [qualitative] lessening [and diminishment], as in the verse, (Genesis 32:26 (and Rashi there)) “And the hollow of Yaakov’s thigh was strained.”
This is in accordance with the statement in Zohar regarding the thigh of a Sota. (Regarding the verses, (Genesis 32:26) “And Yaakov was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him etc.” and, “He saw that he did not prevail against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh,” the Zohar (Mishpatim 111b) explains that the Sitra Achara (the side of evil) persevered over the thigh, i.e. Netzach, of Yaakov, and “won” it from him. The Zohar then continues to explain that the aspect of the “thigh” (i.e., Netzach) of the aspect of Yaakov was weakened until the Prophet Shmuel came and rectified it. (It explains there that its weakness was that it did not draw down the light of prophecy. As is explained elsewhere, prophecy is primarily revealed through the aspects of Netzach and Hod.) From the time of Shmuel onward the Sitra Achara does not have dominion over the aspect of the thigh of Yaakov. Rather, the forces of evil and concealment now receive their sustenance from another “thigh,” the thigh of the adulteress (Sota). As scripture states regarding the adulteress - Sotah (Numbers 5:22), “These waters that cause curse shall enter your innards to distend the stomach and cause the thigh to fall.” The reason for this is because the Sitra Achara itself is compared to an adulteress, as stated (Proverbs 2:17), “Who forsakes the friend of her youth, and forgets the covenant of her God.” (See Zohar II 111b; Numbers 5:21, 27.))
וירא, “the angel saw;” (realised)
כי לא יוכל לו “that he could not overpower Yaakov;” the words: לא יוכל, must be understood in the sense that Moses used them before taking leave from his people, when he said: in Deut. 31,2: לא אוכל עוד לצאת ולבא, “I cannot any longer lead you in war,” where he was physically fully able, but G-d had forbidden him to do so. The author cites more examples of the word יכול occurring in that sense.
ויגע, “the angel touched in a manner which twisted (his hip joint);
בכף ירכו, “his hip joint;” he tried to dislocate his hip joint, hoping that this would cause him to fall down.
ותקע, “he succeeded in dislocating it.” This is one of the words which can be interpreted in two opposite ways depending on the context in which they appear. A well known example is the root דשן, which can mean “to saturate,” i.e. to heap more and more of a substance onto something, but it also appears as removing excess ashes from the altar. (Compare Exodus 27,3) The root תקע is more familiar to us as meaning to firmly establish something, such as the pegs holding a tent to the ground it is on. Compare Genesis 31,25, ויעקב תקע את אהלו בהר, “and Yaakov placed his tent firmly on the mountain.” Compare Leviticus 6,3, Psalms 80,10, and Psalms 52,7. In our verse it describes the angel’s attempt to uproot Yaakov.
כף ירך יעקב, “the hip joint of Yaakov.” The angel succeeded to injure Yaakov despite G-d’s assurances to him that “I will protect you wherever you go;” because Yaakov allowed himself to be frightened of Esau in spite of G-d’s assurances. [This was a lack of faith in G-d’s promise. Ed.] We find something similar with Moses, whom the angel injured and almost killed. (The incident at the inn on the way to Egypt) He had been assured of G-d’s support (Exodus 3,12) but displayed fear of Pharaoh, and refused the mission to become the leader of the Jewish people and to return to Egypt. (Exodus 3,13) He had asked G-d to send anyone but him.
THAT HE PREVAILED NOT AGAINST HIM. The angel against Jacob.
HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF HIS THIGH. Jacob’s thigh.
WAS STRAINED. Va-teka (was strained) is similar to teka (be moved) (It comes from the root yod, kof, ayin and means was moved (Cherez, Weiser). J.P.S. renders it as alienated.) in Lest My soul be moved (teka) from thee (Jer. 6:8). The hollow of Jacob’s thigh moved out of its place.
וירא כי לא יוכל לו, that he could not force him to the ground.
ויגע בכף ירכו, he hinted to him that whereas Esau would not be able to overpower him, danger lurked for him from another source, that someone of his own children would cause him grief. He referred to his daughter who would be raped by an uncircumcised gentile. This is why he injured his כף ירכו, the word כף being feminine. Yaakov understood all this from what the angel had done, but he may not have understood how this hint applied to his daughter until it happened. He may have thought that she would either take sick or die. The entire episode must be viewed as a dream he had, even though on the morrow he found himself limping. This was a sign from G’d, a reprisal of a kind, for the doubts he had expressed about the various promises G’d had made him. G’d now punished him by making him unable to rely on parts of his body that he was in the habit of relying on. True, Yaakov trusted G’d with all his heart, but he was in a constant state of worry that the promises he had received would not come true due to some sin he had committed. Considering that G’d’s promise had been repeated on different occasions, proving that in the interval Yaakov had not forfeited his claim to them, he should no longer have doubted that G’d would not keep His promise for whatever reason. His servile behaviour towards Esau, including the many times he called him adoni, “my lord,” implied a lack of trust in the validity of G’d’s promises to him. Neither should he have sent him such an elaborate gift, nor should he have prostrated himself before him repeatedly. By doing so he committed a sin and G’d punished him in this life by afflicting his body, retribution already for planning to do this. If you prefer, you may understand this story as something taking place while Yaakov was awake but that he day dreamed the event and that the man appeared to him in this dream but that was a figment of his imagination. Similar events occurred in Joshua 5,13 although the conversation between Joshua and the angel sounds very real. In Judges 6,11 a similar wakeful encounter with someone perceived as an angel in human guise happened to Gideon, and there are more such instances in the Scriptures. In fact, we could also understand the encounter between angels and Avraham, and between Lot and the angels in such terms. However, the difficulty with such an interpretation in our example is the physical contact not only described in the narrative, but the evidence of an injury sustained by Yaakov which could hardly have resulted from some hallucinatory encounter. It is difficult to reconcile the Torah’s historical note that in commemoration of Yaakov’s injury the Jewish people do not eat the organ of an animal that corresponds to the one which was injured in Yaakov’s body during that encounter.
ותקע, we find the word used in a similar meaning in Jeremiah 6,8 פן תקע נפשי ממך, “lest My essence be removed from you.”
AND HE SAW THAT HE PREVAILED NOT AGAINST HIM. Ye angels of His, ye mighty in strength, that fulfill His word. (Psalms 103:20.) Because of this (Although the angel’s strength was superior to Jacob’s, he was restrained by G-d from harming him.) the angel could not prevail against him to harm him for it was not permitted to him to do other than that which he did to him, namely, to disjoint the hollow of his thigh. Now the Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah: (77:4.) “He touched all the righteous people who were destined to come from Jacob. This refers to the generation of religious persecution.” (This refers to the religious persecution during the reign of Emperor Hadrian, 117-138 Common Era.) The purport of this Midrash is that this entire event constitutes a hint to his generations, indicating that there will be a generation from the seed of Jacob against whom Esau [Rome] will prevail to the extent of almost uprooting his seed. This occurred in one generation during the period of the Sages of the Mishnah, which was the generation of Rabbi Yehudah ben Baba (In Sanhedrin, 13 b, it is recounted how this Sage suffered martyrdom for the sake of ordaining his disciples, an act which the Romans had forbidden.) and his companions. (Possibly a reference to the Assarah harugei malchuth, the Ten great Rabbis who endured martyrdom rather than abide by the Hadrianic regulations.) As they said: (Shir Hashirim Rabbah 2:18.) “Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said, ‘If a person were to tell me, “Give your life for the sanctification of the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He,” I would give it, providing only that they slay me immediately. But in the generation of religious persecution I could not endure!’ And what did the Romans do in that generation? They would bring iron balls and heat them in fire and then place them under their arm-pits and cause their death.” And there are other generations in which they have done to us such things as these and even worse, but we have endured and it has passed over us, just as it is hinted in the verse, And Jacob came in peace. (Further, 33:18.)
כי לא יכול לו, the angel did not succeed in preventing Yaakov from crossing and fleeing.
ותקע, was dislocated, separated. We find the word as having a similar meaning in Jeremiah 6,8 פן תקע נפשי ממך; “lest My essence not become separated from you (Israel).” Whereas in the words ירך the emphasis is on the first syllable, in verse 33 in the word הירך the emphasis is on the letter ר, seeing that there it is used as a noun, whereas here it appears in an adjective mode. Whenever ירך appears in a construct form (Exodus 40,24, i.e. as something subordinate, its stress is on the first syllable) Also the kametz changes to a segol, as the word in unadorned mode is yarech and not yerech. [the author quotes parallels from the word gezel and gazel, respectively, claiming that the unadorned noun for robbery is gazel not gezel. He makes the same claim for the words geder and gader (fence) respectively. [In modern Hebrew the latter is accepted whereas “robbery,” גזל, does not appear with a kametz, but the difference between the construct mode and the unadorned noun is merely that the latter has a chataf segol instead of a regular vowel segol. Ed.]
ויגע בכף ירכו HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF HIS THIGH — The upper thigh-bone that is sunk in the hip is called כף because the flesh on it (on this bone) has the form of the hollow part of a pot-ladle (כף).
ותקע AND WAS STRAINED — It was violently torn from its joint. Similar in meaning is (Jeremiah 6:8) “Lest My soul be alienated (תקע) from thee” — i.e. removed from thee; and in the Mishna, לקעקע בצתם, which means to remove violently (לשרש) their roots.
נגע ב־ ist immer ein ungehöriges Anrühren: נוגע בטומאה בקדש usw. Häufig auch: ein heftiges, feindliches Anpacken, so (Job 1, 19) von dem Sturm, der das Haus an allen vier Seiten packte und umriss: .ויגע בארבע פנות הבית ותקע — von ,יקע schwebend werden, daher הוקע schwebend machen, henken. — כף הירך ist der starke Fleischmuskel, welcher das Schenkelbein regiert und den festen Stand und Gang auf der Erde bedingt. Der Gegner wollte Jakob von der Erde aufheben und ganz niederwerfen. Das, sah er, gelang ihm nicht. Da packte er ihn an den Hüftballen und, indem Jakob sich ihm widersetzte, wurde der Muskel von seinen Bändern losgerissen, so, daß er fortan den Fuß nicht mehr regieren konnte und Jakob dadurch hinkend wurde. Also: während des ganzen nächtlichen Kampfes bemüht sich Jakobs Gegner, ihm den Boden völlig unter den Füßen zu entziehen, ihm die Existenz auf Erden überhaupt streitig zu machen. Das gelingt nicht; wohl aber gelingts ihm, ihm die materielle Kraft zu schwächen und ihn zu hindern, sich seiner natürlichen Anlagen und Kräfte zum festen Fortschritt auf Erden zu bedienen.
לא יכול לו, seeing that most of Yaakov’s striving was oriented toward G’d and heavenly concerns. Both his thinking and his conversation had G’d and His will as its focus.
ויגע he informed him that in the future, i.e. כף ירכו, many of his offspring would become guilty of sins against G’d. While this troubled Yaakov he momentarily digressed from his concentration on G’d so that the angel could inflict an injury upon him during his lapse of concentration.
While the pair were grappling each other, he, the man, said: Release me, for the dawn has broken. I cannot remain here for I am a nocturnal being. Here the verse clearly indicates that the strange figure was a spiritual entity. Nevertheless, Jacob felt that he was capable of subduing him, and he said: I will not release you unless you bless me. Jacob demanded neither surrender nor apology, but submission, expressed in the form of a blessing. The stranger’s agreement to the request, and the bestowal of a blessing, would indicate his acceptance of Jacob.
וירא כי לא יכול לו, “when the man realized that he could not overpower him, etc.,” actually, he could have overpowered Yaakov, seeing that he was an angel disguised as a human being, איש; however he had not received permission to do this. All he had been allowed to do was to dislocate Yaakov’s hip joint. This injury too was intended to serve as a warning to the Jewish people in the future that there would arise a descendant of Esau, the Roman Empire, who would threaten to totally annihilate the people.
ויגע בכף ירכו, “he ‘touched’ his thigh-joint.” He intended thereby to cause Yaakov to fall to the ground, in the manner of two people wrestling, when each one attempts to first force his opponent to the ground. Some commentators claim that the angel tried to inflict a disabling blow on Yaakov, one that would disqualify him from performing service on the altar, as a penalty for his having taken the birth right from Esau, i.e. Esau’s privilege to perform such service for G’d. on the altar. Prior to the building of the Tabernacle all such service was performed by the firstborn of each Jewish household.
“He wrenched Jacob’s hip” [32:26]. He wrenched Jacob’s hip. That is to say, the hip that lay with two sisters. With this, the angel was able to prevail slightly over Jacob. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:25.) Ba’al ha-Turim writes. The angel saw that he could not do anything to Jacob. He thought that he was an angel and wanted to see if he had a knee, since angels have no knees. Thus, the angel was able to wrench his hip. (Ba’al ha-Turim, Genesis, 32:26.)
It is from the roots of this commandment [that it is to serve as] a hint to Israel that though they will suffer many troubles in the exile by the hand of the nations and by the hand of the [descendants] of Esav (i.e. the Christians), [the Jews] should trust that they will not perish, but rather that their descendants and name will stand firm forever, and that their redeemer will come and redeem them from their oppressor. And in continually remembering this idea through the commandment that serves as a reminder, they will stand firm in their faith and righteousness forever. And this hint [stems from the fact that] that the angel who fought with Yaakov our forefather — who according to tradition (Bereshit Rabbah 78) was the guardian angel of Esav — wished to eliminate Yaakov from the world, he and his descendants; but he could not [get the better] of him, (Genesis 32:26) but anguished him in injuring his thigh. Likewise, Esav’s seed anguishes the seed of Yaakov; but in the end, [the latter] will be saved from them. As we find (Genesis 32:32) with respect to [our] forefather that the sun shone to heal him and he was saved from pain, so will the sun of the messiah shine and he will heal us from our pain and redeem us speedily in our days, amen!
Because of its systemic failure to understand time, philosophy (an immense gift to civilization, and still our best way of thinking about thinking) has always been, and will always be, disastrous when applied to the political realm, which is what happened in revolutionary France and communist Russia. Philosophy as political ideology constantly holds forth the promise of a shortcut to utopia – and there is no shortcut. It took forty years for the Israelites to get from Egypt to the banks of the Jordan, a journey that should have taken days. That, says Maimonides, was no accident. A generation born in slavery was not ready for the responsibilities of freedom. Hope is the ability to combine aspiration with patience; to be undeterred by setbacks and delays; to have a sense of the time it takes to effect change in the human heart; never to forget the destination even in the midst of exile and disaster. The politics of progress, from Plato to Marx (what J. L. Talmon calls “secular messianism”), is always impatient, because it lacks more than a superficial understanding of time. Judaism has never ceased to wrestle with time (“I will not let you go until you bless me,” said Jacob to the angel [Gen. 32:26], as Jews have always said of time and fate). Because of this it yields a different kind of aspiration, one that I call the politics of hope.
There are commandments that serve as reminders of the fundamental commandments, such as the observance of the Sabbath, which commemorates the work of Creation, and the cessation of slave labor, which recalls the Exodus from Egypt. Similarly, the Passover, the matzah, the bitter herbs, the Feast of Tabernacles, the mezuzah, the hand and head Tefillin, and the tzitzit are all reminders. Although the blue thread is not indispensable, similar to how the absence of bitter herbs does not invalidate the obligation of eating matzah, the blue thread serves as a reminder. Therefore, the robe of the High Priest is entirely made of blue, and the golden plate on the headgear is tied with a blue cord. However, one should not wrap themselves in a prayer shawl or perform a complete mitzvah while in the marketplace, as the heart may be more prone to wander after the eyes than during prayer. I mention this because I have witnessed many individuals who are not God-fearing, yet they wrap themselves in a prayer shawl out of self-respect. The ephod and the breastplate also serve as memorials. Similarly, the sciatic nerve, which is prohibited for consumption, serves as a reversal of the eating of the Passover offering. Now I will explain that just as when a father receives upon himself and his descendants the obligation of hearing the voice of the father, as in the days of Purim and the laws of fasting, it is written in the scroll (Esther 9:27), "And Esther the queen, the daughter of Abihail, and Mordecai the Jew, wrote with full authority to confirm this second letter of Purim." They established the days of Purim for themselves and for their descendants, as the prophets and elders of the earlier generations enacted these fasts due to the calamities that befell them. Thus, they fulfilled the words of the four fasts that are recorded in the Twelve Prophets. If one does not transgress the commandments of our Lord, it is enough. And the reason for this matter is so that the kindness that the Lord bestowed upon Jacob, who alone is our father and does not share it with others like Abraham and Isaac, is remembered. For the Lord chose him and did not mix with his descendants, unlike those whom the Lord did not choose, like the Canaanites, as mentioned in the Torah (Genesis 9:25): "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." Canaan, who is from the descendants of Shem, the father of all the Hebrews, was cursed and not redeemed through their food and wine, as it is stated. And the prophet said (Hosea 12:3): "He took his brother by the heel," and the meaning of "the sons trembled" (meaning, the sons of Jacob) is explained there in Hosea. And it testifies regarding Judah, and afterwards it says, "in the womb he took his brother by the heel," which means that the Lord granted him strength so that his hand would grasp the heel of Esau before he emerged from the womb. And he did not do so for every newborn. And those who claim that this occurred after his birth is not plausible, for it is written, "His hand took hold," and if it were according to their words, it would have been written, "And afterward his brother came out, and his hand took hold." Furthermore, while he was still in the womb, Jacob grasped his brother's heel, and in his strength, he contended with God and struggled with the angel but could not prevail. And behold, he has a great merit. Additionally, according to the wisdom of physicians, each organ retains the impression of its form if it is healthy, and the opposite is true as well. And because it is written (Genesis 32:26), "And he touched the socket of Jacob's thigh," therefore, he would not eat from that day forward. They are obligated to show honor to their father, and I needed to elaborate on this matter because it is understood according to the straightforward meaning. Only the statute is mentioned, and there is nothing like the rite of circumcision. As it is written (Leviticus 12:3), "And on the eighth day, the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised." It is also written concerning the matter (Deuteronomy 5:16), "The orphan and the widow you shall remember, for you were slaves in Egypt, and you shall not overpower the works of my hands, says the Lord."
We now must awaken you to many places in Torah where the name Ya”h-י״ה is found. For example, the verse states, (Exodus 17:16) “For a hand is [raised in oath] on the throne of Ya”h-י״ה; HaShem-יהו״ה maintains a war against Amalek from generation to generation.” What does it mean, “From generation to generation-MiDor Dor-מדור דור”? The following explains this verse: The wicked Amalek (The numerical value of Amalek-עמלק-240 is the same as “doubt-Safek-ספק-240,” in that the external husk (Kelipah) of Amalek sows doubt, as will soon be intimated.) comes from the power of the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee). He adheres to him and derives his strength from him. From the time that the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee) instilled his contamination into Chavah, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a) Adam severed the plantings above (After the sin of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam separated from his wife Chavah for one-hundred and thirty years, during which time he had nocturnal emissions of his seed with she-demons (Liliot) in his dreams. He thus caused a separation between the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut and the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet. This caused the plantings to be severed, and the conduits to pour out wasted influence. This caused the separation of the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel from the Holy One, blessed is He, in which the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י was separated from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus blemishing the letters Vav-Hey-ו"ה of the Name HaShem-יהו"ה. He then repented and returned to his wife Chavah and gave birth to his son Sheth who was born “in his likeness and image.” See Genesis 5:3 and Rashi there; Midrash Bereishit Rabba 20:11, 24:6; Bamidbar Rabba 14:12; Zohar III 31a, and elsewhere.) and “estranged the Master-Alooph-אלוף.” (See Proverbs 17:9 – That is, he brought about a separation of the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus concealing the Master of the World-Aloopho Shel Olam-אלופו של עולם.) This is the secret of the withdrawal of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, the Shechinah, the essential root of which was in the lower worlds, (Midrash Shir HaShirim Rabba 5:1 to Song of Songs 5:1 – “At first, the essential root of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Ikkar Shechinah, was in the lower worlds.”) so that, “the dove could not find a resting place for the sole of its foot.” (Genesis 8:9 – The dove-Yonah-יונה refers to the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel, the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Shechinah. This verse thus hints at the exile of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, from (Isaiah 66:1) “the earth (Aretz-ארץ) is My footstool,” as well as the exile of the Jewish people. See Talmud Bavli, Brachot 53b; Tikkunei Zohar 22b.) Now, even though when the children of Israel stood at Mount Sinai, their contamination ceased, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a ibid. – “When the Jewish people stood at Mount Sinai their contamination (which was instilled in Chava by the primordial snake ceased.” That is, at the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai there was a direct revelation of the true unity and singularity of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, in a manner that there is no room for doubt-Safek-ספק-240 (which is Amalek-עמלק-240) as it states (Exodus 19:20), “And HaShem-יהו״ה came down upon Mount Sinai,” and (Exodus 20:2), “I am HaShem-יהו״ה your God,” that we heard directly from the Almighty One, as discussed before in Gate Six.) nevertheless, the blemish of the moon (Kingdom-Malchut) (Levanah-לבנה) was never removed, (See at greater length in Talmud Bavli, Chulin 60b; This is explained at length in Pardes Rimonim, Shaar 18 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon), Etz Chayim, Shaar 36 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon) and elsewhere.) except at specific intervals in time [on Rosh Chodesh-the new moon] when certain known sacrifices are offered, namely the known he-goats (Se’irim-שעירים) that Se’ir adheres to, in that Se’ir is the first (Reishit-ראשית) of Amalek’s strength. (That is, the verse (Genesis 36:20) states, “These are the sons of Se’ir-שעיר the Horite… Lotan,” and (Genesis 36:22), “Lotan’s sister was Timna,” and (Genesis 36:12), “Timna was the concubine of Esav’s son Eliphaz; She gave birth to Amalek-עמלק-240 from Eliphaz.” (Also note Rashi there, that her birth came about through promiscuity and adultery, in which there was doubt-Safek-ספק-240 as to who her father was, which is why the verse only specifies that “Lotan’s sister was Timna.”)) The sign for this is the verse, (Numbers 24:20 – Amalak was the first nation to attack the Jewish people after they left Egypt, and did so without any reason or provocation.) “The first of the nations (Reishit Goyim-ראשית גוים) is Amalek.” When Amalek came, (That is, when Amalek (who is rooted in the blemish of the moon-Levanah) came and waged war on the Ingathering of Israel, their intention was to cause the separation of the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut, by blemishing the Sign of the Holy Covenant-Ot Brit Kodesh-אות ברית קודש (the circumcision), so that it will not receive beneficence from the upper Sefirot.) he added further iniquity to the blemish of the moon by “disjointing Yaakov’s thigh,” (Genesis 32:26, 33; Also see Zohar I 146a, 170b; Zohar II 111b; Tikkunei Zohar 36a and elsewhere. Also see Shaar HaYichud of Rabbi Dovber of Lubavitch, translated as The Gate of Unity (with commentary), Ch. 35, and the explanatory notes and citations there.) thereby shattering the Kingdom of the House of David. (That is, the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut is called “The Kingship of the House of David”-Malchut Beit David-מלכות בית דוד, as discussed in the First Gate.) Now, when the plantings were severed at the time of Adam, and when Amalek “disjointed Yaakov’s thigh,” the Torah portion of Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you (Parshat Zachor) was established. (That is, the Torah portion of (Deuteronomy 25:17), “Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you,” (which is to be recalled daily, see Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 5:5). As explained in Gate Two, the aspect of Remember-Zachor-זכור corresponds to the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod, which is where Amalek attempts to cause blemish in order to separate the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut. Therefore, to repair this, the Torah portion of Zachor-זכור is recited daily to repair this. Also see Zohar II 66a.) Thus, the final two letters of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, were blemished by the hand (Yedei-ידי) of Amalek, so to speak. This was possible because the hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה afflicted them, as in the verse, (Samuel I 12:12-15 – “But when you saw that Nachash-נחש, king of the children of Ammon, came upon you, you said to me, ‘No, but a king shall reign over us!’ But HaShem-יהו״ה your God, is your King! And now, here is the king who you have chosen, who you requested; for behold, HaShem-יהו״ה has set a king over you. If you will fear HaShem-יהו״ה and worship Him and listen to His voice and do not rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, then you and the king who reigns over you shall follow after HaShem-יהו״ה your God. But if you do not listen to HaShem’s-יהו״ה voice and rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, the hand of HaShem-יהו״ה shall be against you and against your fathers.”) “The hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה shall be against you,” and it states, (Proverbs 30:19 – Also note the explanation (in Gate Six) about the verse (Deuteronomy 32:18), “You have weakened the Rock-Tzur-צור who gave birth to you, and have forgotten the God who brought you forth.” See Midrash Eichah Rabba 1:33; Also see Shaarei Tzedek of Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, Shaar 2; Zohar II 64a; Etz Chayim, Shaar 49, Ch. 7.) “the way of a snake-Nachash-נחש is upon a rock-Tzur-צור.” The sign for this is the verse, (Exodus 17:8) “Amalek came and fought against Israel in Rephidim-רפידים,” meaning, (Mechilta d’Rabbi Yishmael 17:8 – “Rephidim-רפידים means ‘The slackening of the hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים,’ in that the Jewish people were slack in their Torah study [and observance], and it is on account of this that the enemy came upon them.” That is to say, through a weakening in the Sefirot of the “hands” and below, which are the Sefirot indicated by the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה of The Name HaShem-יהו״ה, Amalak and the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmoni) are able to set their hand against those Sefirot. It is for this reason that (Exodus 17:11), “Whenever Moshe raised his hands, Israel was stronger, and when he lowered his hands, Amalek was stronger,” [and particularly, when he would raise the middle finger of his hands, which is the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet and is the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, then the children of Israel prevailed. See Zohar III 186a-b (Yenukah).]) “Because of the slackness of their hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים.”
For these caused: (Gen. 32:26) ... and he ‘struck’ (teiq’a) the thigh of Jacob, on the sciatic nerve – which is the Righteous-One.
The shophar (ram’s horn) is Higher Shekhinah – its ‘blast’ (teq’a) is the Lower Shekhinah, of which it is stated: (Gen. 32:26) And the thigh socket of Jacob was dislocated (teiq’a) – in exile.
But Jacob was strong on all sides, on the side of Isaac and the side of Abraham. (Samael) came to the right and saw Abraham, strong with the vigor of day, namely, the right side, which is Chesed. He came to the left, and saw Isaac, powerful with the strength of rigorous judgment. He came to the body and saw Jacob strong on these two sides. They surrounded him, one from here and one from there. Then "when he saw that he did not prevail against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh" (Beresheet 32:26), a place outside the body, the one pillar of the body. Then "and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was put out of joint, as he wrestled with him...".
Rabbi Ḥama ben Rabbi Ḥanina said: It was Esau’s guardian angel. That is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels, and you welcomed me” (Genesis 33:10). “He saw that he could not prevail against him, and he touched the joint of his thigh; the joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated as he wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:26). This is analogous to an athlete who was standing and wrestling with the king’s son. He lifted his eyes, saw the king standing over him, and cast himself down before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not prevail against him” – He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not prevail over him. Rabbi Berekhya said: We do not know who was victorious, whether it was the angel or Jacob, but from what is written in the verse: “A man wrestled [vaye’avek] with him” – that is, who became covered with dust [avak]; the man who was with him. (Since the man who was with him became covered with dust, that indicates that Jacob was victorious.) Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to him [to the angel]: 'He comes against you with five amulets in his possession: His merit, his father’s merit, his mother’s merit, his grandfather’s merit, and his grandmother’s merit. Evaluate yourself whether you are able even to stand against his merit.' Immediately, “he saw that he could not prevail against him.” This is analogous to a king who had a wild dog and a tame lion. The king would take his son and embolden his heart with the lion, (He was emboldened by the fact that he would emerge victorious over the lion.) so were the dog to come and confront him, the king would say to him [the dog]: ‘The lion could not stand against him, and you seek to confront him?’ So, were the nations of the world to come and confront Israel, the Holy One blessed be He will say to them: ‘Your ministering angel could not stand against him, and you seek to confront his descendants?’ “He touched the joint of his thigh” – he touched the righteous men and women, the prophets and prophetesses, who are destined to emerge from him. Which is that [generation]? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived in the wake of the Bar Kokhva rebellion.) “The joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated [vateka]” – Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Eliezer said: It was smoothed. (The bone that naturally protrudes in the thigh joint was driven inward, like a peg that is driven [tekua] into the ground.) Rabbi Berekya said in the name of Rabbi Asi: It was split like a fish. (It was split lengthwise. In this interpretation, vateka is a derivation of the word beka, meaning split.) Rav Naḥman bar Yaakov said: It was dislocated from its place, as it is written: “I was repulsed [vateka]…as My soul was repulsed [nake’a]” (Ezekiel 23:18). “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken. He said: I will not release you unless you bless me” (Genesis 32:27). Throughout that night each of them was striking the other, this one’s shield against that one’s shield. When dawn broke: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken.”
“Therefore, the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve, which is upon the hip socket, to this day, because he touched Jacob’s hip socket, at the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33). “Therefore, the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve [gid hanashe]” – why is it called gid hanashe? It is because it was dislocated [nasha] from its place. Rav Huna said: These extensions of the sciatic nerve are permitted, but Israel is holy and they prohibited it upon themselves. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei: Rabbi Yehuda said: He touched one of them, and one of them was prohibited. Rabbi Yosei said: He touched one of them, (But the Torah did not specify which leg, implying that it is prohibited to eat the sciatic nerve from either leg.) and both of them were prohibited. There is a tanna who teaches that logic dictates that it is the right one, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. There is a tanna who teaches that logic dictates that it is the left one, (It might have been the left one.) in accordance with Rabbi Yosei. The one who says that logic dictates that it is the right one – “he touched his hip [yerekho] socket.” (“His” indicates that it is the nerve in his stronger leg.) The one who says that logic dictates that it is the left one, it is as it is stated: “Because he touched Jacob’s hip [yerekh] socket.”
“It is the Lord’s kindnesses that have not ceased, for His mercies have not ended” (Lamentations 3:22). “It is the Lord’s kindnesses that have not ceased” – Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: After the Holy One blessed be He despairs of the righteous in this world, He then has mercy on them. That is what is written: “It is the Lord’s kindnesses that have not ceased.” “They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness” (Lamentations 3:23). “They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness” – Rabbi Alexandri said: Because You renew us each and every morning, we know that “great is Your faithfulness” regarding the revival of the dead. Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said: Because You renew us on the mornings of the kingdoms, (New kingdoms arise and supplant the old ones, yet the Jewish people remain (Etz Yosef).) we know that “great is Your faithfulness” to redeem us. Rabbi Ḥelbo said: Each and every day, the Holy One blessed be He creates a band of new angels and they recite a new song and go on their way. (They cease to exist.) Rabbi Berekhya said: I responded to Rabbi Ḥelbo: ‘But is it not written: “Release me, as dawn is breaking”’ (Genesis 32:27)? (This is the guardian angel of Esau, who is still in existence. Apparently, angels do not cease to exist after only one day.) He said to me: ‘Strangler, did you think you could strangle me? (Did you think you could challenge me from an explicit verse?) Gavriel and Mikhael are the supernal princes. All of them are replaced, but they are not replaced.’ (Some angels, such as Gavriel and Mikhael, and also the guardian angel of Esau, continue to exist.) Hadrian, may his bones be crushed, asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya, he said to him: ‘Do you say that each and every day the Holy One blessed be He creates a band of new angels and they recite a new song and go on their way?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘And where do they go?’ He said to him: ‘To where they were created from.’ He said to him: ‘Where are they created from?’ He said to him: ‘From the river of fire.’ He said to him: ‘How does the river of fire function?’ He said: ‘Like the Jordan, which does not stop at night and does not stop during the day.’ He said to him: ‘But the Jordan flows during the day and stops at night.’ He said to him: ‘I was watching at Beit Peor, and that Jordan, just as it flows during the day, so it flows at night.’ He said to him: ‘From where does that river of fire emerge?’ He said to him: ‘From the perspiration of the creatures that bear the Throne.’ “The Lord is my portion, says my soul; therefore I will hope in Him” (Lamentations 3:24). “The Lord is my portion, says my soul” – Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: [This is analogous] to a king who entered a province, and there were generals, captains, and commanders with him. The prominent leaders of the province resided in the middle of the province. One said: ‘I will take the generals to me.’ One said: ‘I will take the captains to me.’ One said: ‘I will take the commanders to me.’ (Each thought to curry favor with the different groups of attendants) There was one clever one there. He said: ‘I will take the king, as all the others are replaced and the king is not replaced.’ Likewise, idolaters, some worship the sun, some worship the moon, some worship wood and stone. But Israel worships only the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “The Lord is my portion, says my soul,” as I proclaim His unity twice daily, and say: “Hear Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
“Remember, Lord, what befell us; look, and see our disgrace” (Lamentations 5:1). “Remember, Lord, what befell us.” Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “The greyhound, or the goat” (Proverbs 30:31). The way of the world is that if a person raises two greyhounds in his house, one large and one small, he restrains the large one before the small one in order to spare his property. (He ensures that the large one does not kill the small one.) Rabbi Berekhya said: Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, You wrote for us in the Torah: “Remember what Amalek did to you” (Deuteronomy 25:17). He did to us, but did not do to You? Did he not destroy Your Temple?’ (The Romans, who destroyed the Second Temple, are identified as descendants of Edom, who descended from Esau. Amalek also descended from Esau, and therefore the Romans were viewed as descendants or relatives of Amalek.) The Rabbis say: Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘We are Yours and the nations of the world are Yours; why do You not have mercy upon Your nation?’ “And the king, against whom no one rises” (Proverbs 30:31). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘We are subject to forgetfulness but You are not subject to forgetfulness. There is no forgetfulness before You; therefore, “remember….”’ “Remember, Lord, the day of Jerusalem for the sons of Edom, who said: Tear her down, tear her down [aru aru], to her foundation” (Psalms 137:7). Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Destroy, destroy. Rabbi Levi said: Empty, empty. (These sages are offering interpretations of the phrase aru aru.) The one who said: Destroy, destroy, that is what is written: “The broad walls of Babylon will be destroyed [arer titarar]” (Jeremiah 51:58). According to the one who said: Empty empty, that is what is written: “To her foundation,” they reached even her foundations. (And they cleared them away.) “Look, and see our disgrace.” Rabbi Yudan said: Looking is from near and seeing is from afar. Looking is from near, as it is stated: “He looked and, behold, there was beside his head a cake baked on coals” (I Kings 19:6). Seeing is from afar, as it is stated: “He saw the place from afar” (Genesis 22:4). Rabbi Pinḥas said: Looking is from afar, as it is stated: “Look from Heaven and see” (Psalms 80:15). Seeing is from near, as it is stated: “He saw that he could not overcome him and he touched his hip socket” (Genesis 32:26).
(Fol. 90b) We are taught in a Mishna that there was a round place for collecting the ashes in the middle of the altar, and there were at times in it nearly as much as three hundred cors of ashes. "This must be an exaggeration," remarked Raba. R. Ami said: "The Pentateuch, the Prophets and the sages are wont to speak in a hyperbolical language. That the sages speak in a hyperbolical language, as quoted above; that the Pentateuch speaks in a hyperbolical language, we find in the following verses (Deut. 1, 28) Cities great and walled up to heaven; that the Prophets speak in a hyperbolical language, we find in the following verse (I Kings 1, 40) So that the earth rent with the sound of them." R. Isaac said: "In three places did the Rabbis use a hyperbolical language. They are: In connection with the ash-pile [in the altar] in connection with the vine, and in connection with the veil [of the Temple]. As to the ash-pile it was stated above; as to the vine, we find in the following Mishna: There was a golden vine at the entrance of the Temple, trailing on crystals, on which people, who donated fruit or grape clusters, would suspend on it. R. Elazar b. Zadok said: "It happened once that three hundred priests were summoned to clear [the vine of such offerings]." The veil refers to the following Mishna: Rabban Simon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R. Simon, the High-priest's substitute: "The thickness of the veil [of the Temple] was a hand-breadth. It was woven of seventy-two cords, each cord consisting of twenty-four strands. Its length was forty cubits, by twenty in width. It was made by eighty-two myriads of damsels, and two such veils were made every year. It took three hundred priests to immerse and cleanse it [if it becomes unclean]." (Fol. 91) R. Joshua b. Levi said: "The passage states (Gen. 32, 26) And he wrestled with him. This means that they did like a man wrestles with his friend, when his hand reaches the right thigh of his friend." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "The Angel appeared to him in the guise of a heathen, as the master said [elsewhere] that of an Israelite is joined by a heathen on the road, the latter should join at the right side of the Israelite." R. Samuel b. Acha said before R. Papa, in the name of Raba b. Ulla that the Angel appeared to Jacob in the guise of a scholar, as the master said [elsewhere] whoever walks at the right side of his teacher is to be considered an ignorant [hence he walked at the left of Jacob and thus reached Jacob's right thigh]. The Rabbis, however, maintain that he appeared at the back of Jacob and hit him at both thighs. But how will the Rabbis explain the passage, as he wrestled with him [which means that they had a frontal encounter]? This they explain in the way of the other interpretation of R. Joshua b. Levi, who said: "Infer from the above passage that the dust [caused by their wrestling] went upward until it reached the Divine throne; for it is written here (be'he'abko) as he wrestled with him, and again there is a passage (Nahum 1, 3) And the clouds are the dust (Abak) of His feet.
... Another version. The Rabbis said the minimum number that the word ‘stones’ can refer to is two, and Yaakov woke up in the morning and found that they were one. He was in great fear and said ‘the house of the Holy One is in this place and I was not conscious of His Presence’ as it says “And he was afraid and said, How dreadful is this place! This is no other than the house of Gd…” (Bereshit 28:17) From here they said that anyone who prays in Jerusalem is as if they pray before the Throne of Glory, because the gate of heaven is there; and an open door to hear prayer, as it says “…and this is the gate of heaven. (ibid.) Yaakov went back to gather the stones and he found that they were one stone. Yaakov took the stone and placed it as a monument in the midst of the place and oil descended from heaven for him and he pour it out on the stone, as it says “…and he poured oil on top of it.” (Bereshit 28:18) What did the Holy One do? He took its right foot, sank it to the deepest depths and made it a keystone for the earth, like a man who places a keystone in an arch. Therefore it is called foundation stone, because there is the navel of the world and from there the world was opened out. And upon it is the palace of Gd, as it says “And this stone, which I have placed as a monument, shall be a house of God…” (Bereshit 28:22) And Yaakov fell to the ground before the foundation stone, praying before the Holy One, and said ‘Master of the World! If you bring me back to this place in peace, then I will sacrifice before you whole offerings and thanksgiving offerings!’ as it says, “And Jacob uttered a vow, saying…” (Bereshit 28:20) He vowed and he fulfilled his vow. From there he picked up his feet (to go) and there he left the well, because the well had been going before him, and in the blink of an eye came to Haran as it says, [“Now Jacob lifted his feet…” (Bereshit 29:10)] “And Jacob left Be’er Sheva, and he went to Haran.” (Bereshit 28:10) About him the tradition says, “When you walk, your step will not be constrained, and if you run, you will not stumble.” (Mishle 4:12) R’ Abahu said in the name of R’ Yochanan – the angels carried him as it says, “On [their] hands they will bear you…” (Tehillim 91:12) Ya’akov’s steps were not constrained and his strength did not falter and like a mighty man he rolled back the stone from off of the mouth of the well. Then the well rose up and overflowed and the shepherds were astounded because all together they were unable to roll off the stone and he did it alone as it says, “…that Jacob drew near and rolled the rock off…” (Bereshit 29:10)
Again the angel said to him: "Let me go" (Gen. 32:26). Jacob answered him: I will not let thee go until thou hast blessed me; and he blessed him, as it is said, "And he blessed him there" (Gen. 32:29). Again he said to him: "Let me go" (Gen. 32:26). He answered him: I will not let thee go until thou tellest me what thy name is. And (the angel) called his name Israel like his own name, for his own name was called Israel. Jacob wished to prevail over the angel, and to throw him down upon the earth. What did the angel do? He took hold of the sinew of the hip, which was upon the hollow of Jacob's thigh, and he lifted the sinew of his hip (out of its place), and it became like the fat of the dead. Therefore the children of Israel are forbidden to eat of the sinew of the hip which is upon the hollow of the animal's thigh, as it is said, "Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sinew of the hip which is upon the hollow of the thigh" (Gen. 32:82).
Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Ḥelbo: It is written: “A man wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:25). We do not know who was dominated by whom; whether the angel was dominated by Jacob or Jacob was dominated by the angel, except from what is written: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken” (Genesis 32:27). The angel said to Jacob: ‘Release me, as the time for my lauding has arrived.’ Thus, the angel was dominated by Jacob. In what guise did he appear to him? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He appeared to him in the guise of Esau’s guardian angel. That is what is written: “For I have therefore seen your face like seeing the face of an angel” (Genesis 33:10). [Jacob] said to [Esau]: ‘Your face is like that of your angel.’ This is analogous to a king who had a tamed lion and a wild dog. What did the king do? He brought the lion and incited it against his son. He would say: If the dog comes upon my son, my son will say: If I overcame the lion will I not be able to overcome the dog? So too, when the nations of the world come upon Israel, the Holy One blessed be He says to then: ‘Your guardian angel was not able to withstand their ancestor, will you be able to overcome them?’ Rabbi Huna said: He appeared to him as a herdsman; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: (The angel said to Jacob.) ‘Cross mine and I will cross yours.’ (Help me cross the stream with my livestock, and I will help you cross with your livestock. Some suggest that the text should read: Cross yours and I will cross mine. This is consistent with the version of the text in Bereshit Rabba 77:3 and with the continuation of the midrash here (Etz Yosef).) After Jacob our patriarch crossed his, he said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ Once he returned, “a man wrestled with him.” (The angel, appearing as a herdsman, fought with Jacob under the pretense that after crossing his own livestock, Jacob had come to take some of his livestock.) Rabbi Ḥiyya the Great and Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi were engaged in commerce and were dealing silk fabric. They entered Tyre and engaged in their labor. When they exited the city gates, they said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ They returned and found a bundle of silk fabric. They said: This matter is from Jacob our grandfather, as it is written: “A man wrestled with him.” (This event occurred after Jacob had returned to see if he forgot anything. They derived from Jacob’s behavior that checking if one forgot anything is a good habit.) The Rabbis say: He appeared to him as an arch robber; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: Cross mine and I will cross yours. The angel crossed Jacob’s flocks in the blink of an eye. Our patriarch Jacob was crossing the flocks of the angel, and he was returning and finding other flocks all that night. What did Jacob our patriarch do? Rabbi Pinḥas said: At that moment, Jacob wrapped a soft woolen scarf around his neck. He said to him: ‘Sorcerer, sorcerer, you are a wizard, but wizardry is not effective at night.’ Rabbi Huna said: At that moment the angel said: ‘Shall I not inform him with whom he is dealing?’ What did he do? He placed a finger on a rock and it began bursting into flames. [Jacob] said to him: ‘With this you are seeking to frighten me? I am constituted entirely from it,’ as it is stated: “The house of Jacob will be fire” (Obadiah 1:18). Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to Esau’s guardian angel: ‘Are you standing against him? He is coming against you with five amulets in his hand: His merit, the merit of his father, the merit of his mother, the merit of his grandfather, and the merit of his grandmother. Assess yourself relative to him, as you are unable to stand even against his own merit.’ Immediately, “he saw that he could not overcome him” (Genesis 32:26). Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. [This is analogous] to an arch robber who was struggling with the son of a king. He lifted his eyes and saw that his father the king was standing over him, and he submitted to him. So too, when the angel saw the Divine Presence standing over Jacob, he submitted before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not overcome him.” Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. “He touched the socket of his thigh” (Genesis 32:26), the righteous men and the righteous women and the prophets and the prophetesses who were destined to emerge from him and his sons. What is that? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived after the destruction of the Temple, when the Romans persecuted the residents of the Land of Israel.) “The socket of Jacob’s thigh was dislocated [vateka]” (Genesis 32:26), Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Eliezer says: He smoothed it. (The bone that protrudes from the thigh no longer protruded.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rav Asi: (The Hebrew text says Ravasa, which is short for Rav Asi.) He fractured it like [one splits] a fish. (Lengthwise.) Rabbi Naḥman bar Yaakov said: He dislocated it, just as you say: “My soul was alienated [vateka] from her” (Ezekiel 23:18).
The expansion of the גיד הנשה is the “מרכבה,” vehicle, of Samael in our world which touched, i.e. hurt, the thigh joint of Jacob. The Arizal explains Genesis 32, 26: וירא כי לא יוכל לו, ויגע בכף ירכו, "When he saw that he could not overpower him, he touched his thigh joint," as referring to Jacob's descendants. Samael, the guardian angel of Esau, left his mark on all the צדיקים, righteous people, who would stem from Jacob, i.e. any generation in which Jews would abandon their religion, etc. The words ותקע כף ירך יעקב, "Jacob's thigh joint was disjointed" (ibid.), are an allusion to the negative effect of the destruction of the Temple on this earth on the Celestial Regions. G–d swore an oath that He would not take up residence in the Jerusalem of the Heavenly Regions until the Jerusalem on earth had been restored and He would be able to take up residence there. This concept is known to us as "the name of G–d is not complete, neither is His throne complete, until matters on earth are developing to G–d's satisfaction."Put differently: "what happens down here is called גיד הנשה. The Talmud speaks about גזרות קשות כגידים, decrees as tough as sinews." The sinews referred to in such statements are the branches of the גיד הנשה. This גיד is the "evil" sinew of the 365 sinews in our bodies because it strengthens the power of Samael, i.e. the power of Esau. The damage to the Celestial Regions is done in a single "day." The word "day" in those regions is the one thousand years that Bereshit Rabbah 8, 2 describes as the length of G–d's day. [Because of this definition of "day," Adam could live almost one thousand years in terms of our days, though G–d had said he would die on the day he would eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Ed.] The Zohar, commenting on Lamentations 1, 13: נתנני שוממה כל היום דוה, "He has made me desolate, I am in misery a whole day," states that this verse proves that when the destruction of the Temple was decreed, the exile was meant to last at least one thousand years.
Thus, in the case of Jacob, I admit that the entire narrative of “and Jacob sent messengers” (4. Gen. 32:4 ff.) occurred as something seen in a dream. Nonetheless, in my opinion Jacob carried this out when he awoke, as happened in many such cases. (5. Maimonides, in the Guide II:42, asserts that the entire section occurred in a vision, including the preparations for the meeting with Esau (vv. 14-24) and the wrestling with the angel (vv. 25-32). Kaspi, both here and in the Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 22), asserts that the intermediary passage, where Jacob prepared to meet Esau, did occur outside of the prophetic vision.) As for the wrestling with the angel, (6. Gen. 32:25-32.) this never occurred other than in a dream. The touching of the hollow of his thigh (and the passage following) until “the sinew of the thigh vein” (7. Gen. 32:26, 33. This comment is intended to answer the following problem: If indeed the wrestling with the angel was but a mental occurrence, how and why did Jacob limp in the morning (v. 32)?) was intended as an allusion to evil events that would befall Jacob in respect of women, for nasheh (“thigh vein”) is equivocal, (8. The Hebrew term could also be taken as the root for ’ishah (“woman”); consequently, the maiming of that limb would be an oblique allusion to being maimed on account of woman. Accordingly, Jacob was maimed in the thigh during the course of the vision, through some divine instrument.) similar to ḥovlim and the like. (9. Cf. Guide II:43, which refers to ḥovlim and other instances of metathesis. On Kaspi’s use of metathesis, see above Chapter 2.) Accordingly he experienced the events of Dinah, (10. He is referring to the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) Rachel, (11. He is referring to the tragic death of Rachel in Gen. 35:16 ff.) and Rebeccah’s handmaid. (12. Gen. 35:8. All three instances caused Jacob much grief.)
על אויביך ועל שונאיך, “against your enemies and those who hate you.” The former are the Ishmaelites, Arabs; the latter refer to the descendants of Esau. The prophet Micah (Micah 5,8) speaks of “your hand shall prevail over your foes, and all your enemies shall be cut down.” This is a reference to the two nations to which we are enslaved and amongst which we are scattered. This is why the sages in Baba Batra 73 refer to two geese in a story related by Rabbi Bar bar Chana. The story goes as follows: “I once walked in the desert and we saw these two geese which lost their feathers due to their excessive obesity. I extracted a continuous thin line of honey from them. I said to them: “are we going to have a share in the world to come?” One of them lifted its body, whereas the other lifted its flank.” When Rabbi Bar bar Chana came to Rabbi Eleazar (and told him of his experience) the Rabbi said to him that the meaning is that in the future the Jewish people will have to render an accounting. Thus far the Talmud. [The fact is that the entire story does not appear in our editions of the Talmud. Rabbi Chavell claims he has found it in a similar form in Agadot haTalmud. Ed.] The meaning of the whole story is that the sage (Rabbi Bar bar Chana) saw in his mind, while in an isolated part of the world, i.e. the desert, that these two Empires, that of the Mohammedans and that of the Romans, attained tremendous power in this world. This was symbolized by the obesity of the geese. When the Rabbi asked them: “are we not going to have a share in your prosperity in the future?,” the meaning of the words: “one of them lifted its wings” is a reference to Ishmael This was a symbol that the Ishmaelites will flee to us in the future and take refuge under the wings of the Shechinah. They will give us their beasts to use as sacrifices to the Lord on their behalf. This is the meaning of Isaiah 60,7: “all the flocks of Kedar shall be assembled for you (the Jewish people); the rams of Nevayot shall serve your needs.” This indicates that these Ishmaelites will convert to Judaism. It also is an allusion to the fact that they will wear phylacteries, seeing the phylacteries have been compared to wings (Shabbat 49). Concerning the other goose which raised its rump, this is a reference to Edom, whose protective angel had dislocated Yaakov’s hip joint in the nocturnal encounter described in Genesis 32,26. It is also an allusion to the commandment of circumcision, i.e. that in the time under discussion these people would convert and circumcise themselves. There is no need to add that at that time political and moral sovereignty will be restored to the Jewish people. This is the symbolism portrayed by the fatness of these two geese and the honey which dripped from them. As to the words of Rabbi Eleazar that the Israelites would be called upon to give an accounting at that time, the meaning is that they will have to give an accounting for not having become penitents during all the preceding years, and have tarried so long before living as true Jews. The reason the term אויב is applied to the Roman Empire, whereas the term שונא is applied to the Islamic Empire, is that the former is a term describing fiercer hatred and animosity than the word שונא. אויב is an enemy who is full of hatred in his heart, knows no mercy. A שונא, on the other hand, though he too inflicts hurt and death, tempers it with a degree of mercy. Proof of this found in Isaiah 47,6: ”but you showed them no mercy. Even upon the aged you made your yoke exceedingly heavy.” [actually in that chapter the prophet speaks of the cruelty of the Babylonians, not the Ishmaelites. Ed.] The very etymology of the word אויב, reflects that it refers to unrelenting hatred; it is derived from אבוי, a word which has the same letters as אויב, and means “woe.” The reason that the Torah mentions אויביך before speaking of שונאיך, [when we would have expected the Torah to describe matters in an ascending order, Ed.] is that it wanted to link the שונאיך to the pursuit, i.e. אשר רדפוך, “who have pursued you.” This nation has traditionally uprooted our exiles wherever their rule extended. The reason they are referred to by the term שונא, “someone who hates,” is that G’d Himself describes His relationship with Esau with the words: “I have hated Esau,” (Maleachi 1,3). Midrash Mishley confirms this when explaining the words (Proverbs 30,23) “because of the loathsome woman when she becomes married.” The “loathsome, hateful one,” is understood to be a reference to Esau. The verse from Scripture cited as proof is also the one from Malachi I,3. The final words in that verse in Proverbs, i.e. ושפכה כי תירש גברתה, “and when a slave-woman inherits her mistress” (another phenomenon confounding Solomon who describes such phenomena as intolerable), is a reference to Ishmael, seeing his mother Hagar was the slave-woman of Sarah.) Seeing that the attitude of the Ishmaelites towards the Jews is more hostile than that of the Edomites, the Torah describes them as “your enemies.” This is confirmed by the popular saying: “rather under the Edomites than under the Ishmaelites.” [The idea is that if Jews have a chance which exile to choose they would invariably prefer to live under the yoke of the former. Ed.] G’d, when describing for how long He will hold generations responsible for the deeds of their forefathers, says ועל רבעים לשאוני, “and to the fourth generation concerning those who qualify for the term שונאי, “those who hate Me” (Exodus 20,5). Concerning G’d’s אויביו, “His enemies,” however, we read in Psalms 37,20: ואויבי ה' כיקר כרים כלו בעשן כלו, “and the enemies of the Lord shall be consumed like meadow grass consumed in smoke.” The verse teaches that nothing at all will remain of these “enemies.” This is why they are compared to the fat of the fat sheep which goes up completely in smoke (on the altar). Solomon refers to both of these nations as “two daughters,” mentioning that both are destined for Gehinom, hell. This is what he meant when he wrote in Proverbs 30,15 that “the leech has two daughters, ‘give give’!;” He compared Gehinom, the place where judgment is meted out to the souls of the wicked, to a leech which is a blood-sucker. Concerning these two nations the prophet in Isaiah 66,17 wrote: “those who sanctify themselves and purify themselves to enter the groves;” the former who sanctify themselves are the Edomites whose habit it is to shake their fingers in different directions. The latter are the Ishmaelites whose habit it is to bathe their hands and feet (to cleanse them) but not their hearts, which is their essence. The prophet in that verse continues אחר אחד בתוך, and alludes to the manner in which the Edomites sanctify themselves in the center of the garden. Alternatively, these last three words may be an allusion to the day of their judgment, a day already appointed for that purpose. One of these nations will be judged on a Friday preceding the onset of the Sabbath, whereas the other will be judged immediately after the Sabbath, the Sabbath remaining “in the center;” when the prophet describes one of these people as “consuming swine,” he refers to the Edomites, whereas the ones described in that same verse as eating reptiles and mice, are the Ishmaelites. The verse concludes by saying: “they will perish together.”
וחובר חבר, the tone-sign is on the letter ח just as it is in the word חרב, cherev, both in Jeremiah 21,2 and in Samuel II 11,25, this is proven by the plural mode in Psalms 56,8 being חברים, chavarim, with the emphasis on the letter ר just as in melech- melachim, and the vowel kametz, instead of tzeyreh.. If the emphasis were on the letter ב, i.e. on the last syllable as in חבר, (friend) in Psalms 119,63 Genesis 32,26 ירך as well as in the words גדר, gader in Numbers 22,24 where the emphasis is on the letter ד, then the plural mode would not have the vowel kametz under the second consonant in Psalms 56,8 but would have the vowel tzeyreh.
her soul was disgusted with them [Heb. וַתֵּקַע.] That Jehoiakim and Zedekiah rebelled against them. וַתֵּקַע is esloched in Old French, dislocated. וַתֵּקַע is like (Gen. 32: 26): “and the upper joint of Jacob’s thigh was dislocated (וַתֵּקַע).” הוֹקָעָה is an expression of joining and inserting a pole into the earth, and also when it is withdrawn from the earth, is the expression קְעִיָה appropriate for it, just as you say (Ps. 80:10): “it took root (וַתַשְׁרֵשׁ),” as an expression of taking root, and (Job 31:12), “and it uproots (תְּשָׁרֵשׁ) all my grain,” as an expression of uprooting. Similarly (Isa. 17:6): “on its branches (בִּסְעִפֶיהָ) when it produces fruit,” is an expression of branches, and (ibid. 10:33), “lops off (מְסָעֵף) the branches,” is an expression of cutting off the branches of the tree and its boughs.
and beseeched him When he said to him, “I will not let you go unless you bless me” (Gen. 32:26), and the angel was begging him, “Let me go now. Eventually, the Holy One, blessed be He, will reveal Himself to you in Bethel, and there you will find Him, and there He will speak with us, and He and I will agree with you concerning the blessings that Isaac blessed you.” Now that angel was Esau’s genius, and he was contesting the blessings.
Where did it come from, this Jewish ability to turn weakness into strength, adversity into advantage, darkness into light? It goes back to the moment in which our people received its name, Israel. It was then, as Jacob wrestled alone at night with an angel, that as dawn broke his adversary begged him to let him go. “I will not let you go until you bless me,” said Jacob (Gen. 32:26). That is the source of our peculiar, distinctive obstinacy. We may have fought all night. We may be tired and on the brink of exhaustion. We may find ourselves limping, as did Jacob. Yet we will not let our adversary go until we have extracted a blessing from the encounter. This turned out to be not a minor and temporary concession. It became the basis of his new name and our identity. Israel, the people who “wrestled with God and man and prevailed” (v. 28), is the nation that grows stronger with each conflict and catastrophe.
MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then.
And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the sciatic nerve of the right thigh is forbidden because the verse states: “And when he saw that he could not prevail against him, he touched the spoon of his thigh; and the spoon of Jacob’s thigh was strained, as he wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:26). The angel grappled with Jacob like a man who hugs another in order to throw him to the ground, and his hand reaches to the spoon of the right thigh of the other.
The Gemara asks: And the Rabbis, what do they derive from this phrase: “As he wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:26)? The Gemara answers: They require it for the other interpretation of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: This teaches that the dust [avak] from their feet ascended to the throne of glory. It is written here: “As he wrestled [behe’avko] with him,” and it is written there in a description of how God will punish the wicked: “The Lord, in the whirlwind and in the storm is His way, and the clouds are the dust of His feet” (Nahum 1:3).
He [the man] saw that he could not defeat him, and he struck the socket [girth] of his hip. [The girth of] Yaakov’s hip joint was dislocated as he wrestled with him.
And the hollow of Jakob's thigh was displaced in contending with him.
And he saw that he had not power to hurt him, and he touched the hollow of his thigh, and the hollow of Jakob's thigh was distorted in his contending with him.
| וַיֹּ֣אמֶר שַׁלְּחֵ֔נִי כִּ֥י עָלָ֖ה הַשָּׁ֑חַר וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ לֹ֣א אֲשַֽׁלֵּחֲךָ֔ כִּ֖י אִם־בֵּרַכְתָּֽנִי׃ | 27 E | Then he said, “Let me go, for dawn is breaking.” But he answered, “I will not let you go, unless you bless me.” |
שלחני כי עלה השחר, “give me permission to leave for dawn has arisen!” “Until now I held you up from proceeding according to plan; now you have permission to proceed on your way.” An alternate exegesis of this strange conversation: The angel told Yaakov that since it now was almost daylight, he no longer had anything to fear from him. It is not customary for destructive forces to do their jobs during the daylight hours.
שלחני כי עלה השחר, “give me permission to leave for dawn has arisen!” “Until now I held you up from proceeding according to plan; now you have permission to proceed on your way.” An alternate exegesis of this strange conversation: The angel told Yaakov that since it now was almost daylight, he no longer had anything to fear from him. It is not customary for destructive forces to do their jobs during the daylight hours. כי אם ברכתני, “unless you first give me a blessing.” Yaakov meant that he would not accept the angel’s words until he had demonstrated that he meant it, by giving him a blessing. After that he would feel confident that he no longer had reason to fear him and would not seek revenge because he had failed to disable him. (Rash’bam)
כי אם ברכתני, “unless you first give me a blessing.” Yaakov meant that he would not accept the angel’s words until he had demonstrated that he meant it, by giving him a blessing. After that he would feel confident that he no longer had reason to fear him and would not seek revenge because he had failed to disable him. (Rash’bam)
לא אשלחך, "I will not let you depart, etc." When the angel said to Jacob that he had struggled with a celestial being and had prevailed, he meant that he now could not depart without Jacob's permission. When Jacob said: "unless you bless me," he meant that he would assure him that the injury he caused to Jacob's hip-joint would not be permanent. It is also possible that the mere fact that Jacob now realised he had wrestled with an angel prompted him to ask for a blessing from that angel.
ויאמר שלחוני, “he (the angel) said: ‘let me go!’” The angel was afraid that if he were to leave without having obtained Yaakov’s permission they would punish him in heaven with having to endure the פולסי דנורא [some physical punishment administered by a fiery rod and mentioned in Chagigah 15 and elsewhere as an instrument for disciplining wayward angels. Ed.] We have another reference to this incident in (Hoseah 12,5) “He strove with an angel and prevailed; the other had to weep and implore him.”
כי עלה השחר, “for dawn as risen.” When the angel asked to leave before daybreak Yaakov asked him: “are you a thief that you need to fear daylight?” He answered “I am an angel and ever since I have been created I have not yet had the opportunity to sing a song of praise to the Lord in the heavenly choir. Today is my opportunity.” There is a reference to this in Scripture (Job 38,7) ברן יחד כוכבי בוקר ויריעו כל בני אלוקים. “When the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy.” The time of dawn is the time when the קדושה is recited as mentioned by Isaiah 6,3 “and one would call to he other: Holy, Holy, Holy.” Hearing this, Yaakov replied: לא אשלחך כי אם ברכתני, “I will not let you go unless you first bless me.” He wanted Esau’s angel to acknowledge that the blessing he had received from Yitzchak was acknowledged by Esau as being rightfully his. Thereupon the angel said: לא יעקב יאמר עוד שמך כי אם ישראל, “your name will no longer be Yaakov but Israel.” He meant that from now on people will no longer say that you obtained the blessings by subterfuge, but they will admit that you are the rightful recipient of them. Alternatively, what the angel meant was that if anyone were to accuse Yaakov of having swindled Lavan they would be proven wrong as Yaakov had been accorded the attribute “Truth”, i.e. that he had acted truthfully in all his undertakings. This was confirmed in Michah 7,20 “You have given “truth” to Yaakov.”
ויאמר שלחני, he meant that he had been sent by G’d to Yaakov to demonstrate to him by a factual illustration that he would not overcome him, and that a mere human being such as Esau would certainly not be able to harm him. Now that I have accomplished my mission, please let me go. In other words, “unless you have any other request from me, I am leaving.” Yaakov said that indeed he did want something else of him, and until that was granted he would not let him depart. He wanted to receive the angel’s blessing. The reason that the angel added the words
כי עלה השחר, that it is already becoming morning, was that Yaakov had no reason to be afraid, as the night, the time for fear, had already passed. Being alone, without escort during daylight is no reason for concern.
כי עלה השחר, seeing that it is daylight already it is time for you to be on your way. (to the meeting with Esau).
כי אם ברכתני, as a sign that you have parted from me in peace, that I will not suffer harm or damage through having been in a struggle with you.. Now that it had become daylight Yaakov realised for the first time that his adversary had been an angel.
כי עלה השחר FOR THE DAY BREAKETH, and I have to sing God’s praise at day (Chullin 91b; Genesis Rabbah 78:1).
ברכתני [EXCEPT] THOU BLESS ME — admit my right to the blessings which my father gave me and to which Esau lays claim.
לא אשלחך כי אם־, wörtlich: ich entlasse dich nicht; denn (ich entlasse dich) wenn du mich gesegnet. So überall das לא־ כי אם־, das כי ist immer elliptisch: denn ich tue es, wenn — also ich tue es nur, wenn usw. — Jakobs Gegner kann also nur kämpfen, so lange es Nacht auf Erden ist, und zwar, so lange es Nacht ist, scheint er, wenn auch nicht der Sieger, doch der Mächtigere zu sein. Sobald es aber Tag zu werden beginnt, tritt das Gegenteil in die Erscheinung und Jakob wird der "Maßgebende" für die Beendigung des Kampfes. Und die Bedingung, die Jakob für das Ende des Kampfes setzt, somit das Ziel des Ganzen, ist: die Anerkennung, daß Jakob statt Anfeindung Segen und Förderung verdiene, indem nur in dieser Anerkennung die Völker sich selber segnen, und sich die Verheißung erfüllt: ונברכו בך כל משפחות האדמה ובזרעך. Die ganze Nacht hindurch, spricht daher Jakob, hast du mich angegriffen, mich also als ein Hindernis betrachtet, dessen Vernichtung in unablässigem Kampfe anzustreben wäre. Jetzt, da es tagt, gibst du den Kampf auf, ich aber nicht früher, als bis du mir die segnende Anerkennung gezollt. Das Ziel der Geschichte liegt nicht darin, daß Jakob gezwungen werde, in die Masse der Völker aufzugehen, sondern umgekehrt, daß die Völker zur Einsicht gelangen, gerade in dem, inmitten aller Kämpfe von Jakob vertretenen und emporgehaltenen Prinzip liege auch das Heil der Völker, dem sie sich huldigend anzuschließen, und das vielmehr sie selbst mit allen ihren geistigen und materiellen Mitteln zu fördern, ja als einziges Ziel anzustreben haben. —
לא אשלחך, this utterance by Yaakov confirms what the sages tell us that the righteous are greater than the ministering angels (Sanhedrin 92).
Concede to me the blessings with which my father blessed me... You might ask: Perhaps Yaakov requested that he actually bless him? The answer is: The angel replied, “No longer will your name be spoken of as Yaakov.” How did this answer [Yaakov’s request]? Perforce, the angel’s answer means as Rashi explains: “It will no longer be said that the blessings came to you through deceit and trickery.” This implies that Yaakov had requested for a concession to the blessings, and the angel replied accordingly. (Re’m)
He, the angel, said to him: What is your name? He said: Jacob. Had this been a normal conversation between people, Jacob presumably would have asked the figure why he attacked him if he was unaware of his identity. However, he understood that the angel knew his name, and his question was a ceremonial introduction to his blessing.
כי אם ברכתני, “unless you have first blessed me.” In accordance with the accepted principle that the person who inflicts injury is in a better position to heal same than anyone else by pronouncing a formula wishing his victim a speedy recovery. The angel wanted to know Yaakov’s name, as it is mandatory for the healer to know the victim’s name if his efforts are to be crowned with success. Another explanation of the meaning of כי אם ברכתני, has Yaakov asking for a blessing from the angel, as an acknowledgment that he had prevailed in the struggle. with celestial forces. This was the reason why Yaakov asked the angel for his name. He wanted to be able in the future to be able to tell whomever it concerned that he had battled an angel to a standstill. The angel protested that it would be embarrassing for him that Yaakov should boast to have overcome him. In lieu of revealing his name, he bestowed a blessing on Yaakov that incorporated an allusion to this nocturnal encounter every time he would be addressed by this name.
“He said, let me go” [32:27]. The angel said: send me away from you. The angel thought that because I was sent by the Holy One to Jacob, I do not want to go away without permission from Jacob. Therefore, the angel pleaded with Jacob to let him go, since Jacob was holding him. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:27.)
“For dawn is breaking” [32:27]. The morning star is about to rise. Jacob said to the angel, are you a thief that you say that it is almost day? It is customary for thieves to be afraid when it is day. The angel responded that he was no thief. However, since the day that he was created he never sang praises before the Holy One and now the time has come that I should sing praises, since the morning star is about to rise. Therefore, let me go. Jacob responded: I will not let you go until you will bless me and you should strengthen the blessings with which my father had blessed me. The angel responded: your name should be Israel, because you vanquished Esau and Laban and angels. Your name should not be Jacob. This means that you have falsified. That is to say, you took away the blessing from Esau with deceit. Now the angel of Esau agreed with the blessings that Jacob had received from his father. Therefore, we say, “you will give truth to Jacob” [Micah, 7:20]. That is to say, whatever Jacob did to Esau and Laban, he did everything with truth and no deceit. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:27.) The Midrash writes. (Genesis Rabbah, 78.3.) “For you have striven with divine beings” [32:27]. This means that the image of Jacob is engraved on the Throne of Glory of the Holy One. Therefore, the angel said to Jacob: you have vanquished God. That is to say, you have dominion by God, since you are on the Throne of Glory. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:29.) Hizkuni writes. “For dawn is breaking” [32:27], means that the angel said: it is almost day. You don not need to fear me, because day is the time when demons and angels have no power to harm people when it is day. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:27.)
Although it is a scientific fact that major physical phenomena are reversible, G-d’s ability to destroy earth proves that it had not always existed, that He had created it. Otherwise, whence would G-d have taken the power to destroy it? The fact that the reversals of certain phenomena are the product of G-d’s free will and did not happen of their own, needs to be demonstrated. The verse (Jeremiah 31,10) "He who disperses Israel will gather it in," which might indicate the opposite, when viewed superficially, does in fact not prove that such reversals occur automatically. Jeremiah does not refer to the ingathering as being an automatic corollary of a previous dispersal, but as an act of G-d requiring supernatural means. This is demonstrated clearly by the context of the whole chapter in which this verse appears. Shepherds do likewise with their flocks, and so does the Lord. Sometimes He scatters in order to discipline, sometimes He collects people. All this is due to G-d exercising benevolent Personal Providence. This is true also when such happenings occur as part of the shepherd's vocation. When we talk about natural phenomena, the same does not hold true. Gideon, who wanted to see if the wool which is naturally moisture absorbent could also be made moisture repellant at the will of G-d, had his wish fulfilled (Judges Chapter 6). Thereby the power of G-d to reverse the laws of nature which He Himself had formulated had been demonstrated. Similarly, King Hezzekiah (Kings II, chapter 20). When the king saw the shadow of the sun dial reversing itself, he had found proof of the Creator's ability to reverse the seemingly irreversible processes of nature. The story of the deluge also demonstrates that He who has established natural law can also reverse it. Thereby He proves that His existence had preceded the laws of the universe, else He could not have demonstrated mastery over these laws. G-d therefore is able to decree after the deluge that natural law shall not again cease to function normally. Summer, winter, heat, and cold will all alternate at predictable intervals, as stated in Genesis 8,22. Noach and his sons, having witnessed first a universe which functioned beautifully then a universe in the process of destruction and lastly a newly functioning universe, were the witnesses for all future generations of the truth of the claim that G-d had created the universe ex nihilo. According to the Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 11, the technical method that brought about the flood was the relocation of two stars forming the Pleiades. Even if mankind were to serve G-d, but under the mistaken impression that the laws of nature are immutable, such service of G-d would degenerate if man grew to believe that they were only in touch with intermediaries such as the sun and the moon, and that the Lord Himself would forever unconditionally allow these intermediaries to possess independent power which could not be curbed. At this point, the author engages in polemics against all those Jewish philosophers who, in common with their Greek counterparts, attempt to explain away most of the miracles. He singles out Ralbag especially. He defends the Rambam as having been wilfully misunderstood by some who read his commentary. He ascribes the tendencies of some commentators to rob the story of miracles of their fundamental value to two considerations. 1) No one can perform miracles that outclass those performed by Moses. 2) The beneficiaries of such miracles were not worthy of such far-reaching changes in nature to be performed for their sake. The Talmud Shabbat 53 relates that a husband whose wife died while leaving behind a small baby was in a predicament since he could not afford to hire a wet nurse to nurse the baby. A miracle occurred; the father's nipples produced milk on which the baby fed and survived. Rabbi Joseph views this as an extreme compliment to the father for whose sake such a great miracle was performed. Abaye, on the other hand, feels that it points out the unworthiness of the father, since G-d had to resort to supernatural means to supply the infant's needs. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the father's position was such that a miracle was not denied him, in order for him to fulfil his function of raising the infant. We have to view the role of pious men and prophets at various times in our history in a similar light. On the one hand, the generation of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai and of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, were praised because there was no need for a rainbow to appear during their respective lives (Ketuvot 76). They were praised for the fact that no miracles were needed in their time. No doubt, had the need arisen, these men would have been able to call on the power of miracle to be used on behalf of their contemporaries. Jacob moved a rock meant to be removable only by a whole group of shepherds. On the other hand, when praying for victory against Amalek, Moses’ss hands were so weak they had to be supported. This does not make Jacob superior to Moses. Certain needs arise at certain times. Only at those times can it be determined whether a miracle is in place to meet those needs. Examples are numerous. Joshua's commanding the sun and moon to be arrested in their orbits, does not denigrate the powers of Moses one iota. Had Moses found himself in the same predicament Joshua had found himself in, he would have been able to perform a similar miracle. Even a Yehu, a king of Israel who had failed to remove the golden calves Jerobam had erected, was enabled to wipe out all the priests of the Baal singlehandedly, something none of those greater than he had been able to do. Elijah and Elisha revived the dead, feats not credited to Moses, yet no one puts down Moses’s abilities on account of that. If you will, the revelation at Mount Sinai, and Moses’ss role in it as well as the participation of the entire nation, so outclass and overshadow any miracles performed by anyone subsequently or prior to that, that Moses’ss honor as the prophet/miracleworker par excellence can never be called into question. At that time, Moses had been instrumental in a chidush ha-olam, a renewal of the universe, so to speak. What happened was such a thorough reversal of all natural laws that the work of later prophets pales into relative insignificance by comparison. If this were not so, the miracles predicted in Yoel chapters three and four, would not be capable of being performed without relegating Moses to an inferior position vis a vis the Messiah or whoever will be G-d’s instrument when the time comes to fulfil those prophecies. In fact, all subsequent miracles are ascribed by G-d to Moses, when G-d promises in Exodus 34,10 that all the miraculous acts which are yet to occur are based on what G-d does for, with, and through Moses. In Moses, as it were, rests the fountainhead of all miracles ever performed by any prophet after him. In all of the Torah, we do not find any events which would constitute fulfilment of G-d’s promise to Moses made at that point. Joshua 11,16 makes it clear that throughout his career as leader of the Jewish people, his role remained that of being Moses’ss disciple. Nothing he did is to be understood as being innovative. It may have been Moses’ss desire to personally carry out these miracles as demonstrations of G-d’s power, which prompted him to request permission from G-d to cross the river Jordan. G-d’s denial of this request was coupled with the assurance that indeed his disciple would perform such miracles, thus fulfilling G-d’s promise to Moses in Exodus 34,10. The instructions to Moses to invest Joshua with part of his own glory and Moses’ss subsequent action cause our sages to comment that whosoever leaves behind him pupils fit to take his place has not in fact died at all (Midrash on Numbers 26,20). Our sages have accepted the principle that the Torah occasionally employs language in the manner people do in their every day speech. Therefore, we find both exaggeration and hyperbole. This fact, however, is not sufficient reason to explain away the very miracles that demonstrate the power of the Creator. There is also no foundation for the assumption of some commentators that miracles involving extra terrestrial matters are of inherently greater significance than miracles involving behavior of phenomena that we are familiar with on earth. In fact, one could argue the reverse with at least equal persuasion. If one can change phenomena that occur on earth despite the fact that their celestial causes have NOT been altered, this is more remarkable than changing patterns of behavior by phenomena whose celestial causes have either been neutralised, interfered with, or have been reversed. If, for instance, someone's arm can stay the wheel of a watermill in spite of the fact that the flow and pressure of the stream that activates it has not diminished, this is more remarkable than halting such a wheel by stopping the flow of water to it. If Daniel told Darius that the angel of G-d shut the lions' mouths, this is more remarkable than if the angel had merely killed the lions. We have discussed such events in chapter fifteen, also in chapter thirty-eight, in connection with the Passover in Egypt. The statement in Deut.34,10 that there never arose another prophet comparable to Moses, does not refer to Moses’sd power as a performer of miracles, but to the fact that no one since ever attained the face to face relationship with G-d that the Torah testifies Moses had achieved. The effortlessness with which Moses performed miracles, as compared to the need of other prophets to engage in prayer beforehand etc., proves how much Moses was on G-d’s "wavelength," so to speak.
I found almost sixteen years ago, as I still find today, those words to be among the most profound written about the Jewish condition in modernity, and at the same time the most despairing. Jewish thought must confront them constantly and constantly fight against them. For the biblical narrative simply does not say what R. Soloveitchik has it say. Elsewhere, in an essay entitled “Catharsis,” (R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik, “Catharsis,” Tradition 17:2 (Spring 1978), 38–54.) he gives his own interpretation of Jacob’s inner struggle, his great wrestling match with an unnamed adversary in the loneliness of night. The reading is utterly characteristic. Jacob, at the point of victory, lets his opponent go. “The Torah,” concludes R. Soloveitchik, “wants man…to act heroically, and at the final moment, when it appears to him that victory is within reach, to stop short, turn around, and retreat.” But this is Kierkegaard, not Torah. The biblical Jacob does not retreat. He tells his opponent, “I will not let you leave until you bless me.” (Genesis 32:27.) This sentence, crucial to the Jewish destiny, in reply to which the name Israel is first pronounced, is wholly absent from R. Soloveitchik’s account.
Therefore, it is written, "The burden of Dumah. One calls to me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of the night?" (Isaiah 21:11), for the dominion of Esau, who is called 'Se'ir', is during the night. Therefore the angel weakened when morning came, and then "he said, Let me go, for the day breaks."
And to the skirts of Thy mercies I will lay hold until Thou hast had mercy on me, And I will not let Thee go till Thou hast blessed me.
Rabbi Ḥama ben Rabbi Ḥanina said: It was Esau’s guardian angel. That is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels, and you welcomed me” (Genesis 33:10). “He saw that he could not prevail against him, and he touched the joint of his thigh; the joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated as he wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:26). This is analogous to an athlete who was standing and wrestling with the king’s son. He lifted his eyes, saw the king standing over him, and cast himself down before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not prevail against him” – He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not prevail over him. Rabbi Berekhya said: We do not know who was victorious, whether it was the angel or Jacob, but from what is written in the verse: “A man wrestled [vaye’avek] with him” – that is, who became covered with dust [avak]; the man who was with him. (Since the man who was with him became covered with dust, that indicates that Jacob was victorious.) Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to him [to the angel]: 'He comes against you with five amulets in his possession: His merit, his father’s merit, his mother’s merit, his grandfather’s merit, and his grandmother’s merit. Evaluate yourself whether you are able even to stand against his merit.' Immediately, “he saw that he could not prevail against him.” This is analogous to a king who had a wild dog and a tame lion. The king would take his son and embolden his heart with the lion, (He was emboldened by the fact that he would emerge victorious over the lion.) so were the dog to come and confront him, the king would say to him [the dog]: ‘The lion could not stand against him, and you seek to confront him?’ So, were the nations of the world to come and confront Israel, the Holy One blessed be He will say to them: ‘Your ministering angel could not stand against him, and you seek to confront his descendants?’ “He touched the joint of his thigh” – he touched the righteous men and women, the prophets and prophetesses, who are destined to emerge from him. Which is that [generation]? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived in the wake of the Bar Kokhva rebellion.) “The joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated [vateka]” – Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Eliezer said: It was smoothed. (The bone that naturally protrudes in the thigh joint was driven inward, like a peg that is driven [tekua] into the ground.) Rabbi Berekya said in the name of Rabbi Asi: It was split like a fish. (It was split lengthwise. In this interpretation, vateka is a derivation of the word beka, meaning split.) Rav Naḥman bar Yaakov said: It was dislocated from its place, as it is written: “I was repulsed [vateka]…as My soul was repulsed [nake’a]” (Ezekiel 23:18). “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken. He said: I will not release you unless you bless me” (Genesis 32:27). Throughout that night each of them was striking the other, this one’s shield against that one’s shield. When dawn broke: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken.”
“He said: Release me, as dawn has broken. He said: I will not release you unless you bless me” (Genesis 32:27). “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken” – it is written: “New each morning, great is Your faithfulness” (Lamentations 3:23) – Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said: From the fact that you renew us each and every morning we know that You have great faithfulness to revive the dead for us. Rabbi Alexandri said: From the fact that you renew us in the morning of the kingdoms, (You give us strength to live despite the hardship of living under their reign.) we know that You have great faithfulness to redeem us. Rabbi Ḥelbo said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: No heavenly group (Group of angels.) lauds and repeats, but rather, each day the Holy One blessed be He creates a new group of angels, and they recite a new song before Him, and they go on their way. Rabbi Berekhya said: I responded to Rabbi Ḥelbo: ‘But is it not written: “Release me, as dawn has broken,” and the time for me to recite song has arrived?’ He said to me: ‘Strangler! Do you seek to strangle me?’ (Do you seek to strangle me by challenging me from an explicit verse?) I said: ‘What is that verse that is written: “Release me, as dawn has broken”?’ He said to me: ‘These are Mikhael and Gavriel, who are heavenly princes, as all of them are replaced, but they are not replaced.’ Hadrian, may his bones be crushed, asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya, he said to him: ‘Do you say: No heavenly group lauds and repeats, but rather, each day the Holy One blessed be He creates a new group of angels, and they recite a new song before Him, and they go on their way?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘To where do they go?’ He said: ‘To the place from which they were created.’ He said to him: ‘From where were they created?’ He said to him: ‘From the River of Fire.’ He said to him: ‘What is the function of the River of Fire?’ He said to him: ‘It is like that Jordan that does not stop; neither by day nor by night.’ He said to him: ‘From where does it originate?’ He said to him: ‘It is from the perspiration of beasts that perspire from bearing the Throne of the Holy One blessed be He.’ His adviser said to him: ‘But does that Jordan not flow during the day, and it does not flow at night?’ He said: ‘I was a sentry at Beit Peor; just as it flowed during the day, it flows at night.’ Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Shimon: Rabbi Meir says: Who is greater, the guard or the guarded? From what is written: “For He will charge His angels on your behalf to guard you” (Psalms 91:11) – that is, the guarded is greater than the guard. Rabbi Yehuda says: Who is greater, the carrier or the carried? From what is written: “They will carry you on their palms” (Psalms 91:12) – that is, the carried is greater than the carrier. Rabbi Shimon said: From what is written: “He said: Release me” – that is, the one releasing is greater than the one released.
“He said: ‘Release me” – as the time for my lauding, to laud the Holy One blessed be He has arrived.’ He said to him: ‘Let your colleagues laud Him.’ He said to him: ‘I cannot, as the next day I will come to laud, and they will say to me, just as you did not laud yesterday, so you will not laud today.’ He [Jacob] said: ‘If you complete your task, you receive your reward – “I will not release you unless you bless me.”’ He [Jacob] said to him: ‘Those angels who came to Abraham, they took their leave from him only with a blessing.’ He said to him: ‘They were sent only for that purpose, but I was not sent for that purpose.’ He said to him: ‘If you complete your task, you receive your reward’ – “I will not release you.” Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: He [the angel] said: ‘The ministering angels, because they revealed the secrets of the Holy One blessed be He, (They revealed to Lot that the city of Sodom was going to be destroyed.) they were banished from their partition for one hundred and thirty-eight years. If I heed you, I will be banished from my partition.’ He said: ‘If you complete your task, you receive your reward – “I will not release you unless you bless me.”’ Rav Huna said: Ultimately he said: I will reveal it to him. If the Holy One blessed be He says to me: Why did you reveal it to him? I will say before Him: Master of the universe, your prophets issue decrees, and you do not abrogate their decrees; would I be able to abrogate their decree. (He is asking rhetorically.) He said to him: ‘He is destined to reveal Himself to you in Beit El and change your name, and I will be standing there. That is what is written: “In Beit El he found him, and there he will speak with us” (Hosea 12:5).’ It is not written here, “with you,” but rather, “and there he will speak with us.”
“It is the Lord’s kindnesses that have not ceased, for His mercies have not ended” (Lamentations 3:22). “It is the Lord’s kindnesses that have not ceased” – Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: After the Holy One blessed be He despairs of the righteous in this world, He then has mercy on them. That is what is written: “It is the Lord’s kindnesses that have not ceased.” “They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness” (Lamentations 3:23). “They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness” – Rabbi Alexandri said: Because You renew us each and every morning, we know that “great is Your faithfulness” regarding the revival of the dead. Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said: Because You renew us on the mornings of the kingdoms, (New kingdoms arise and supplant the old ones, yet the Jewish people remain (Etz Yosef).) we know that “great is Your faithfulness” to redeem us. Rabbi Ḥelbo said: Each and every day, the Holy One blessed be He creates a band of new angels and they recite a new song and go on their way. (They cease to exist.) Rabbi Berekhya said: I responded to Rabbi Ḥelbo: ‘But is it not written: “Release me, as dawn is breaking”’ (Genesis 32:27)? (This is the guardian angel of Esau, who is still in existence. Apparently, angels do not cease to exist after only one day.) He said to me: ‘Strangler, did you think you could strangle me? (Did you think you could challenge me from an explicit verse?) Gavriel and Mikhael are the supernal princes. All of them are replaced, but they are not replaced.’ (Some angels, such as Gavriel and Mikhael, and also the guardian angel of Esau, continue to exist.) Hadrian, may his bones be crushed, asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya, he said to him: ‘Do you say that each and every day the Holy One blessed be He creates a band of new angels and they recite a new song and go on their way?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘And where do they go?’ He said to him: ‘To where they were created from.’ He said to him: ‘Where are they created from?’ He said to him: ‘From the river of fire.’ He said to him: ‘How does the river of fire function?’ He said: ‘Like the Jordan, which does not stop at night and does not stop during the day.’ He said to him: ‘But the Jordan flows during the day and stops at night.’ He said to him: ‘I was watching at Beit Peor, and that Jordan, just as it flows during the day, so it flows at night.’ He said to him: ‘From where does that river of fire emerge?’ He said to him: ‘From the perspiration of the creatures that bear the Throne.’ “The Lord is my portion, says my soul; therefore I will hope in Him” (Lamentations 3:24). “The Lord is my portion, says my soul” – Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: [This is analogous] to a king who entered a province, and there were generals, captains, and commanders with him. The prominent leaders of the province resided in the middle of the province. One said: ‘I will take the generals to me.’ One said: ‘I will take the captains to me.’ One said: ‘I will take the commanders to me.’ (Each thought to curry favor with the different groups of attendants) There was one clever one there. He said: ‘I will take the king, as all the others are replaced and the king is not replaced.’ Likewise, idolaters, some worship the sun, some worship the moon, some worship wood and stone. But Israel worships only the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “The Lord is my portion, says my soul,” as I proclaim His unity twice daily, and say: “Hear Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
... Another version. The Rabbis said the minimum number that the word ‘stones’ can refer to is two, and Yaakov woke up in the morning and found that they were one. He was in great fear and said ‘the house of the Holy One is in this place and I was not conscious of His Presence’ as it says “And he was afraid and said, How dreadful is this place! This is no other than the house of Gd…” (Bereshit 28:17) From here they said that anyone who prays in Jerusalem is as if they pray before the Throne of Glory, because the gate of heaven is there; and an open door to hear prayer, as it says “…and this is the gate of heaven. (ibid.) Yaakov went back to gather the stones and he found that they were one stone. Yaakov took the stone and placed it as a monument in the midst of the place and oil descended from heaven for him and he pour it out on the stone, as it says “…and he poured oil on top of it.” (Bereshit 28:18) What did the Holy One do? He took its right foot, sank it to the deepest depths and made it a keystone for the earth, like a man who places a keystone in an arch. Therefore it is called foundation stone, because there is the navel of the world and from there the world was opened out. And upon it is the palace of Gd, as it says “And this stone, which I have placed as a monument, shall be a house of God…” (Bereshit 28:22) And Yaakov fell to the ground before the foundation stone, praying before the Holy One, and said ‘Master of the World! If you bring me back to this place in peace, then I will sacrifice before you whole offerings and thanksgiving offerings!’ as it says, “And Jacob uttered a vow, saying…” (Bereshit 28:20) He vowed and he fulfilled his vow. From there he picked up his feet (to go) and there he left the well, because the well had been going before him, and in the blink of an eye came to Haran as it says, [“Now Jacob lifted his feet…” (Bereshit 29:10)] “And Jacob left Be’er Sheva, and he went to Haran.” (Bereshit 28:10) About him the tradition says, “When you walk, your step will not be constrained, and if you run, you will not stumble.” (Mishle 4:12) R’ Abahu said in the name of R’ Yochanan – the angels carried him as it says, “On [their] hands they will bear you…” (Tehillim 91:12) Ya’akov’s steps were not constrained and his strength did not falter and like a mighty man he rolled back the stone from off of the mouth of the well. Then the well rose up and overflowed and the shepherds were astounded because all together they were unable to roll off the stone and he did it alone as it says, “…that Jacob drew near and rolled the rock off…” (Bereshit 29:10)
There is another mystical dimension to the love between Esau and Jacob, or to love generally. Under certain conditions the feeling of love for something may transform evil into good and the קליפה, unworthy outer shell, may be transformed into something sacred. This is the very dimension which enables people to convert from paganism to Judaism. Our sages have connected this phenomenon with the גיד הנשה, when they explained Genesis 32, 27 where Samael says: "Let me depart, for dawn has come." Chulin 91a, has Jacob ask the angel: "Are you a thief or a gambler that you shun daylight? Samael responded that he was an angel and that from the day he had been created he had not had an opportunity to sing G–d's praises in the heavenly choir until that very day. Rashi interprets the word kubiestous in the Talmud to mean "soul snatcher." [I have translated it as "gambler." Ed.] There is a profound meaning in Rashi's comment, since souls are viewed as oppressed and held hostage by Samael. The Zohar in Parshat Mishpatim comments on this subject.
Having appreciated all the foregoing, we can now understand a statement in the Talmud Chulin 92a, commenting on Hosea 12,5: וישר אל מלאך ויוכל, בכה ויתחנן לו, "He contended with an angel and prevailed; the other had to weep and to implore him." The Talmud says that it is not clear who became “שר” over whom. When the angel implored Jacob to release him, it seemed that he implored Jacob, weeping. Evidently Israel then became שר over the angel. How then can the Talmud assume that the "Master" had implored the servant and wept?
ויתן לך אלוקים, “and may G–d give you, etc.;” Yitzchok, -remarkably- addresses the attribute of Justice of G–d when we might have expected him to address the attribute of mercy. By doing so he implied that this blessing was conditional on the person on whom it had been bestowed being worthy of it. Nonetheless, when it comes to Esau, we see that Yitzchok does not include such a condition in his blessing, as in verse 39 in our chapter he reassures him by saying: “your dwelling will be in the fat parts of the earth and you will enjoy the dew from above. You will live by the sword, although you will serve your brother.” He adds that on the contrary, the blessing given to his brother Yaakov is conditional on his not making your life intolerable.” [my choice of words. Ed.] It is noteworthy that in his lengthy prayer after consecrating the Temple he has built, King Solomon attaches the condition of worthiness when speaking of how G–d shall respond to the prayers of the Israelites, whereas when speaking of gentiles coming to Jerusalem to pray there, he does not attach such a condition but asks G–d to grant the wishes of such gentiles, regardless. (Kings I 8,32-43) Solomon is concerned that the gentiles should not get the impressions that our G–d is someone with Whom one needs to bargain. Yitzchok was concerned about the same when realising that Esau, if he insisted on his blessing surely credited G–d in heaven with being the One Who would provide its becoming reality. If he did not think so, why would he demand it? [When G–d fulfills the requests of a gentile, without regard to his worthiness, if the gentile as a result does not become G–d fearing and grateful, he will find that the very fulfillment of his request will eventually boomerang and he will more than lose its benefit. Ed.] You will also find that there are ten different categories of blessings, corresponding to the ten utterances used by G–d when He created His universe, and corresponding to the Ten Commandments. These blessings were pronounced on seven different occasions. 1) here; 2).Genesis 28,3: ואל שדי יברך אותך and the attribute of G–d known as shadday will bless you. 3) Genesis 28,13 (to Yaakov); 4) Genesis 32,27: “I will not let you depart (Yaakov to the angel he had wrestled) until you bless me;” 5) Genesis 35,9: “G–d appeared to Yaakov;” 6) Genesis 46,3; and Genesis 12,2, where G–d blessed Avraham for the first time. Avraham was blessed by G–d on seven different occasions. The Jewish people were given seven different (days) that are holy, most of them festivals: Sabbath, Passover, Shavuot, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, and Sh’mini Atzeret. There are seven stars that serve the sun and the moon in their orbits. [The author adds some astronomical observation that have to do with the time to plant and harvest being related to sunset and sunrise which I have not understood. Ed.]
and beseeched him When he said to him, “I will not let you go unless you bless me” (Gen. 32:26), and the angel was begging him, “Let me go now. Eventually, the Holy One, blessed be He, will reveal Himself to you in Bethel, and there you will find Him, and there He will speak with us, and He and I will agree with you concerning the blessings that Isaac blessed you.” Now that angel was Esau’s genius, and he was contesting the blessings.
and the counsel of His messengers One angel said to Jacob (Gen. 32:27), “Israel shall be your name,” and I fulfilled his words. Here too, I will fulfill the counsel of My prophets who say concerning Jerusalem, “It shall be settled.”
It is clarified from this that the fulfillment of the mitzvah of Kriyat Shema in its primary [sense involves] the fulfillment of accepting the yoke of Heaven, and the berachot of Kriyat Shema correspond to the paragraphs of the Shema, and that they were established to elaborate the intentions within the paragraphs [of the Shema] and that the fulfillment of accepting the yoke of heaven is withen them. It appears [that it is necessary] to add two topics and aspects of "acceptance of the yoke of heaven" of Kriyat Shema and its blessings: A) Accepting the yoke of heaven by mentioning the Uniqueness of Hashem and His Oneness, B) Accepting the yoke of heaven through songs and praises to Hashem. It seems that [when one] says Kriyat Shema of the morning and the evening, one completes the other, that there is a distinction between the fulfillment of "accepting the yoke of heaven" in the Kriyat Shema and its blessing in the morning and the fulfillment of Kriyat Shema and its blessings in the evening. The distinction between them is elaborated from text of the berachot of Kriyat Shema, that [by] the berachot of Kriyat Shema of the morning, we mention the singing of the angels ("and all [of them] opened their mouths...with song and melody...), however, we do not mention this singing in the [blessings] in the evening, [since] there is no singing at night, and this is established [from the fact that] we do not say Hallel except during the day, as it is written "From the rising to the setting of the sun, Hashem's name is to be praised (see Megillah 20b)." And thus we find that the angel said to Yaakov Avinu (Genesis 32:27), "Let me go, for dawn is coming," and Rashi's explanation [there]: " ...and I need to sing during the day," this indicates that precisely during the day the angels sing.
The Gemara returns to the verses that describe Jacob wrestling with the angel. “And he said: Let me go, for the dawn has risen. And he said: I will not let you go until you bless me” (Genesis 32:27). Jacob said to the angel: Are you a thief, or are you a gambler [kuveyustus], who is afraid of dawn? The angel said to him: I am an angel, and from the day I was created my time to recite a song before God has not arrived, until now. Now I must ascend so that I can sing songs of praise to God.
The verse in Hosea states: “He wept, and made supplication to him.” From this verse I do not know who cried to whom. When another verse states: “And he said: Let me go, for the dawn has risen” (Genesis 32:27), you must say that the angel cried to Jacob.
He [the man] said, Let me go, for the dawn is breaking. He [Yaakov] said, I will not let you go unless you bless me.
And he said, Send me away, for the column of the dawn ariseth, and, behold, the hour cometh for the angels to praise. And he said, I will not release thee until thou bless me.
And he said, Let me go, for the column of the morning ascendeth; and the hour cometh when the angels on high offer praise to the Lord of the world: and I am one of the angels of praise, but from the day that the world was created my time to praise hath not come until now. And he said, I will not let thee go, until thou bless me.
| וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֵלָ֖יו מַה־שְּׁמֶ֑ךָ וַיֹּ֖אמֶר יַעֲקֹֽב׃ | 28 E | Said the other, “What is your name?” He replied, “Jacob.” |
Let us proceed to explain some aspects about Yitzchok’s and Rivkah’s marital union and its implications. We must take note that the marital unions of the patriarchs and their details have been described in the Torah, with the exception of the union of Avram and Sarai at the time. Seeing that at the time Avram married Sarai he was not yet a founding father of the Jewish nation, the Torah did not see fit to give us any details about that union and how it came about. We have explained previously that names reflect the soul’s origin, so that when both Avram’s and Sarai’s names were changed they also experienced a change in their souls. The union of Avram and Sarai had not produced any offspring, and until both their names were changed by Divine decree they could not become patriarchs and matriarchs, respectively. This leaves us with the question why the names of Yitzchok and Rivkah were not changed so that they would not have become parents of an Esau? Avraham’s name was changed in order that his attribute of חסד could take root in the world and enable him to be active spreading this virtue. By doing this he incidentally illuminated the world with some of the Divine light that had been withheld since Adam’s sin. We have explained previously that this Divine light, brightness, cannot be allowed to keep on getting stronger without endangering the existence of the human race while man had not kept pace with the spiritual growth needed to tolerate these infusions of Divine light. It was Yitzchok’s task to preserve the limitation of this accomplishment of his father Avraham without endangering his achievements by recklessly leading where his contemporaries could not follow and keep in step. This is why his name, as opposed to that of his father or his son Yaakov, was never changed. Just as G’d had to impose limitations on Himself before becoming active in a material world, so Avram before becoming active as a patriarch, had to impose limitations on himself. The name אברם, “a towering personality in lofty regions,” was appropriate as long as he had not been charged with spreading monotheism through his loving concern for his fellow throughout the regions in which he would sojourn. Once this became his primary task, the name change from אברם to אברהם, i.e. “father of many (terrestrial) nations,” and mirrored his becoming more effective in our terrestrial regions. He himself could not produce personal issue until he had begun the task assigned to him on earth. Yaakov, who as we explained, represented a fusion of the attributes of his father and his grandfather, had his name changed to Israel, when he had matured to the point of representing this meld of loving kindness on the one hand, and awe of G’d on the other. [No other patriarch is quoted as having been “afraid” as many times as Yaakov, in spite of his having received more assurances from G’d than either his father or grandfather. Ed.] Whereas Avraham, after having had his name changed, is never again referred to as Avram, and according to halachah it is inadmissible for us nowadays to refer to him by his original name, Yaakov received an “additional” name, his original name not having been uprooted and the prophets throughout the generations repeatedly referring to him by that name. The fact that he was able to sire all the 12 tribes before having had the name Yisrael added to his name, is proof that his name change was of a different kind from that of Avram’s becoming Avraham. Yaakov’s combining the attributes of חסד and גבורה, did not need to be renamed for the sake of achieving צמצום, voluntary restriction of some of his natural initiatives. When the angel informed him that henceforth the name Israel would be added to his original name (Genesis 32,28) this was in recognition of Yaakov’s ability to function on both “wavelengths, i.e. he could keep in check his tendency to practice חסד as well as his tendency to be in awe of G’d, גבורה, דין as the occasion demanded. We can best understand this when picturing a father who, when displaying his love for a young child, has to keep in check that this intellect tells him that he is wasting valuable time “playing,” during which he could perform other tasks whose usefulness would be apparent to all. By knowing when to use the instrument of tzimtzum, he pleases the Creator so much that the prophet Isaiah 49,3 quotes G’d as saying of Israel: ישראל אשר בך אתפאר, “Israel through you I am glorified.” [I have occasionally paraphrased the author’s words in the preceding paragraph. Ed.]
Genesis 32,28. “He said: ‘your name will no longer be Yaakov, but Israel, for you have contended both with celestial forces and with human forces and you have prevailed.’” There are people who constantly remain attached to G’d even while they are engaged in conversation with human beings. There are other people, who while engaged in a conscious effort to serve the Lord, concentrate on this to the exclusion of everything else; these people while engaged in mundane activities, such as business conversations with their peers, cannot at the same time remain conscious of their duties towards their Creator. The first type of person deserves the title: “Israel;” as the letters ישר, “upright,” as well as the letters ראש, “head,” are part of that title. The second category of person, (observant Jew) is called יעקב, i.e. י-עקב, meaning that his attachment to G’d is עקב, “secondary,” just as a heel is a secondary and not a primary organ. Esau’s celestial representative acknowledged that Yaakov was a person for the first category, since in his dealings with man he never lost sight of his primary duties to his G’d.
YiTGaDaL—is TaGiY DaL. That is: tagiy is Keter (Crown); dal corresponds to yAaKoV, for he is AKeV (heel), an aspect of dal (poor). Moreover, the aspect of yiSRael corresponds to tagiy, for “SaRita (you have become ennobled) before God” (Genesis 32:28).
?ויאמר ..מה שמך?, this question is only an opener for the dialogue that follows. We have several such examples, as in Genesis 3,9 where G’d asks Adam איכה?, “where are you?,” though He was perfectly aware of Adam’s whereabouts. Similarly, in Exodus 4,2 G’d asks Moses “what is this in your hand?,” knowing full well that Moses was holding a staff in his hand. Here too, Yaakov was well aware who the angel was seeing he had been sent to him specifically.
He, the angel, said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name; rather, you shall be called Israel; for you have striven [ sarita ] with God [ elohim ], an angel, a supernatural force, and with men, and you have prevailed.
The Pesaḥ story – “Begin with shame and end with praise” – is the archetype of the Jewish reading of history, its insistence on rescuing a thread of meaning from catastrophe, its refusal, at times heroic, to be demoralized by defeat, to give in to the siren call of despair. It is the rejection of myth and tragedy, optimism and pessimism alike. The Jewish narrative does not ask us to believe in a world in which there are simple happy endings. Nor does it allow us to take refuge in the cynical belief that every aspiration ends in failure (it is worth remembering that the first “cynics,” from whom we get the word, were Greek philosophers). Anouilh was right: tragedy is restful; Judaism is restless. There is nothing peaceful about hope. Far simpler to believe nothing, expect nothing, reconcile oneself to the meaninglessness of a universe endlessly revolving in silence around a void, and therefore accept the inevitability of fate. Far harder to strive for justice against oppression, freedom against tyranny, knowing that even victory is never final before the end of days and that until then we must fight the battle in every generation, just as the story of the Exodus must be told every year. Yet to be a Jew is to choose what Levinas calls “difficult liberty” over easy necessity. Israel, says the Torah, is the people whose name means “one who struggles with God and with man and who prevails” (Gen. 32:28). Far from being simple or naive, hope demands, creates, and expresses indomitable moral courage.
“He said to him: What is your name? He said: Jacob” (Genesis 32:28). “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name; rather, Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29). “He said to him: ‘What is your name?’ He said: ‘Jacob.’ “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name.” “Who confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers” (Isaiah 44:26) – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Since He “confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers,” do we not know that it says: “Of Jerusalem: It will be inhabited; and of the cities of Judah: They will be built” (Isaiah 44:26)? (Namely, from the fact that the Lord fulfills the word of the angel who told Jacob that his name would be changed, we can learn that He will fulfill the word of His prophets who prophesied that Jerusalem would be inhabited.) [It refers] to one angel who appeared to our patriarch Jacob. That is what is written: “He said to him: What is your name.… No [more…] Jacob.” “And fulfills the counsel of His messengers” – as the Holy One blessed be He appeared to our patriarch Jacob in order to fulfill the decree of that angel that said to him: “No [more…] Jacob.” The Holy One blessed be He also said so to him. That is what is written: “God said to him: Your name is Jacob; [your name shall no longer be called Jacob]” (Genesis 35:10) – “no [more] shall Jacob be said.” Bar Kappara said: Anyone who calls Abraham Abram violates a positive commandment. Rabbi Levi said: A positive commandment and a prohibition. “[Your name] shall no longer be called [Abram]” (Genesis 17:5) – a prohibition; “but your name shall be Abraham” (Genesis 17:5) – a positive commandment. And yet the members of the Great Assembly called him Abram, as it is written: “You are the Lord God who chose Abram…”? It was relating a narrative and saying that while he was still Abram You chose him. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Sarah Sarai violates a positive command? (And according to Rabbi Levi a positive command and a prohibition (Genesis 17:15).) It is, rather, that only he (Abraham. The verse states: “God said to Abraham…you shall not call her name Sarai.” In the case of Abraham the verse stated “your name shall no longer be called Abram.”) was commanded in her regard. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Israel Jacob violates a positive command? It is taught: It is not that the name of Jacob will be uprooted. Rather, “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Israel will be primary and Jacob secondary. Rabbi Zechariah in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: In any case: Your name is Jacob… “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Jacob is primary, and Israel is in addition to it. “For you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” – you have wrestled with the heavenly and prevailed over them, and with the earthly and prevailed over them. With the heavenly – this is the angel. Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He was Esau’s ministering angel. This is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [penei elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). Just as penei elohim is judgment, so too, your face is judgment. (As it were, Esau is passing judgment on Jacob (see Bereshit Rabba 76:7).) Just as penei elohim – “you shall not appear before Me [yera’u fanai] empty-handed” (Exodus 23:15), so too, you, I will not appear before you empty-handed. With the earthly and you prevailed over them – this is Esau and his chieftains. Alternatively, “for you have striven with God” – it is you whose image is carved on High. (The image of man in the Throne of Glory.)
(Ibid. 32:28) "Your name will no longer be called Yaakov but Yisrael." The first name remained and the second was superadded.
[(Exod. 12:29:) AND IT CAME TO PASS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.] This text is related (to Is. 44:26): CONFIRMS THE WORD OF HIS SERVANT. (PRK 7:3.) R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Levi: What is the meaning of CONFIRMS THE WORD OF HIS SERVANT? Do we not know that (ibid., cont.) HE SAYS TO JERUSALEM: YOU SHALL BE INHABITED, AND TO THE CITIES OF JUDAH: THEY SHALL BE REBUILT? It is simply that a certain angel appeared to our ancestor Jacob. He said to him: What is your name? He told him: Jacob. (in Gen. 32:29 [28]): YOUR NAME SHALL NO LONGER BE JACOB, …. (Is. 44:26, cont.:) AND FULFILLS THE COUNSEL OF HIS MESSENGERS. The Holy One appeared to Jacob to affirm the command of his angel, AND (in Gen. 35:10) GOD SAID TO HIM: YOUR NAME IS JACOB. In the case of Jerusalem, over which all the prophets have prophesied, how much the more ?
3. [God] confirmeth the word of His servant, and performeth the counsel of His messengers; that saith of Jerusalem: 'She shall be inhabited'; and of the cities of Judah: 'They shall be built, and I will raise up the waste places thereof';(Is 44:26) R. Berekiah said in the name of R Levi: Whoever confirmeth the word of His servant, and performeth the counsel of His messengers, do we not [therefore also] know that he will say of Jerusalem: 'She shall be inhabited'; and of the cities of Judah: 'They shall be built?' Rather [the apparent repetition may be understood by another text]: an angel appeared to our father Jacob and said to him, 'What is thy name?' And he said: 'Jacob.' And he said: 'Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel;(Gen 32:28-29). The Kadosh Baruch Hu appeared [afterwards] to our father Jacob to fulfill the decree of the angel [in another verse]: And God said unto him: 'Thy name is Jacob: [thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name'; and He called his name Israel.] (Gen 35:10) Jerusalem, of which all the prophets prophesied that it will be built, all the more so! Another interpretation: “[God] confirmeth the word of His servant” refers to Moses, [as he is called in another verse]: My servant Moses is not so. (Num 12:7) “Performeth the counsel of His messengers” refers to Moses, [as he is called in another verse]: [God] sent a messenger, and brought us forth out of Egypt. (Num 20:16) The Kadosh Baruch Hu said to Moses, “Go, tell the people Israel that I will go through the land of Egypt in that night, [and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt.]” (Ex. 12:12) Moses went and said to Israel, “Thus saith the LORD: About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt.” (Ex 11:4) The Kadosh Baruch Hu said, “Already I have made my promise to Moses, And I said of him 'My servant Moses is not so; he is trusted in all My house.' (Num 12:7) Should I make a liar out of My servant Moses? No, instead Since Moses said “About midnight,” then I will go out at midnight. So it happened that it came to pass at midnight, [that the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt.]
In the stories of Jacob, however, the Torah always uses “Lord,” for he was more complete than was Isaac. Thus, unlike Isaac, who had not been as | complete as Abraham, (36. Kaspi says that in the following verses, which refer to Isaac, the memory and merits of Abraham are invoked in order to increase the well-being of Isaac. This indicates that Abraham was the greater of the two.) it is not said of Jacob, “because that Abraham hearkened to my voice,” (37. Gen. 26:5.) or “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” (38. Gen. 26:24.) The exception (where “God” appears in the stories of Jacob) is “the house of God,” (39. Gen. 28:17.) and that is on account of its being followed by “and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob said that because he recognized that the place was conducive to prophecy and perception because of the celestial cause that predominated there, as Ibn Ezra noted. (40. Ibn Ezra says on this verse: “This is the house of God—in which a person can pray in time of need, for his prayer will be heard on account of its being a special place.”) He continued to say, “If God will be with me …” (41. Gen. 28:20.) (using ’Elokim) in accordance with the opinion of our Torah that the world of Separate Intelligences is the first cause. (42. As explained above, ’Elokim refers to the upper two worlds, which are here referred to by Kaspi as ha-sekhel ha-nifrad (“the separate intellect”), which as an entity influences the events of the sublunar world below them.) The proof of this is provided by the opening verse of the Torah, “In the beginning God created …” as I have explained. (43. See above chap. II, n. 1.) When Jacob’s wives speak, and when Jacob speaks to them, they mention “God,” (44. Gen. 31:5, 9, 11, 16.) for that is appropriate for them, as we have already mentioned. This is especially the case as they are the daughters of (the pagan) Laban, as is proved by Rachel when she coveted the teraphim. (45. Gen. 31:19.) When on occasion they do mention “Lord,” (46. Gen. 29:32–33, 30:24.) it is only because they learnt this from Jacob. Notice the precision regarding Laban when the Torah says, “and God came to Laban,” (47. Gen. 31:24.) similar to what was written of Abimelech, (48. Gen. 20:3.) in accordance with his confused belief in the power of the Heavenly Sphere and that of the imagination. Laban said to Jacob, “the God of your father spoke unto me yesternight saying …,” (49. Gen. 31:29.) for how could the god of Laban assist Jacob when (Jacob) did not believe in him. Similarly he said, “the Lord watch between me and thee,” (50. Gen. 31:49.) in accordance with Jacob’s belief. Furthermore Laban made Jacob swear by the Lord, for Jacob feared Him, and not God. In summarizing in conclusion, Laban said, “The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor … judge betwixt us …” (51. Gen. 31:53.) whereas “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.” (52. Ibid.) Jacob uses “God” when saying “and the angels of God met him,” (53. Gen. 32:2.) and “this is God’s camp,” (54. Ibid.) as well as “I have seen God face to face” (55. Gen. 32:28.) and “for thou hast striven with God,” (56. Gen. 32:20.) for all of them are in a prophetic use of the imagination. (57. He means that they take place in a prophetic vision, which with the exception of Moses, necessarily involves the imaginative faculty.) It is similar with “And God said unto Jacob,” (58. Gen. 35:1.) | and “there God was revealed unto him,” (59. Gen. 35:7.) as well as “and God appeared unto Jacob again” (60. Gen. 35:9.) and “where God spoke with him.” (61. Gen. 35:15.)
It is one of the most enigmatic episodes in the Torah, but also one of the most important, because it was the moment that gave the Jewish people its name: Israel, one who “wrestles with God and with men and prevails” (Gen. 32:28).
[82] Consider the case of Jacob. The Man of Practice was now in the last bout of his exercises in virtue, about to exchange hearing for eyesight, words for deeds, and progress for perfection, since God in his bounty had willed to plant eyes in his understanding that he might see clearly what before he had grasped by hearing, for sight is more trustworthy than the ears. Then it was that the oracles rang out their proclamation, “Thy name shall not be called Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name, because thou hast been strong with God and mighty with men” (Gen. 32:28). Now Jacob is a name for learning and progress, gifts which depend upon the hearing; Israel for perfection, for the name expresses the vision of God.
[44] These and the like are symbols of a soul which in inward things is undefiled towards God and in outward things is pure towards the world of our senses and human life. And so those were fitting words which were said to the victorious wrestler when he was about to be crowned with garlands of triumph. For “Thou hast been strong with God and mighty with men” (Gen. 32:28) were the words which proclaimed his victory.
He [the man] said to him, What is your name? And he replied, Yaakov.
And he said, What is thy name? He answered, Jakob.
| וַיֹּ֗אמֶר לֹ֤א יַעֲקֹב֙ יֵאָמֵ֥ר עוֹד֙ שִׁמְךָ֔ כִּ֖י אִם־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל כִּֽי־שָׂרִ֧יתָ עִם־אֱלֹהִ֛ים וְעִם־אֲנָשִׁ֖ים וַתּוּכָֽל׃ | 29 E | Said he, “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven (striven Heb. saritha, connected with first part of “Israel.”) with beings divine and human, (beings divine and human Or “God (Elohim, connected with second part of ‘Israel’) and human beings.”) and have prevailed.” |
Let us proceed to explain some aspects about Yitzchok’s and Rivkah’s marital union and its implications. We must take note that the marital unions of the patriarchs and their details have been described in the Torah, with the exception of the union of Avram and Sarai at the time. Seeing that at the time Avram married Sarai he was not yet a founding father of the Jewish nation, the Torah did not see fit to give us any details about that union and how it came about. We have explained previously that names reflect the soul’s origin, so that when both Avram’s and Sarai’s names were changed they also experienced a change in their souls. The union of Avram and Sarai had not produced any offspring, and until both their names were changed by Divine decree they could not become patriarchs and matriarchs, respectively. This leaves us with the question why the names of Yitzchok and Rivkah were not changed so that they would not have become parents of an Esau? Avraham’s name was changed in order that his attribute of חסד could take root in the world and enable him to be active spreading this virtue. By doing this he incidentally illuminated the world with some of the Divine light that had been withheld since Adam’s sin. We have explained previously that this Divine light, brightness, cannot be allowed to keep on getting stronger without endangering the existence of the human race while man had not kept pace with the spiritual growth needed to tolerate these infusions of Divine light. It was Yitzchok’s task to preserve the limitation of this accomplishment of his father Avraham without endangering his achievements by recklessly leading where his contemporaries could not follow and keep in step. This is why his name, as opposed to that of his father or his son Yaakov, was never changed. Just as G’d had to impose limitations on Himself before becoming active in a material world, so Avram before becoming active as a patriarch, had to impose limitations on himself. The name אברם, “a towering personality in lofty regions,” was appropriate as long as he had not been charged with spreading monotheism through his loving concern for his fellow throughout the regions in which he would sojourn. Once this became his primary task, the name change from אברם to אברהם, i.e. “father of many (terrestrial) nations,” and mirrored his becoming more effective in our terrestrial regions. He himself could not produce personal issue until he had begun the task assigned to him on earth. Yaakov, who as we explained, represented a fusion of the attributes of his father and his grandfather, had his name changed to Israel, when he had matured to the point of representing this meld of loving kindness on the one hand, and awe of G’d on the other. [No other patriarch is quoted as having been “afraid” as many times as Yaakov, in spite of his having received more assurances from G’d than either his father or grandfather. Ed.] Whereas Avraham, after having had his name changed, is never again referred to as Avram, and according to halachah it is inadmissible for us nowadays to refer to him by his original name, Yaakov received an “additional” name, his original name not having been uprooted and the prophets throughout the generations repeatedly referring to him by that name. The fact that he was able to sire all the 12 tribes before having had the name Yisrael added to his name, is proof that his name change was of a different kind from that of Avram’s becoming Avraham. Yaakov’s combining the attributes of חסד and גבורה, did not need to be renamed for the sake of achieving צמצום, voluntary restriction of some of his natural initiatives. When the angel informed him that henceforth the name Israel would be added to his original name (Genesis 32,28) this was in recognition of Yaakov’s ability to function on both “wavelengths, i.e. he could keep in check his tendency to practice חסד as well as his tendency to be in awe of G’d, גבורה, דין as the occasion demanded. We can best understand this when picturing a father who, when displaying his love for a young child, has to keep in check that this intellect tells him that he is wasting valuable time “playing,” during which he could perform other tasks whose usefulness would be apparent to all. By knowing when to use the instrument of tzimtzum, he pleases the Creator so much that the prophet Isaiah 49,3 quotes G’d as saying of Israel: ישראל אשר בך אתפאר, “Israel through you I am glorified.” [I have occasionally paraphrased the author’s words in the preceding paragraph. Ed.]
Genesis 32,28. “He said: ‘your name will no longer be Yaakov, but Israel, for you have contended both with celestial forces and with human forces and you have prevailed.’” There are people who constantly remain attached to G’d even while they are engaged in conversation with human beings. There are other people, who while engaged in a conscious effort to serve the Lord, concentrate on this to the exclusion of everything else; these people while engaged in mundane activities, such as business conversations with their peers, cannot at the same time remain conscious of their duties towards their Creator. The first type of person deserves the title: “Israel;” as the letters ישר, “upright,” as well as the letters ראש, “head,” are part of that title. The second category of person, (observant Jew) is called יעקב, i.e. י-עקב, meaning that his attachment to G’d is עקב, “secondary,” just as a heel is a secondary and not a primary organ. Esau’s celestial representative acknowledged that Yaakov was a person for the first category, since in his dealings with man he never lost sight of his primary duties to his G’d.
YiTGaDaL—is TaGiY DaL. That is: tagiy is Keter (Crown); dal corresponds to yAaKoV, for he is AKeV (heel), an aspect of dal (poor). Moreover, the aspect of yiSRael corresponds to tagiy, for “SaRita (you have become ennobled) before God” (Genesis 32:28).
“Your name will no longer be Yaakov, but Yisrael, for you have fought with beings and people and prevailed” (Bereishis 32:29). These two names, Yaakov and Yisrael, represent the body and the soul. Yaakov represents the body, from wisdom (Yud) to the heel (Eikev), while Yisrael represents the soul, meaning "Li Rosh" (a head for me). A person must perfect the body so the soul's power is reflected, thus becoming "Yisrael." Yaakov's fight with the angel illustrates this. The human soul is greater than an angel's, but an angel's body surpasses a human's, as our bodies are bound to this world. However, Yaakov perfected his body to become a "Chariot" for Hashem, making his body as holy as his soul. Hence, he could fight the angel with his body, which had transcended its physical nature to become spiritual. This transformation is why Yaakov's name changed. His body, once called Yaakov, became spiritual like his soul, now called Yisrael. This is reflected in "And Yaakov came 'Shalem'" (Bereishis 33:18), meaning his body and soul achieved harmony, or Shalom. In each Jew, the body and soul conflict, and Shabbat represents this harmony, offering a taste of the world to come where bodies will be perfected like souls. On Shabbat, this harmony is achieved according to one's weekly preparation, meriting an "extra soul," signifying the soul's power spreading into the body.
[However,] we must first understand that the reason it is called by the name Yisroel-ישראל is “because you have ruled over (שרית) Elohi”m-אלהי״ם [and prevailed] etc.” (Genesis 32:29; Also see Etz Chayim (Shaar Leah V’Rachel) Shaar 38, Ch. 2.)
כי שרית עם אלהים, “you have now become the equal of angels, but you have not succeeded in outranking them.”
Heb. saritha, connected with first part of “Israel.”
Or “God (Elohim, connected with second part of ‘Israel’) and men.”
כי שרית עם אלוקים, “for you have contended with Divine forces.” In this instance the word elohim refers to the angel representing Esau with whom Yaakov had wrestled. The words ועם אנשים in the same line, refer to Lavan and Esau. According to Bereshit Rabbah 78,3 the words כי שרית עם אלוקים mean that Yaakov’s countenance was engraved on the throne of G’d and the angel had realized this after looking at Yaakov.
ויאמר, an angel is allowed to expand the parameters of his mission, as we know already from when Lot asked the angel to allow him not to climb the mountain but to spend the night in Tzoar (Genesis 19,21). The angel there describes himself as granting permission, although it is possible that he checked with G’d first and the Torah did not bother to mention this.
לא יעקב יאמר, the meaning is “not only Yaakov will your name be in future.” We have examples of parallel meanings in Joshua 22,20 לא גוע בעונו, “he did not die due to his sin,” where the meaning is that “not only Achan died for his sin, but due to his sin many others died.“ [The Israelites who fell in the first battle of Ai. Ed.] Also in Kings II 6,10, the words לא אחת ולא שתים, “not one and not two,” is such a construction. The expression means: “not once but many times.” Knowing that the meaning of our verse is that Yaakov will henceforth not only be known as Yaakov, helps explain the many occasions later when this original name is applied to him, as distinct from the name change of Avram to Avraham.
כי אם ישראל, the name Yisrael denotes the nation founded by “Yaakov.” Our sages are of two minds if the former name of the additional name is the principal name. Rabbi Zecharyah is of the opinion that the name Yaakov remained the principal name, whereas the majority opinion is that from this point on the name Yisrael became the principal name of Yaakov. (Bereshit Rabbah 78,3) The point of the angel telling him that he would henceforth not be called Yaakov but Yisrael was to tell him that G’d would change his name. This occurred when Yaakov came to Bet El. This is why we read in 35,10 ויקרא את שמו ישראל. The reason for the name change was revealed to Yaakov by the angel.
כי שרית עם אלוקים, with the angel. He wrestled with you and could not overpower you to the extent of felling you.
ועם אנשים. With Lavan and Esau who intended to harm you and were unable to do so. He meant that exactly what had happened to Yaakov in his encounter with Lavan who had pursued him with hostile intent, would happen in his forthcoming encounter with Esau and his soldiers.
כי שרית, the word is derived from שרה in Hoseah 12,4 ובאונו שרה את אלוקים, “and with his might he fought with a Divine Being (reference to Yaakov).” The construction is parallel to קנה-קנית, or עשה-עשית. However, in the same chapter, verse 5 in Hoseah, the word וישר in the line וישר אל מלאך ויוכל, “he wrestled with an angel and prevailed,” is not derived from the root שרה but is of the same category of verbs as קם, שב, רץ all of which have a letter ו in the middle in the infinitive. The corresponding construction to ours of those examples would be ויקם, ויקב, וירץ, as in וישר from the root שור, ”to wrestle.” As to the fact that in spite of his victory, Yaakov was injured in that struggle, this was a punishment for his attempt to flee, in spite of his having been assured by G’d that He would help and protect him. We find other examples of great people who pursue a path that does not conform with G’d’s will that as a result they experience punishment for ignoring G’d’s will. As soon as Moses refused the mission and told G’d to send someone else, (Exodus 4,13) we find that G’d became angry at him. According to the plain meaning of the text there, although the sages say that wherever G’d’s anger is mentioned the subject at whom G’d is angry is visibly punished, whereas there is no word about Moses being punished for his words שלח נא ביד תשלח, Aaron who was meant to function only as a Levite, became the High Priest, a role which Moses would have filled but for his improper refusal to accept G’d’s mission without demurring. This is an explanation based on an allegorical approach, whereas the plain meaning is that at the inn, when on his way to Egypt, Moses was almost killed for having been remiss in not circumcising his son Eliezer before setting out on his journey. Jonah, too was punished for trying to circumvent the will of G’d and spent three most uncomfortable days inside one or more fish. Similarly, G’d’s anger resulted in Bileam being harmed by his ass when contravening G’d’s will and setting out on his way to curse the Jewish people (Numbers 22,22 indicates that he walked with a pronounced limp, presumably due to having his leg squeezed against the wall by his ass as per Numbers 22,25.
לא יעקב [THY NAME SHALL] NO MORE BE CALLED JACOB [BUT ISRAEL] (literally, “not Jacob — supplanting — shall any more be said to thee”) — It shall no longer be said that the blessings came to you through supplanting and subtlety but through noble conduct (שררה) and in an open manner. Because later on the Holy One, blessed be He, will reveal Himself to you at Bethel and will change your name. There He will bless you, and I shall be there and admit your right to them (the blessings). It is to this that the passage refers (Hosea 12:5), “And he strove with an angel and prevailed; he wept and made supplication unto him” — it means the angel wept and made supplication unto him (Jacob). What was the subject of his supplication? This is stated in the next verse: “At Bethel He will meet us and there He will speak with us — implying the request. “Wait until he will speak with us there, and then I will admit your right to the blessings.” Jacob, however, would not agree to this, and against his own wish he had to admit his right to the blessings. That is what is meant when it states (v. 30) “And he declared him blessed there”, that he begged him to wait and he did not agree to do so (cp. Genesis Rabbah 78:2).
ועם אנשים AND WITH MEN —Esau and Laban.
ותוכל AND HAST PREVAILED over them.
לא יאמר, nicht לא יקרא: dein Name soll nicht mehr "der die Ferse zu halten Bestimmte" "gedeutet" werden; nicht, er soll nicht mehr Jakob heißen (erteilt wird ihm der Name Israel erst später durch Gott, Kap. 35, 10), sondern der Name Jakob selbst soll als Israel begriffen werden. ישראל, von שרה, der einen Seite des Herrscherbegriffes, überragen, größer sein, heißt ja wörtlich: Gott ist der Überragende, der alles andere an Macht und Größe Überwältigende, und das soll ja in Wahrheit die Bedeutung des Zustandes sein, der durch יעקב ausgedrückt ist. Nur wenn ein יעקב, ein seiner äußeren Erscheinung nach nur unter die Ferse aller übrigen Gewiesenes, die feindseligsten Angriffe und Kämpfe des materiell gerüstetsten Gegners siegreich besteht weist dieser Erfolg auf das Vorhandensein einer alle materielle Größe und Macht überwiegenden geistigen Kraft, auf das Vorhandensein einer Gottesallmacht hin, die sich eben in der siegreichen Ausdauer dieses äußerlich Schwachen offenbart, und ist somit gerade יעקב als ישראל zu begreifen. —
ותוכל, da du vermocht hast. Du hast das vollständig erreicht, was du gewollt, nicht ich. Ich wollte dich niederwerfen, das habe ich nicht vermocht. Du wolltest nur nicht niedergeworfen werden, das ist dir gelungen. Das ist auch für alle Zeit die Stellung Jakobs und Esaus zu einander geblieben. Politisch und religiös spricht Esau: außer mir kein Heil, und erkennt seine Existenz für beeinträchtigt, so lange noch außer ihm ein Jakob, so lange es außer ihm noch eine Potenz gibt, die es beansprucht, auch zur Gestaltung der Welt in voller Berechtigung zu gehören. Jakob lässt alles Reinmenschliche in unangetasteter Berechtigung, ja verkündet allem Reinmenschlichen gerade die höchste Bedeutung und Blüte, wenn es den von ihm zu bringenden Geist in sich aufnimmt und zur Verwirklichung hinauslebt. "Segnende Anerkennung" ist das einzige, um welches Jakob mit Esau ringt.
Das עם אלקי׳ ועם אנשים scheint so viel zu sein wie בעיני אלקי׳ ואדם (Prov. 3, 4). Wenn Hoschea 12, 4 u. 5 auf dieses Erlebnis hinblickt: בבטן עקב את אחיו ובאונו inשרה את אלקים וישר אל מלאך ויוכל בכה ויתחנן לו 111׳ so ist dort der Begriff שר seiner doppelten Abstammung gefasst. שרה von שרה und וישר von שור. Es heißt: "Im Mutterschoße hielt er dem Bruder die Ferse, und in seiner Vollkraft ward er der Überragende mit Gott (wie קניתי איש את ד׳); einem Engel gegenüber ward er der Maßgebende (Bedingung setzende), so daß er weinend sich von ihm Gnade erflehte usw. Siehe oben Kap.17. V. 15.
לא יעקב יאמר עוד שמך, a reference to the end of days when Israel will have survived the destruction of the gentile nations When that time comes no one ever will again use the name Yaakov for the Jewish people [and the stigma that used to be associated with that name. Ed.] The very word יעקב already contained within this message that the bearer of this name will triumph at the end. Once he has triumphed there is no more point in having a name which alludes to something which will be realised only in the future. The future will then have arrived!
כי אם ישראל כי שרית, they will only refer to as “Israel.” This new name is to confirm that שרית עם אלוקים ועם אנשים, this is analogous to Isaiah 24,21 יפקוד ה' על צבא המרום במרום ועל מלכי האדמה על האדמה, “in that day the Lord will punish the host of heaven in heaven and the kings of the earth on earth.”
God will reveal Himself to you in Beis Eil, and change your name... I.e., the angel did not change Yaakov’s name here. Rather, he told Yaakov that Hashem will change his name in the future, and he said that he will interpret the change [of his name] that Hashem will make as applying to the blessings.
Jacob asked the angel and said: Tell me, please, your name, your essence or function. This request was not merely due to curiosity; rather, Jacob sought to clarify the meaning of the fight. Jacob did not know whether this angel represented Esau or his own alter-ego, and whether their confrontation was a trial from God or an actual threat from dark heavenly forces. He said: Why is it that you ask of my name? It is unnecessary for you to know my name. And he, the angel, blessed him there again.
When reciting the Shema, after completing the first verse, one says quietly "Blessed be the name of the glory of His Kingdom forever." (This phrase is recited quietly because it is not part of the section of the Shema as it appears in the Torah, but rather was recited by Jacob in Egypt, as explained later in this halachah. It is, however, pronounced loudly on Yom Kippur. Pirkei D'rabbi Eliezer explains that the angels praise God with this verse. On Yom Kippur, we are as pure as angels and thus, emulate their practice (Hagahot Maimoniot). It is preferable to separate clearly between the end of "Blessed be the name" - i.e., the words לעולם ועד - forever, and the beginning of the next section, ואהבת (And you shall love...) (Tur, Orach Chayim 61).) He then continues to read the first section in its normal fashion: "And you shall love God, your Lord..." Why do we read it in this fashion? (i.e., Why do we include this verse of "Blessed be the name...," since it is not part of the section of the Torah beginning with "Shema Yisrael...") It is our tradition that when the patriarch, Jacob, gathered all his sons together in Egypt close to his death, (See Genesis, Chapter 49.) he commanded and urged them regarding the Unity of God and the path of God upon which Abraham and Isaac, his father, had tread. (This narrative can be found in Pesachim 56a.) He asked them: "My sons, perhaps there are dregs among you, one who does not stand with me in the Unity of God?" (What would cause Jacob to have such a doubt regarding his children? One of the greatest merits of Jacob is that he - unlike Avraham, who fathered Yishmael, and Yitzchak, who had Esau as a son - had only righteous children. Pesachim (ibid.) explains that Jacob desired to reveal the secret of the end of days to his children, but that this knowledge suddenly left him. He was worried that perhaps his sudden lack of understanding was due to the imperfect state of his children and therefore, felt compelled to ask them about their faith in the One God. The Rambam omits all these particulars, since they are not relevant to the matter at hand - namely, the source of the custom of saying "Blessed be the name..." after "Shema Yisrael...") This is comparable to the manner in which Moses, our teacher, said to us: "Lest there be among you a man or woman [whose heart turns this day from God...]" (The Rambam adds this in order to teach us the nature of Jacob's doubts. He was not casting aspersions on the behavior of his sons, since he knew that their deeds were righteous. He was, however, worried that perhaps one of them had a mistaken understanding regarding the unity of God. This is in line with the verse the Rambam quotes. Moses is not chastising the Jewish people for their actions, but rather warning them of the possibility that there might be someone with a lack of faith that could lead to blasphemy later (Kessef Mishneh).) (Deuteronomy 29:17). They all answered and said: "Listen, Israel, (Jacob is also called by that name (Genesis 32:29).) God is our Lord, God is One," i.e., listen to us, Israel, our father, God is our Lord, God is One. (God is our Lord, God is One," i.e., listen to us, Israel, our father, God is our Lord, God is One.) The wise elder responded: (Praising God for the fortune of having righteous children; "Blessed be the Name of the Glory of His Kingdom forever." Therefore, the Jews are accustomed to utter the praise that Israel, the wise elder, uttered after this verse.) "Blessed be the Name of the Glory of His Kingdom forever." Therefore, the Jews are accustomed to utter the praise that Israel, the wise elder, uttered after this verse.
And this prohibition is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and makes himself a clairvoyant in one of the ways from all the matters we have mentioned or in another matter, and tells people things that he sees through his clairvoyance, is liable for lashes — and that is when he does some act in the thing, as we do not administer lashes without an act. But one who asks [something] from a clairvoyant is not under the liability of lashes. Nonetheless, very disgusting is anyone who fixes his thoughts or expends his time on these vanities. As it is not appropriate for one whom God has graced with knowledge and given the true religion as an inheritance to think about these vanities. Rather, he should fix his thoughts on the service of the Creator, may He be elevated, and not fear the words of the clairvoyant; since God, in His kindnesses will change the system of the stars, and nullify the power of the constellations, [so] as to do good to His pious ones. And it is known that we are the holy people, such that we are not under [the power of] a star or constellation — “the Lord is our inheritance, as He spoke to us.” And [it is] like the matter that we found with the forefathers, that God placed their stature above the ministers above: Like that which is written about Yaakov, “but rather Yisrael will be your name” (Genesis 35:10), “for you have dominated (sarita) with powers, etc.” (Genesis 32:29); meaning that God made him a minister (sar) over the [celestial] ministers. And so [too,] is Yitschak called Yisrael, as it is stated (Genesis 46:8), “these are the Children of Israel that were coming to Egypt, Yaakov and his children.” And so [too,] Avraham is called Yisrael, as we wrote in the Introduction of the book. And this is [the meaning of] what is written about the matter of the disagreement of the prophet, Eliyahu, with the prophets of Baal, as is stated (I Kings 18:31), “like the number of tribes of the children of Yaakov,” whose name was called Yisrael: As he was rebuking them [about] why they were leaving the service of the Master, the Lord of Hosts, who has in His hand to nullify all the actions of the powers and the constellations; and like the matter that He did with the forefathers, such that He put the constellations under their hand. And that is [the meaning] of its stating in that place (I Kings 18:31), “like the number of tribes of the children of Yaakov, to whom was the word of the Lord, saying, ‘Yisrael will be your name,’” — meaning to say, that He made him a minister over the [celestial] ministers, to change their system and their power with his merit. [This is] meaning to say, Israel, who are the children of Yaakov, are also ministers over the celestial ministers; and hence it would be fitting for them to not worship anything besides God alone. And so did we find with Yehoshua, who decreed to the sun and the moon to stand — as it is written in Joshua 10:12, “Sun, be still in Giveon, moon in the Ayalon Valley” — and they stood. And so [too,] several pious ones of Israel who changed the system of the constellations [and their power] with their merit. The matter would [take too] long, to bring [the] several stories that happened in Israel about this matter.
Another explanation of "And he said" has the same meaning as "and He said, If you will diligently hearken to the voice of Hashem your Elohim" (Shemot 15:26). Here too "And he said" (means) "Your name shall be called no more 'Jacob', but Israel." Then was Jacob crowned by his grade, by which he will include all the Patriarchs. It is written, "And he blessed him there" (Beresheet 32:30). It means that he acknowledged all the blessings with which his father blessed him.
Abram was called Abraham. Isaac was called Abraham, as it is stated: “This is the legacy of Isaac, Abraham’s son; Abraham.” Jacob was called Israel, as it is written: “He said: No longer will Jacob be said to be your name, but rather, Israel” (Genesis 32:29). Isaac was called Israel, as it is written: “These are the names of the children of Israel who came to Egypt with Jacob [et Yaakov]” (Exodus 1:1). (The midrash interprets the verse as saying that Jacob is included in “the children of Israel.” If so, Israel in this verse is Isaac.) Abraham was called Israel. Rabbi Natan said: It is a profound matter. “The dwelling of the children of Israel that they dwelled in Egypt” (Exodus 12:40), in the land of Canaan, and in the land of Goshen “was four hundred and thirty years” (Exodus 12:40). (The total starts from the Covenant of the Pieces, which God made with Abraham before Isaac was born, and the Torah refers to it as: “The dwelling of the children of Israel.”)
“He said to him: What is your name? He said: Jacob” (Genesis 32:28). “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name; rather, Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29). “He said to him: ‘What is your name?’ He said: ‘Jacob.’ “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name.” “Who confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers” (Isaiah 44:26) – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Since He “confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers,” do we not know that it says: “Of Jerusalem: It will be inhabited; and of the cities of Judah: They will be built” (Isaiah 44:26)? (Namely, from the fact that the Lord fulfills the word of the angel who told Jacob that his name would be changed, we can learn that He will fulfill the word of His prophets who prophesied that Jerusalem would be inhabited.) [It refers] to one angel who appeared to our patriarch Jacob. That is what is written: “He said to him: What is your name.… No [more…] Jacob.” “And fulfills the counsel of His messengers” – as the Holy One blessed be He appeared to our patriarch Jacob in order to fulfill the decree of that angel that said to him: “No [more…] Jacob.” The Holy One blessed be He also said so to him. That is what is written: “God said to him: Your name is Jacob; [your name shall no longer be called Jacob]” (Genesis 35:10) – “no [more] shall Jacob be said.” Bar Kappara said: Anyone who calls Abraham Abram violates a positive commandment. Rabbi Levi said: A positive commandment and a prohibition. “[Your name] shall no longer be called [Abram]” (Genesis 17:5) – a prohibition; “but your name shall be Abraham” (Genesis 17:5) – a positive commandment. And yet the members of the Great Assembly called him Abram, as it is written: “You are the Lord God who chose Abram…”? It was relating a narrative and saying that while he was still Abram You chose him. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Sarah Sarai violates a positive command? (And according to Rabbi Levi a positive command and a prohibition (Genesis 17:15).) It is, rather, that only he (Abraham. The verse states: “God said to Abraham…you shall not call her name Sarai.” In the case of Abraham the verse stated “your name shall no longer be called Abram.”) was commanded in her regard. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Israel Jacob violates a positive command? It is taught: It is not that the name of Jacob will be uprooted. Rather, “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Israel will be primary and Jacob secondary. Rabbi Zechariah in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: In any case: Your name is Jacob… “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Jacob is primary, and Israel is in addition to it. “For you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” – you have wrestled with the heavenly and prevailed over them, and with the earthly and prevailed over them. With the heavenly – this is the angel. Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He was Esau’s ministering angel. This is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [penei elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). Just as penei elohim is judgment, so too, your face is judgment. (As it were, Esau is passing judgment on Jacob (see Bereshit Rabba 76:7).) Just as penei elohim – “you shall not appear before Me [yera’u fanai] empty-handed” (Exodus 23:15), so too, you, I will not appear before you empty-handed. With the earthly and you prevailed over them – this is Esau and his chieftains. Alternatively, “for you have striven with God” – it is you whose image is carved on High. (The image of man in the Throne of Glory.)
[(Exod. 12:29:) AND IT CAME TO PASS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.] This text is related (to Is. 44:26): CONFIRMS THE WORD OF HIS SERVANT. (PRK 7:3.) R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Levi: What is the meaning of CONFIRMS THE WORD OF HIS SERVANT? Do we not know that (ibid., cont.) HE SAYS TO JERUSALEM: YOU SHALL BE INHABITED, AND TO THE CITIES OF JUDAH: THEY SHALL BE REBUILT? It is simply that a certain angel appeared to our ancestor Jacob. He said to him: What is your name? He told him: Jacob. (in Gen. 32:29 [28]): YOUR NAME SHALL NO LONGER BE JACOB, …. (Is. 44:26, cont.:) AND FULFILLS THE COUNSEL OF HIS MESSENGERS. The Holy One appeared to Jacob to affirm the command of his angel, AND (in Gen. 35:10) GOD SAID TO HIM: YOUR NAME IS JACOB. In the case of Jerusalem, over which all the prophets have prophesied, how much the more ?
Again the angel said to him: "Let me go" (Gen. 32:26). Jacob answered him: I will not let thee go until thou hast blessed me; and he blessed him, as it is said, "And he blessed him there" (Gen. 32:29). Again he said to him: "Let me go" (Gen. 32:26). He answered him: I will not let thee go until thou tellest me what thy name is. And (the angel) called his name Israel like his own name, for his own name was called Israel. Jacob wished to prevail over the angel, and to throw him down upon the earth. What did the angel do? He took hold of the sinew of the hip, which was upon the hollow of Jacob's thigh, and he lifted the sinew of his hip (out of its place), and it became like the fat of the dead. Therefore the children of Israel are forbidden to eat of the sinew of the hip which is upon the hollow of the animal's thigh, as it is said, "Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sinew of the hip which is upon the hollow of the thigh" (Gen. 32:82).
(Devarim 6:4) "Hear, O Israel, the L-rd our G-d, the L-rd is One": Because it is written (Shemoth 25:2) "Speak to the children of Israel — It is not written "Speak to the children of Abraham and Isaac," but "speak to the children of Israel (i.e., Jacob [viz. Bereshith 32:29]) — Jacob merited that this pronouncement be stated to his children. For Jacob feared all of his days — Woe unto me, lest "base matter" issue from me as it did from my fathers! From Abraham there came forth Yishmael. From Isaac there came forth Esav my brother. Yishmael was an idolator, viz. (Bereshith 21:9) "And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian … 'disporting himself'" (with idolatry). These are the words of R. Akiva. R. Shimon b. Yochai says: R. Akiva expounds four things where I differ from him, and it seems to me that my view is the correct one: He says "And Sarah the son of Hagar the Egyptian disports himself" with idolatry." And I say that the reference is to the inheritance, Yishmael saying "should I not, being the first-born, take a double portion?" And for this reason Sarah said (Ibid. 10) "Drive out this maidservant and her son." And my view seems more cogent than his.
To return to the subject which we touched upon earlier of how the שר can don the "mantle" of the שכינה. Although this is a tremendous display of power for such a שר, it will boomerang and become the cause of his downfall as we mentioned earlier. This procedure is alluded to in the words of our פרשה in 10,2, where the Torah says: "how I have made a mockery of the Egyptians." Rashi explains that the word התעללתי במצרים, means "I have toyed with them." We need to understand the meaning of this שחוק, game, that G–d played. When we consider the august position of the שר של מצרים as we have described, we realise that when he was at the height of his power, this שר gave no thought to his eventual demise, and that the higher he would rise, the greater would be his eventual fall into a deep pit. The very "mantle" of the שכינה which he wore would become the cause of his downfall. At that time, G–d in Heaven, who is aware of the exact moment in time when events would cause the שר של מצרים to fall, would smile. The timing of these events is alluded to in Moses' words to Pharaoh in 10,3: "How long will you refuse to humble yourself before Me?" Humbling oneself means to turn from being evil to being good. We have a prime example of this when Samael, who had been Jacob's arch-enemy, changed direction and accorded Jacob his blessing, his recognition (Genesis 32,29).
The verse (26,5) we have just quoted contains ten words corresponding to the Ten Commandments. When you examine the wording of the Ten Commandments you will find that it contains 172 words, the same as the numerical value of the word עקב, as pointed out by Baal HaTurim. You may ask: If this is so why was יעקב not called עקב? The answer is already alluded to when we read about Jacob's birth, when he is described as holding on to עקב עשו, the heel of Esau (25,26). The last three letters in Jacob's name are an indication that the sanctity, holiness expressed by the letter י in his name will prevail in the world only at the end of history, at the עקב, or סוף. The heel of Esau, however, the one that Jacob held on to, is symbolic of the serpent which hisses: it is the end of life, signifies darkness and death, as we have explained earlier. When the enmity that exists between the serpent and man is described in the Torah in Genesis 3,15: הוא ישופך ראש ואתה תשופנו עקב, "He (man) will strike at your head, and you (the snake) will strike at his heel," the Zohar writes on this verse that the word ראש refers to the first letter in the name יעקב, an allusion to the Ten Commandments. If Jacob observes the Ten Commandments, then he can successfully strike at the ראש, the head of the serpent and all that the serpent represents; but והיה כאשר תריד (Genesis 27,40) "when you will backslide in your service of G–d," then you (the snake) will strike at עקב, the part of the name יעקב when detached from the י and all that this letter stands for." If Jacob had not had the letter י in his name his name would have been associated only with elements derived from the סטרא אחרא, the negative side of the diagram of the emanations. When the Torah reports that וידו אוחזת, that "his hand was holding on to," the letters in the word for "his hand,” i.e. ידו, are the same as the letter יוד. The potential contained in the name יעקב, enabled Jacob to become ישראל, a name that was accorded to Jacob only after his successful refinement through harassment at the hands of Esau. The name ישראל is the pinnacle that the spiritually most refined people can achieve. It indicates that he had been able to contend with Heavenly forces and to prevail (Genesis 32,29). Onkelos translates this verse: "You have fought before G–d with man and have succeeded."
Having this in mind, we can understand an enigmatic Midrash Rabbah Genesis 63,3 on this פרשה: "These are the descendants of Isaac the son of Abraham, Abraham begat Isaac. Abraham was called Abraham; Isaac was called Abraham for the Torah says "these are the descendants of Abraham, Abraham." Jacob's name was called Israel because the Torah says in Genesis 32,29: "He said to him: 'Your name will no longer be called Jacob but Israel.' Isaac was called Israel, as the Torah says in Exodus 1,1 'And these are the names of the children of Israel who came to Egypt with Jacob.' Abraham is called Israel." Rabbi Natan added that there is a profound meaning in: ומושב בני ישראל אשר ישבו במצרים ובארץ כנען ובארץ גשן שלושים שנה וארבע מאות שנה. "The period that the children of Israel lived in Egypt, Goshen and Canaan respectively prior to the Exodus was 430 years."
The significance of the number seventy is the number of Jacob's offspring that went down to Egypt which corresponded to the seventy spiritual representatives of the Gentile nations in the Heavenly Regions. The reason that the seventy souls went to Egypt and into exile was to enable them to be refined there in what our sages have called "the crucible of Egypt." The Kabbalists tell us that of the seventy שרים, representatives at the Celestial Court we have mentioned, thirty five are perceived as lining up on the "right" side of the diagram of the ספירות, emanations, whereas the other thirty five are found on the "left" side. Israel has a סנהדרין, Supreme Court, of seventy judges corresponding to those שרים of the Gentile nations. All of these judges are from the root of קדושה. This is why the Torah warns us not to turn either right or left from what these judges (elders) tell us (Deut. 17,11). Rashi and other commentators interpret this to mean that even if the Sanhedrin tells you that "right" is "left," and that "left" is "right," we must abide by their ruling (Jerusalem Talmud Horayot 1,5). A Jewish Court of Law composed of expert scholars who have received the ordination called סמיכה, is called אלו-הים. It is the nature of this ordination that there is a continuous chain of authority going back all the way to G–d Himself via the scholars in each generation, including Moses who was ordained by G–d Himself. The very word used to describe this ordination, סמוכים, "adjoining, next to one another,” hints at the nature of the ordination, that it is valid only because it represents an unbroken chain of tradition. This idea is expressed in the Torah in Deut. 4,4 ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כלכם היום, "You who have cleaved to the Lord your G–d, are all alive this day." The 70 שרים of the Gentile nations are called אלהים אחרים, "deities of the others," because they look up to them as their gods. This idea is alluded to when the angel, (Esau's celestial counterpart), justifies Jacob being called Israel by saying כי שרית עם אלה-ים, you have fought with the 70 deities of the Gentile nations.
"There he praised the Almighty G–d of Israel." According to the view of Rabbi Eleazar in Megillah 18, this verse tells us that G–d called Jacob “א-ל”; his reasoning is as follows: – If this were an appellation Jacob had given, then the Torah should have written ויקרא לו יעקב א-ל אלוקי ישראל. The Torah wanted to go on record that Jacob represents only the “א-ל” part of “סמאל” . When we view the struggle between יעקב, who was all א-ל, and Samael, who was only partially א-ל, it is natural that Jacob should have prevailed, i.e. כי שרית עם אלוקים ועם אנשים ותוכל, "You have contended with G–d and with men and have prevailed." This description of a dual encounter refers to the struggle with the terrestrial force of Esau on the one hand, and with the Celestial forces of Esau, i.e. Samael, on the other. The name ישראל fittingly reflects this dual struggle. It is a name conferred upon Jacob by Samael himself, an acknowledgment that Jacob was the bearer of Isaac's blessings.
There is an excellent reason that Jacob should have experienced this revelation at the moment he mourned the death of his mother. I first have to explain something about the exalted meaning of the name ישראל, and also something about the name יעקב. On 32,29, Bereshit Rabbah "Your name shall no longer be Jacob but Israel," comments as follows: "This does not mean that the name Jacob was eliminated (as in the case of the name Abram), but it means that the name Jacob would henceforth be only subordinate to the name Israel” Rabbi Zecharyah in the name of Rabbi Chama adds that the name Jacob would continue to exist in any event, but the name Israel would lend it an additional dimension. Both these opinions are compatible with one another.
We are dealing here with the dimension of "Jacob" as well as with the dimension of "Israel." First, Jacob assumed the position of שר, Master, vis-a-vis the angel. This is what Samael meant when he said: "You have fought with G–d and man and prevailed;" That aspect of the name "Israel" made him superior to the angel. However, from that development alone I would not have known that even the part of him that was still called "Jacob" could attain the spiritual level of the angels. This is why Hoseah said: "The angel wept and implored Jacob." [Hoseah speaks two verses earlier about Jacob as being punished by G–d, whereas he worked his way up on the spiritual ladder. Ed.] The lesson we learn from this is that even in his capacity as "merely" Jacob, the angel had to implore him, weeping. This was a preview of how things were going to be in the future. Both the names "Jacob" and "Israel" will reflect the highest spiritual achievements, higher even than those of the ministering angels, as we pointed out in connection with Numbers 23,23. Jacob's "victory" over an angel of the type of Samael will then be matched by his "victory" over angels which represent only positive spiritual values.
G–d was not satisfied with this refusal by Samael, but pointed out that because Esau was the first-born, it was he who was entitled to receive the Torah. Samael replied that the birthright had already been sold to Jacob, and that he, Samael, had concurred in the validity of the sale during his nocturnal encounter with Jacob in Genesis 32,29. G–d thereupon said to Samael: "Since you are not interested in My Torah, depart from My domain." Samael accepted. G–d said to Samael: "Since you suggested that I offer the Torah to Israel, give me some advice how to go about persuading the children of Israel to accept the Torah from Me." Samael replied that it would be necessary to bribe Israel into accepting the Torah. He suggested that a suitable bribe would be to endow Israel with some of endowments of the Celestial Regions so as to make Israel feel superior. As an opening gesture he himself volunteered to bestow some of his own light on Israel and handed it over to G–d there and then. It is this "light" that the Torah describes as וזרח משעיר "It shone forth from Se-ir towards it" (Israel). This is the mystical dimension of Leviticus 16,22: ונשא השעיר עליו את כל עונותם, "The male goat will carry all their (Israel's) sins." The שעיר refers to Samael.
לא את אבותינו (לבדם) כרת את הברית כי אתנו אנחנו, “not only with our fathers (alone) did the Lord establish the covenant;” we find a similar formulation in Genesis 32,29 לבדם) לא יקרא שמך יעקב כי אם ישראל עמו), “your name will no longer be Yaakov, but the name Yisrael will henceforth be added to it.”We find a similar interpretation in the Midrash Tehillim on Psalms 8,3: מפי עוללים ויונקים יסדת עוז, “from the mouths of infants and sucklings You have founded strength.” This is interpreted to mean that even unborn children have received the Torah and are guarantors for this to their parents that they will observe the Torah in due course. The Midrash describes the unborn fetuses as having been given visions of G-d and having heard the Ten Commandments, and responded after each that they considered it as binding for them.
That is why Moses must fight death and prefer life on earth to life among the ministering angels amid the deathless glory of heaven. The Moses we know – the man who fought injustice and slavery, who stood up against the most powerful empire of the ancient world, who more than any other “wrestled with God and with men” (Gen. 32:29) – was the figure who gave ultimate dignity to this world, not the next. Moses was not a man prepared to make his peace with the wrongs of his time in the knowledge that somewhere else, in some other order of existence, there is a world of perfect justice. “Do not go gentle into that dark night,” wrote Dylan Thomas. “Rage, rage against the dying of the light.” (“Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night,” in The Poems of Dylan Thomas, ed. John Goodby (New York: New Directions, 2003), 239.)
No one has cast a longer shadow over the history of the Jewish people than Moses – the man who confronted Pharaoh, announced the plagues, brought the people out of Egypt, led them through the sea and desert, and suffered their serial ingratitudes. He brought the word of God to the people, and prayed for the people to God. Jacob was given the name Israel, meaning one who “wrestle[s] with God and with men and prevail[s]” (Gen. 32:29). More even than Jacob, the phrase epitomises Moses, whose passion for justice and hyper-receptivity to the voice of God made him the greatest Jewish leader of all time. Yet he was not destined to enter the land to which he had spent his entire time as a leader travelling towards. Why?
התהלך לפני והיה תמים, “walk before Me and become complete, free from blemish.” In order for Avraham to achieve this stature, G–d added the letter ה, a metaphor for His name, to Avraham’s name. The numerical value of the letters in Avraham’s name would then amount to 248, the number of limbs in his body. This is the conclusion arrived at in the Talmud, tractate Nedarim folio 32. According to Romi bar Abba, the reason why Abraham was first known as אברם and subsequently as אברהם is that originally G–d gave him control over 243 limbs, whereas from now on he had control over all of his 248 limbs. They are: two eyes, two ears, his torso, his head. If you want to realise how important the physical act of circumcision was, you will find this explained on folio 31 of tractate Nedarim. In the commentary known as Mechilta, it is stated that the reason why both Avraham and Sarah are never again referred to by their original names, as opposed to Yaakov, who after G–d changed his name to Yisrael is frequently still referred to by his original name Yaakov, this is because after both had their names changed, their original names had not been obliterated completely as the letters of their original names had been retained also as part of their new names. Their names had only been “improved.” Israel being a totally new name was not meant to invalidate his original name. The only reason we know this is because the Torah continues to make use of it. [The name Yaakov, given to him by outsiders, not his father, had suggested that he was somehow inferior spiritually already from birth. The angel in his nocturnal wrestling match had alluded to this. (Genesis 32,29) The Torah by continuing to use it, shows that in G–d’s eyes it never reflected upon him in a negative fashion. Ed.] The sages of the Mechilta add further that the reason why the name of the third patriarch, Yitzchok, has never been changed or amended, is that he had been named by G–d Himself, long before he had even been born. (Verse 19 in our chapter)
Rashbam makes a remarkable comment, connecting Jacob’s wrestling match with the angel to the episode in which Moses, returning to Egypt, is attacked by God (Ex. 4:24), and also linking this to Jonah on the stormy ship (Commentary to Gen. 32:21–29). All three, he says, were overcome by fear at the danger or difficulty that confronted them, and each wanted to escape. Jacob’s angel, Moses’ encounter, and the tempest that threatened to sink Jonah’s ship, were all ways in which Heaven cut off the line of retreat.
One fact about this parasha has long perplexed the commentators. After his wrestling match with the unnamed adversary, Jacob was told: “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with beings Divine and human, and have prevailed” (Gen. 32:29, JPS translation). Or “Your name will no longer be said to be Jacob, but Israel. You have become great (sar) before God and man. You have won” (Aryeh Kaplan translation).
Not until he was running away from home did God appear to him. Not until years later, alone, at night, terrified at the prospect of meeting Esau, did God or an angel wrestle with him. He alone was given, by God or the angel, a completely new name, not an enhancement of his old one but a completely new identity: Israel. Even more strikingly, despite the fact that he was told “Your name shall no more be called Jacob,” (He is told this twice, first by the angel, then by God Himself: Gen. 32:29, 35:10.) the Torah continues to call him Jacob, suggesting that his struggle was lifelong – as, often, is ours.
In them may my name be recalled and the names of my fathers. That you recall for them all of what was taught concerning my name and the name of my ancestors. Because the name Israel is so named because "I have striven with beings divine and human (Genesis 32:29)." Thus he will be a righteous man, ruling through fear of God. And Jacob is so named because most of the goodness of the righteous is hidden, because their beginning is always with sorrow and their end is very exalted. And Abraham, is so named "Father of a multitude of nations (Genesis 17:4), thus they will be the head of all the nations. And Isaac is translated "And I rejoiced", thus there will always be joy in their dwellings.
וקראת את שמו יצחק, “and you will name him ‘Yitzchak.’” Yitzchak was given this name by G-d. This is why we never find that he was given another name such as his father or his son Yaakov who was given the additional name Yisrael. Both Avram’s name and Yaakov’s name had been given them by their respective fathers and not by G-d Himself. I have found a remark confirming this in the Jerusalem Talmud at the end of the first chapter of Berachot. The rhetorical question posed there is: “Why was Yitzchak’s name never amended whereas the names of Avraham and Yaakov were amended?” Answer: ‘’because the latter’s name was G-d-given, whereas the names of the former were given to them by their respective fathers.” The Talmud quotes our verse here as the source for claiming that G-d commanded Avraham to call the name of his son Yitzchak. You might retort that we also encounter Yitzchak’s name spelled with the letter ש instead of the letter צ in Psalms 108,9, and that this is as much of a change as spelling אברהם without the letter ה. Actually, the word ישחק is not a new name at all. The prophet wanted to draw attention to the element fire which was one of the basic elements in Yitzchak’s character as we know from the ספר יצירה where the author writes (edition of Gaon from Vilna chapter 6 Mishnah 2) “there are three אמות which are known as אמ'ש “which are air, water and fire.” Whereas the מ is silent, static, the א is constantly in motion so that the letter ש is an allusion to the great fire, a characteristic of Yitzchak. [Fire is perceived as vanquishing water, rising even during the process of water “extinguishing” fire and remaining behind on the ground. (abbreviated quote from the comment of the Gaon from Vilna). Ed.] Another reason why Avram’s name had to be changed whereas Yitzchak’s name did not need to be changed: G-d had given Avraham an additional destiny, i.e. to become a founder of many nations. This had to be reflected in his name being changed. Similarly Yaakov. His additional name Yisrael was in recognition of his having successfully contended with opposing celestial forces as attested to by the angel who struggled with him (Genesis 32,29). Yitzchak had not had similar experiences so that these did not require any changes or additions to his name. He had remained throughout his life on holy soil in the Holy Land.
The plain meaning of why the Torah suddenly calls Yaakov by his alternate name Yisrael again instead of writing “the time approached for Yaakov to die,” (which would have been the natural sequence to the line: “Yaakov lived in the land of Egypt for seventeen years”) is that ever since he had been given the additional name the Torah uses both names interchangeably. Throughout our portion the names Yaakov and Yisrael are used intermittently. [The name “Yaakov” appears six times, whereas the name “Yisrael” appears thirteen times. Ed.]
From a more rational/scientific point of view we may detect a distinct pattern in the Torah sometimes choosing to refer to Yaakov by his original name and sometimes by his additional name. The name Yaakov applies to the physical part of Yaakov’s personality, matters connected to his terrestrial existence, whereas the name Yisrael refers to spiritual aspects of his personality, matters connected to his eternal existence in celestial regions. When Yaakov had first been given the name “Yaakov” the Torah stated that this reflected his holding on to the heel of his brother Esau (Genesis 25,26). We find the name Yisrael first used in connection with Yaakov having successfully contended with the celestial force representing his brother Esau (Genesis 32,29). It is therefore clear that the additional name Yisrael was intended principally to reflect Yaakov’s spiritual accomplishments.
הקבצו ושמעו, “assemble and listen!” Yaakov refers to both of his names when addressing his children. He speaks of “Yaakov” when referring to his בנים, children, as at the time when his sons were still children he had not yet been given the name “Yisrael.” When he refers to himself as simply “your father,” he uses his name “Yisrael.” It is also possible to understand the words אביכם ישראל as a reference to “your Heavenly father O Israel.” In that event Yaakov introduces his blessings by exhorting his sons to remain loyal to G’d, who is known in Rabbinic terms as ישראל סבא, “grandfather (of) Israel.” This would account for the repetition of the names Yaakov and Yisrael respectively in these two verses.
ויחר אף ה' במשה, such an expression always means that G’d’s anger had tangible consequences for the one at whom G’d was angry. In this instance, the encounter described in verse 24 where G’d is described as seeking to kill him is such a consequence. I already explained on Genesis 32,29 that Yaakov’s having had to limp was a punishment for him.
and Israel, who was called by Me You were called Israel by Me (Gen. 32:29). Jonathan renders: Israel, My summoned one.
משכנותיך, a reference to the synagogues of the Jews all over, as well as to their Temples when these existed. The reason that Bileam said מה טובו, an unusual formulation, is that he wanted to make plain that the Torah academies are not only of benefit to the people who study in them, but that they also are good in a transitive sense, i.e. their very existence is of benefit to the entire nation. The very name יעקב also contains such a dual meaning. On the one hand it appears to have a negative connotation, but it also symbolises עקב a heel, something at the tail end of matters, meaning after everything else has already disappeared the עקב still remains, endures. The name “Israel” that was added to Yaakov’s name was justified by this thought, that its bearer had come out of a confrontation with celestial forces and had survived, had endured. If Israel could contend with celestial forces successfully, it would certainly be able to do so with terrestrial forces, i.e. עם אנשים, (Genesis 32,29).
[14] So impossible to name indeed is the Existent that not even the Potencies who serve Him tell us a proper name. Thus after the wrestling-bout in which the Man of Practice engaged in his quest of virtue, he says to the unseen master, “Announce to me Thy name,” and he said “Why dost thou ask this my name?” (Gen. 32:29), and he refuses to tell his personal and proper name. “It is enough for thee,” he means, “to profit through my benediction, but as for names, those symbols which indicate created beings, look not for them in the case of imperishable natures.”
Again, the Gemara asks: But if that is so, one who calls Jacob Jacob, about whom it is written: “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel” (Genesis 32:29), also transgresses a mitzva.
The Gemara continues to discuss Jacob wrestling with the angel. The prophet states: “So he strove [vayyasar] with an angel, and prevailed; he wept, and made supplication to him; at Beth El he would find him, and there he would speak with us” (Hosea 12:5). From this verse I do not know who became master [sar], i.e., was victorious, over whom. When another verse states: “And he said: Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; for you have striven with angels and with men, and have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29), you must say that Jacob became master over the angel.
The verse states: “And he said: Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; for you have striven with angels [elohim] and with men, and have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29). Rabba says: The angel intimated to Jacob that in the future two princes would emerge from him: They are the Exilarch who is in Babylonia and the Nasi who is in Eretz Yisrael. And from here he also intimated to Jacob that there would be an exile.
Moshe, demonstrating a perfect example of the character of Israel as one who “wrestles with God and man” (Bereshit 32:29), confronts both Israel and God. To God, he prays for mercy for the people. Coming down the mountain and facing Israel, he smashes the tablets, the symbol of the covenant. He grinds the calf to dust, mixes it with water, and makes the Israelites drink it. He tells the Levites to punish the wrongdoers.
I. No Longer Shall You Be Called Yaakov THE CORE IDEA After his wrestling match with the angel, Yaakov was told: “No longer will your name be Yaakov, but Yisrael, for you have struggled with God and with men, and have won” (Bereshit 32:29). This new name is in fact given a second time in our parasha. After his meeting with Esav, and the story of Dina and Shekhem, God tells Yaakov to go to Beit El. Then we read: “After Yaakov returned from Padan Aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him, ‘Your name is Yaakov, but you will no longer be called Yaakov; your name will be Yisrael.’ So He named him Yisrael” (Bereshit 35:9–10).
saying to him, “You whose name is Jacob, You shall be called Jacob no more, But Israel shall be your name.” Thus he was named Israel.
He strove with an angel and prevailed— The other had to weep and implore him. At Bethel [Jacob] would meet him, There to commune with him. (him Heb. “us.”)
He [the man] said, No longer will your name be spoken of as Yaakov, but as Yisrael, for you have contended with God[ly beings] [are great before God] and with men, and you have won.
And he said, Thy name shall be no more called Jakob but Israel, because thou art magnified with the angels of the Lord and with the mighty, and thou hast prevailed with them.
| וַיִּשְׁאַ֣ל יַעֲקֹ֗ב וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הַגִּֽידָה־נָּ֣א שְׁמֶ֔ךָ וַיֹּ֕אמֶר לָ֥מָּה זֶּ֖ה תִּשְׁאַ֣ל לִשְׁמִ֑י וַיְבָ֥רֶךְ אֹת֖וֹ שָֽׁם׃ | 30 E | Jacob asked, “Pray tell me your name.” But he said, “You must not ask my name!” And he took leave of him there. |
Genesis 32,30. “Yaakov named the site of this encounter ‘Peniel’, for I have seen the Divine face to face and I have remained alive.” There are people who serve the Lord in order that He in turn will shower them with all His goodness. There are other persons, on a higher level than the first category, who serve the Lord because of their awareness that G’d, by reason of His greatness, deserves to be served, and that it is a privilege to be allowed to serve Him. They do not even think in terms of what they may stand to gain by doing so. As a result of their wholehearted devotion to G’d, G’d in turn “faces” them in acknowledgment of their selfless service, i.e. He relates to them פנים אל פנים. Surviving such an experience is something extraordinary, and that is why Yaakov, realising this, exclaims: ותנצל נפשי, “my life was saved.”
למה זה תשאל לשמי, “why are you asking for my name?” The angel informs Yaakov that there is no point in knowing his name; he explains that when people that have not seen one another ever, upon meeting, will extend greetings with one another and bless each other wishing each other well, and ask one another for their names, they justify this in the event that they wished to communicate with each other in the future. If they do not know one another’s name and address, how could they communicate with each other? Knowing the angel’s name, just as in the case of Manoach in Judges 13,17, is important only when such occasions will arise. The angel assures Yaakov that in this instance there is no need for this as he knows his name and address and will not forget it. Another interpretation of why the angel retorted to Yaakov’s question with a question of his own, instead of with an answer, though he complied with Yaakov’s request to bless him: the reason why angels do not like to reveal their names is to prevent human beings to make them swear an oath concerning the mission that they had fulfilled. And we also found that it is also written about Manoach to whom the angel says, "Why do you ask for my name? And it is wonderful" (Judges 13,18). Another interpretation: I asked what is your name in order to mention it in the name of the act, but what will my name be of any use to you? Why would you ask me?
הגידה נא שמך, "please tell me your name!" Although Jacob was aware that angels do not have fixed names, he asked him what this particular angel's name was at this particular time.
למה זה תשאל לשמי, "Why do you ask after my name?" Whereas it made sense that the angel asked Jacob's name seeing he intended to change it to Israel, or at least, to inform him of that impending change. Jacob's asking the angel for his name did not have such a purpose, however. The angel therefore wanted to know the reason for Jacob's enquiry. The angel may also simply have hinted that there was no point in asking him his present name as it was apt to be changed as soon as he had accomplished his present mission. He would only have to ask him again for his name on a future occasion.
למה זה תשאל לשמי, “why is this that you ask for my name?” He meant: “we do not have a fixed name; our names always change according to the mission we are sent on.” Another meaning of these words: “why do you ask for a name seeing that we are not in the habit of revealing our names?” The reason an angel does not like to reveal his name is so as not to appear to crown himself with the success of any mission he has been sent on. He does not want a human being to go around saying: “this and this angel has performed such and such a miracle.” He is a servant, a mere extension of his Master in Heaven and he is careful not to to do something which would create the wrong impression. This was the reason that the angel who had announced to Manoach and his wife that they would have a son resented being asked for his name (Judges 13,18) saying that his name was פלאי, “something concealed. This is the meaning of Isaiah 43,7: כל הנקרא בשמי-לכבודי בראתיו, “everything which bears My name,- I have created it for the sake of My honour.” This is also the thrust of David saying in Psalms 29,1: “ascribe to the Lord, O divine beings, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength.”
ויאמר לא אשלחך כי אם ברכתני, this teaches that the intellectual life-force within Yaakov’s body held on to the disembodied intellect represented by the “angel”. He (Yaakov) was not prepared to let go of the disembodied spirit he had embraced during this nocturnal encounter until this force had left an imprint on him which would not become dispelled as soon as he released the disembodied intelligence from his “embrace.” He insisted on attaining the intellectual level he had aspired to in an irreversible manner, not merely as a temporary spiritual-intellectual “high.”
ויאמר לא יעקב יאמר עוד שמך , remember that the name Yaakov has a connotation of “humiliation, degradation.” We encounter this when he was born when the Torah described him as holding on to his twin brother’s heel (Genesis 25,26). Such an activity as holding on to someone else’s heel is certainly creating an image of someone servile, someone in a degrading condition. After all, the heel is the very lowest part of the body. The name ישראל by contrast evokes the image of something superior. This is why the “angel” said: “you are entitled to be known by a name which conveys something lofty.” He gave as the reason for this change of name the fact that כי שרית עם אלו-הים ועם אנשים, that Yaakov’s intellectual life-force had proven to be equal to the intellect of disembodied spiritual beings even though his own intellect was still imprisoned within a body, This is the meaning of the words ועם אנשים. Actually, there had been no need for this word; if someone holds his own in a contest with divine forces he is most certainly understood to be even to or superior to any human contestant. The use of the words עם אנשים therefore adds a new dimension to our verse. Yaakov was very anxious to have confirmation that his own נפש השכלית, was on a par with that of disembodied spiritual creatures though his own spirit was still connected to his body.
הגידה נא שמך, he wanted confirmation of what the “angel” had said by being able to identify him by name. The name would give Yaakov a clue as to the essence of that spiritual force. But the angel did not fulfill his request. He responded למה זה תשאל לשמי — that Yaakov did not need this information as he had already achieved a great deal and had risen to the level of disembodied heavenly spirits. The Torah goes on with a report of the consequences of this encounter by writing על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל את גיד הנשה אשר על כף הירך, “this is why the children of Israel are not to eat the displaced sinew of the hip-socket.” This means that seeing the נפש השכלית is meant to adjust to the norms of the disembodied intellect, the true Israelites are not to engage in activities which arouse the libido which is seated near the hip-socket. The meaning of the word “eat” here does not only mean the actual consumption of this part of animalistic tissue but also what it symbolizes, i.e. absorbing the philosophy it represents.
From a purely physical point of view, this sinew is a very tough sinew and comparable to a tough cord. Cords become harder and tougher with use through pulling wagons, etc. Similarly, when one engages in such activities as arousing one’s libido, this leaves a progressively deeper imprint on one’s personality. The more frequently one engages in such activities the more they become part of one’s personality. Hence, the prohibition of “eating” that sinew has also deep psychological significance for the Jewish people. Preoccupation with such concerns gradually estranges one to G’d. The act of “eating” if performed within reason, i.e. in quantities appropriate to the body’s need, actually promotes both good physical and spiritual health. Eating to excess results in corruption of the body and ultimately the soul. The same is true when one indulges any of the other תאוות הגוף, physical desires. אשר על כף הירך, the importance of this particular sinew is that the entire body relies heavily on it so that if it is damaged one cannot even move. It therefore represents all physical desire. עד היום הזה, this does not refer to a specific date. The meaning of the words is that as long as the desires of the body assert themselves in man the restriction expressed in this prohibition remains in force. The arrival of the hereafter signifies a new יום, “Day,” as documented by many of our prophets. Hence, the Torah says that as long as man (Israel) is a mortal human being this prohibition will remain in force. כי נגע בכף ירך יעקב, the reason the Torah deliberately reverts to naming Israel “Yaakov” at this juncture, is to stress that the influence of physical desire is what “separates the men from the boys,” i.e. what is the true impediment of every “Yaakov” developing into an “Israel.” It is within the power and scope of physical desires to drag down the נפש השכלית in man to the level represented by Yaakov at birth, i.e. a degraded person who hangs on to the heel of his totally physically oriented brother. We find an interesting parallel of this concept in Kings I 18,31 ויקח אליהו שתים עשרה אבנים כמספר שבטי בני-יעקב אשר היה דבר ה' אליו לאמור ישראל יהיה שמך. “Eliyahu took twelve stones according to the number of the tribes of Yaakov, to whom G’d had said: ‘your name shall be Israel.’” What was the need for the Book of Kings to add the words: ‘to whom G’d had said: ”your name shall be Israel?’” Are we then fools that we did not know who Yaakov was? The answer is that at the time of the prophet Eliyahu the Israelite people were in a state of rebellion against G’d. They actively worshiped the Baal, misled by the prophets and priests who preached the religion of the Baal. Eliyahu reminded them in the verse quoted that they were guilty of devoting themselves to the physical, to the desires of the body, whereas their task in life had been to devote themselves to the meta-physical, to the Divine. The word יעקב in the verse above symbolized the physical whereas the word ישראל symbolized the spiritual, the meta-physical. Eliyahu reminded them that G’d had instructed them to become שכליים, intellectually oriented people, similar to the angels. We also find in Psalms 82,6 that at one time G’d had said of Man “you are divine,” only to find that due to their having committed a sin involving following their physical desires they became mortal, far from divine. In 35,9 when G’d says to Yaakov לא יקרא שמך עוד יעקב כי-אם ישראל יהיה שמך, “you will no longer be called Yaakov but your name shall remain Israel,” the message is not so much a compliment but a moral/ethical imperative to live according to the yardsticks applied to individuals deserving of the distinctive title ישראל. This is why our sages in Berachot 13 stated that ישראל was henceforth Yaakov’s major name, the name Yaakov being used only in a secondary sense. This also explains G’d’s instructions to Moses in Exodus 19,3 prior to the giving of the Torah כה תאמר לבית יעקב ותגיד לבני ישראל , “thus you shall say (briefly) to the house of Yaakov, and tell (in detail) to the children of Israel.” The women were referred to as “Yaakov,” as they are adjuncts to the men (in terms of Torah study), the men as “Israel.” Thus far the words of the philosopher. If I perhaps have not translated his words verbatim, this was because I basically wanted only to convey the gist of his approach. I would add, based on the approach of this philosopher, that the fact that the Torah calls the name of the place where Yaakov had this encounter once פניאל and another time פנואל, is a hint that the first name alludes to this angel representing the tenth emanation (meaning of the letter י) the type of angel known as איש. Once Yaakov/Israel had passed that place and had properly assimilated this new concept of man’s נפש שכלית being capable of matching the spiritual level of the intellect of the disembodied angels, the place was called פנואל with the letter ו, as we now find that Yaakov was limping on his hip-socket. He had become aware of his body’s being an impediment to spiritual progress which needed to be overcome. A kabbalistic approach to this episode: The words ויאבק איש עמו are a reference to כבוד נברא במלאכים, a concept we encountered when the angels visited Avraham. [Briefly, if I understand it correctly: on the one hand we find the term מלאך applied to man, on the other hand, we find the term איש applied to angels. Whenever such “inverted” terms are used they are expressions of honor, compliments to the person or angel undergoing the respective experience. In this instance the מלאך assuming human form compliments the human being who is to experience his presence, whereas when a human being is described as מלאך this is a compliment to the angels into whose spheres he has been transplanted for the experience described. In more mundane terms “when in Rome do as the Romans do,” and vice versa. Ed.]
There are some commentators who have explained the words “why do you ask for my name” as “seeing that I have been defeated, what is the pointed in your knowing my name? Usually the victor wants his own name to become known. The loser does not want his name known so as to suffer the minimum of embarrassment.
ויברך אותו שם, “he blessed him there.” He acknowledged that Yaakov was the rightful owner of the blessings his father had bestowed upon him. According to a Midrash the blessing the angel bestowed upon Yaakov at this time was identical with what would later on become the standard formula of the Priests blessing the Jewish people as recorded in Numbers 6,24-27. A logical/investigative approach: The words: “a man wrestled with him,” refer to Gavriel. [We have shown on other occasions that Gavriel is referred to as איש “man.” Ed.] According to the philosophers, Gavriel is symbolic of the active investigative intelligence. [According to Kabbalistic writings this disembodied intelligence supplies the outer form to human beings based on their endowments (genes), Ed.] This force is the tenth of the emanations (the lowest counting from the top) the one we call מלכות which is just one rung above the physical universe, the עולם העשיה. This is the reason that the term איש which is usually only associated with tangible creatures is applied to Gavriel. Yaakov wanted to know if it is possible that this “man’s” soul while still enclosed in a body could attain or represent a spiritual level equal to disembodied intelligences such as the force with whom he had done battle. [In other words, this category of angel might be perceived as the link between the highest intelligence found inside a body and the lowest intelligence able to exist as a disembodied entity. Ed.] The angel, i.e. Gavriel, answered him that this was possible only after dawn, i.e. until the various forces which darken the soul have disappeared with the light of morning. This physical light, though symbolic of spiritual light, is here described as עלות השחר. Let me now explain the whole episode to you based on the premise we have just outlined. I am basing myself on a Jewish philosopher in Seville who wrote this commentary in the course of his discourse on Song of Songs. I have merely translated what he wrote into Hebrew: ויותר יעקב לבדו, “Yaakov remained alone deep in thought, divesting himself of the influences exerted upon him by his body so that his thinking was unimpaired by such influences.” He desired to know if his own intellect had attained the level which when the Torah speaks of certain celestial forces (such as Gavriel) is described as איש. It is understood that what is described as התאבקות, “a wrestling match,” takes place between evenly matched opponents. The Torah informs us here that in that struggle Yaakov did not attain superiority, i.e. the ability to function just like a disembodied spirit free from bodily influences, until the break of dawn. The word שחר stands for the restrictive influence of the body on the mind. Until Yaakov was able to rid himself of that influence, i.e. עד עלות השחר, “until the departure of that שחר,” he was not able to fully assert his שכל הפועל, his free-roaming intellect. וירא כי לא יוכל לו, now that the disembodied intellect no longer held an advantage over Yaakov’s intellect, though the latter was imprisoned in a body, ויגע בכף ירך יעקב, and the forces of the body are identified by the expression כף ירך, the part of the physique which is essential in man, it became clear to Yaakov that his disadvantage vis-a-vis disembodied intellects was due only to the fact that he was imprisoned in a body. ויאמר שלחני כי עלה השחר, at this point the disembodied intellect hints that the intellect embodied within Yaakov will become totally independent once the restrictive shackles of being imprisoned in a body, i.e. שחר are removed. The נפש השכלית, the intellectual life-force within Yaakov is on a par with the intellects of such disembodied beings as the angels. He (the “angel”) mentioned this simile as something similar to someone who dismisses a servant or friend as he no longer needs him. It was a compliment the angel paid to Yaakov.
וישאל...הגידה נא שמך, for each angel has a name appropriate to his mission. This is what Isaiah meant when he said (Isaiah 40,26) לכולם בשם יקרא, “Who calls them each by name. ”We find names of angels spelled out in Daniel 9,21 והאיש גבריאל, as well as chapter 10,12 in Daniel כי אם מיכאל שרכם. Seeing that the angel had changed his name, Yaakov wanted to know the angel’s name in order to find out what this angel’s primary task was.
?למה זה תשאל לשמי; a polite way of saying: “you do not need to know my name.” The same happened to Manoach in Judges 13,18 when he wanted to know the name of the angel who had announced that his wife would give birth to Shimshon. However, the difference there was that at the time Manoach asked he was still unaware that he was addressing an angel, thinking that he was dealing with a prophet, a human being. We do not really know why the angels keep their names secret. According to Bereshit Rabbah 78,4 the angel’s question meant that seeing each angel has a name assigned to him for each specific assignment he carries out on earth, there was no point in knowing his name as it would change before he would be given a new assignment. Rabbi Ami, quoting Abba Yossi, draws attention to two verses, one in Psalms 147,4 saying לכולם שמות יקרא, “He will call all of them by names,” and Isaiah 2,26 לכולם בשם קרא, “He calls all of them by name.” This appears to state that whereas the stars do not undergo name changes, angels names do. He uses the angel’s question to Manoach as proof that this is so. The angel answered Manoach that he did not know what his name would be on his next mission.
ויברך אותו שם, apart from the fact that he had told him about his impending name change to Yisrael, explaining the reason for this, he gave him an additional blessing. The reason the verse ends with the word שם is that it is a reference to Bet El where G’d would confirm the name change.
WHY IS IT THAT THOU DOST ASK AFTER MY NAME? The angel said: “There is no advantage to you in knowing my name for no one possesses the power and the capability other than G-d alone. If you will call upon me I will not answer you, nor will I save you from your trouble. However, I will now bless you, for so I am commanded.” (Leviticus 8:35.) But Scripture does not explain the contents of the blessing. That which our Rabbis have said (Mentioned in Rashi, Verse 27. See also the explanatory note on this verse in my Hebrew commentary, p. 186.) is most probable, namely that the angel, despite himself, conceded to him at that place the legitimacy of his father’s blessings, as Jacob did not wish to wait for him until he arrived at Beth-el.
למה זה תשאל WHEREFORE IS IT THAT THOU DOST ASK [AFTER MY NAME]? — We have no fixed names; our names change, all depending upon the service we are commanded to carry out as the errand with which we are charged (Genesis Rabbah 78:4).
Was fragst du mich nach meinem Namen? Wenn die Sonne aufgeht, dann erbleichen alle Namen vor, dem einen Einzigen, von dem es heißt יהיה ד׳ אחד ושמו אחד und es wird nur der einen Namen haben, der keinen Namen haben wollte, als die Menschen sprachen: נעשה לנו שם, und von dem Gott deshalb sprach: ואגדלה שמך – Er segnete ihn dort, ist doch jedenfalls eine räumliche Beschränkung. Es scheint daher: Eben dort ward Jakob die segnende Anerkennung, wo er, an der Grenze mit der Wiederkehr in das jüdische Land der eigensten Entwicklung des jüdischen Geistes und der abrahamitischen Bestimmung zuwandert. So winkt nicht durch kosmopolitisches Aufgehen in die Völkerströmung seinen Sprößlingen die Anerkennung und der Segen, sondern שָם, gerade bei der vollendetsten Einkehr in die scheinbar isolierende Bestimmung, die der jüdische Boden für alle Zeiten trägt.
הגידה נא שמך, which would describe your essence, your function, and how you would go about performing same. This would enable me to understand why you attacked me in the first place. I would then be able to do penitence for my sin, something I cannot do as long as I do not know what precisely my sin consists of.
?למה זה תשאל לשמי, our (angels) format does not in any way correspond and shed light on the level of our intelligence which cannot be explained in terms of language used by human beings. The angel confronting Manoach in Judges 13,18 summed this up in the single word: “פלאי,” it is concealed, [because it would only be misunderstood if put into words. Ed.] The angel’s activity reflects G’d’s will at the time. [Clearly, this implies that most angels perform their tasks ad hoc. Ed.]
We do not have a set name. Our names keep changing... I.e., he was not angry when Yaakov asked this. [And how does Rashi know?] Because the angel asked Yaakov the same question.
Jacob named the place Peniel: For I have seen God face-to-face and my life was saved. Other people who saw angels expressed fear that they might perish. In the book of Judges, after Mano’ah and his wife encounter an angel, he says: “We will die, because we have seen God.” 6 Jacob, by contrast, knew that his life had been spared despite knowing for certain that he had met an angel face-to-face.
למה זה תשאל לשמי?, “why do you have to know my name?” The angel implies that knowing his “name” will be of no use to Yaakov at all. The reason is that he does not possess any powers of his own, he is only a tool in the hands of G’d, so much so that if Yaakov were ever to call upon him he would not even respond. What he was able to do however, was to give Yaakov a blessing. The reason he could do so was because G’d had commanded him to do so. The Torah did not spell out the text of the blessing. Our sages add that Yaakov thanked the angel for his blessing.
ויברך אותו שם, “he blessed him there.” In that same location Yaakov was not willing to wait until he would get to Beyt El to receive this blessing; therefore the angel spelled it out already now.
“Why do you ask my name?” [32:30]. Jacob asked the angel, what is your name? The angel responded: why do you ask my name? The angel has no set name, but when he is sent on a mission, he is called by that name. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:30.) Bahya writes. The angel said: we never used to say our name. We do not want to make ourselves important. That is to say, that we should say that we do something by ourselves would be something new, since we do everything at the command of the Holy One. Some say, the explanation that the angel said, do not ask what my name is, because I was not able to do anything to you. It is disgraceful to me that one should know who I am. So writes Bahya. (Bahya, Genesis, 32:30.) Hizkuni writes. The angel said: I do not want to say my name; since the angels are afraid that one would adjure them with [magical] names. If they knew the angel’s name, they would be able to force the angel to do whatever the person desires. Therefore, the angel said: you do not need to know my name. You have vanquished me without [magical] names. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:30.)
But some explanation is still needed. For Jacob's having prevailed against the angel was beneficial in itself, that angel being the heavenly plenipotentiary of Esau, as we are told by our sages (Genesis Rabbah 67:2). His prevailing against him connotes the angel's not contesting Jacob's domination of Esau, but consenting to Isaac's blessing in full, as is implied by (Genesis 32:30): "And he blessed him there." And this is in accordance with our sages' dictum: "The Holy One Blessed be He does not exact payment from a people until He exacts it from its heavenly plenipotentiaries first." But Jacob's grasping Esau in the womb was merely a portent of what was to come and not anything beneficial in itself deserving of mention in the Blessed One's chastisements to Jacob.
(The matter of the Divine names and principles pertaining to them) 60. [When our teacher Moshe was about to go down to Egypt to redeem the children of Israel, he asked God, (Exodus 3:13) “Now, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your forefathers sent me to you,’ and they will ask me, ‘What is His name?’ what should I say to them?” He was asking to know the Essential Name HaShem-יהו"ה, which is called Shem HaEtzem-the Name of His Essential Self. Since this Name cannot be grasped by any being other than HaShem-יהו"ה Himself, HaShem-יהו"ה did not fulfill his request, but instead answered, “I shall be as I shall be – אהי"ה אשר אהי"ה.”] (See at length in Ginat Egoz of Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, translated as HaShem Is One, Vol. 1, The Gate of Intrinsic Being (Shaar HaHavayah), section on Eheyeh-אהי״ה.) In Midrash Rabba, our sages, of blessed memory explained, (Midrash Rabbah, Shemot, Parasha 3.) “HaShem-יהו"ה said to Moshe, ‘You wish to know My name? [In My relationship to My world] I am called according to my deeds. I may be called El Shaddai-א"ל שד"י, Tzvaoth-צבאות, Eloh”im-אלהי"ם or HaShem-יהו"ה. When I judge the creatures, I am called Eloh”im-אלהי"ם, when I battle the wicked, I am called Tzvaoth-צבאות, when I suspend the sins of man, I am called (The Lunar year consists of 354 days. The forty days from the beginning of the month of Elul are days of Judgement. Minus these days, there are the 314 days of the rest of the year, the numerical value of Shaddai-שד"י-314.) El Shaddai-א"ל שד"י and when I have mercy upon My world, I am called HaShem-יהו"ה.’” In His relationship with His world the name HaShem-יהו"ה always denotes the quality of mercy, as stated, “HaShem-יהו״ה, HaShem-יהו״ה is a merciful and gracious God.” (Exodus 34:6) This is the meaning of “I shall be as I shall be,” (Exodus 3:14) that is “I will be called according to my deeds.” (The sages stated that also the names of the angels correspond to their mission, and differ accordingly.) (Rashi, Genesis 32:30 based on Midrash Rabbah, Bereshit, Parsha 78.)
Once day broke and night departed, Jacob was strengthened, and the power of Samael diminished. Then he said, "Let me go" (Ibid. 27), for it was his time to say the morning hymns and he had to leave. He confirmed his blessings and added a blessing of his own, as it is written, "And he blessed him there" (Ibid. 30).
“Jacob asked and said: Tell me, please, your name. He said: Why is it that you ask after my name? And he blessed him there” (Genesis 32:30). “Jacob asked and said: Tell me, please, your name” – Rav said in the name of Rabbi Yosei bar Dostai: One verse says: “He sets a number for the stars, and calls them [all] by names [shemot]” (Psalms 147:4), and one verse says: “He who brings out their host by number, calling all of them by name [beshem]” (Isaiah 40:26). Rather, it teaches that there is change there. (At any given time there is one name, but the names change over time, which is reflected in the plural word “names.”) The name that he is called now is unlike the name that he will be called after time, as it is stated: “The angel of the Lord said to him: Why do you ask my name? It is unknown [peli]” (Judges 13:18) – I do not know to what name I will be changed.
“The sun rose for him as he passed Penuel, and he was limping from his hip” (Genesis 32:32). “The sun rose for him…” – Rabbi Berekhya said: For whom did the sun not rise? Rather, for him it is for his healing, but for others, light. Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Aḥa: So, the sun was healing our patriarch Jacob and beating down on Esau and his chieftains. The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You are a paradigm for your descendants. Just as you, the sun was healing you and beating down on Esau and his chieftains, so, your descendants, the sun will heal them and beat down on the idolaters. Will heal them – “but the sun of righteousness will shine for you who fear My name, with healing in its rays” (Malachi 3:20); and will beat down on the idolaters – “behold, the day is coming, burning like a furnace […and all that do evil will be straw, and the day that is coming will set them ablaze]”’ (Malachi 3:19). “And he was limping from his hip” – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi was going up to Rome. (Rome is identified as Edom (Esau).) When he reached Akko, Rabbi Ḥanina came out to greet him. He found him [Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi] limping from his hip. He said to him: ‘You are like your ancestor –”and he was limping from his hip.”‘
(Deut. 33:1:) AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. This text is related (to Prov. 31:29): MANY DAUGHTERS HAVE DONE VALIANTLY, BUT YOU SURPASS THEM ALL. This is the blessing of Moses, (Tanh., Deut. 11:1; PRK 31:11.) in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but compared to all of them none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence. He blessed one and cursed another. (Gen. 9:27:) MAY GOD ENLARGE (YPT) JAPHETH (YPT); but he said (vs. 25:) CURSED BE CANAAN. Isaac blessed Jacob. There was strife in it, in that he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35): YOUR BROTHER CAME WITH DECEIT; and it is stated (in vs. 41): THEN ESAU HATED JACOB <…, AND ESAU SAID IN HIS HEART: LET THE DAYS OF MORNING FOR MY FATHER COME, AND I WILL KILL MY BROTHER JACOB>. Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he said to Reuben (in Gen. 49:4): UNSTABLE AS WATER; and similarly (in vs. 5): SIMEON AND LEVI . And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned] from the Holy One. When he created Adam, he blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:28): THEN GOD BLESSED THEM; [and (The other part of this bracket is several lines below.) the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7): AND THE LORD SAID: I WILL BLOT OUT THE HUMANITY WHICH I CREATED. When Noah left the ark, the Holy One saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1): THEN GOD BLESSED NOAH AND HIS CHILDREN. The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world. Then the Holy One added one blessing for him, as stated (in Gen. 12:2): FOR I WILL MAKE YOU INTO A GREAT NATION…. When Abraham came, the Holy One said: It is not a practice worthy of me, that I should be obliged to bless my creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who issue a blessing through him, I am placing my seal upon , as stated (in vs. 2, cont.): AND SO BECOME A BLESSING. (vs. 3:) I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU…. What is the meaning of I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU. The Holy One said: Take note. I am handing over the blessings to ALL WHOM YOU BLESS, and I am sealing through you. But if from then on the blessings were {spoken} [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said: If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking. A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard. (See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5; also Matthew 13:24–30.) : He gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said: If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard. (Cf. Matthew 13:24–30.) And so also did Abraham say: If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Look here. It is simply that he is leaving him alone until the Holy One comes, when he will deal with what belongs to him.] Jacob came and received five blessing: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One. (Cf. Gen. R. 94:5.) : Two from his father, according to what is stated (in Gen. 27:33): THEN ISAAC TREMBLED (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why TREMBLED? R. Eleazar ben Padat said: because he saw Gehinnom open for Esau. He wanted to say: Cursed. He repented and added a blessing when he said (ibid., end): HE ALSO SHALL BE BLESSED. Here is one blessing. A second (is in Gen. 28:1): SO ISAAC CALLED JACOB AND BLESSED HIM. [The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4): AND MAY HE GRANT YOU THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM…; the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE (the angel) BLESSED HIM THERE; and the blessings of the Holy One (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN…, AND BLESSED HIM.] When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessing that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28): ALL THESE ARE THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL, WHEN HE BLESSED THEM, EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING IS HOW HE BLESSED THEM. (The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe.) When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1): AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. < According to another interpretation, Moses made> an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel, (Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4) since it was fitting for him to bless with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars ; (On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29.) but only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10): BUT HERE YOU HAVE EVEN BLESSED THEM THESE THREE [TIMES]. The Holy One said to him: You are wicked. Your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair. Then he will bless Israel, and it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9): HE THAT HAS A BENEVOLENT EYE SHALL BE BLESSED (YBRK). Do not read YBRK SHALL BE BLESSED, but SHALL BLESS. This refers to Moses our Master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel. He also blessed them with four blessings:
It is written (in Ps. 50:14): SACRIFICE A THANK OFFERING TO GOD. When Jacob left his father's house, he left with nothing but his staff, as stated (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): WITH ONLY MY STAFF I CROSSED THIS JORDAN. Immediately Jacob had made a vow before the Holy One, as stated (in Gen. 28:20): THEN JACOB VOWED A VOW. What is written at the end of the passage (in vs. 22)? AND OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME. But, when he enriched him, as stated (in Gen. 30:43): SO THE MAN (Jacob) BECAME VERY VERY PROSPEROUS, he forgot his vow. Immediately he provoked Laban against him, as stated (in Gen. 31:23): SO HE (Laban) TOOK HIS RELATIVES WITH HIM < AND PURSUED HIM (Jacob) SEVEN DAYS' JOURNEY >. When he had escaped from Laban, Esau was incited against him. Immediately the angel appeared to him. He said to him: Are you not aware of all this trouble? Why has all the trouble come over you? Because you have been late with your vow. Jacob said to him (in Gen. 32:30 [29]) {WHAT IS} [PLEASE TELL] YOUR NAME. He said to him (ibid.): WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? Sometimes the angel is made into a spirit, as stated (in Ps. 104:4): HE HAS MADE HIS ANGELS SPIRITS. Sometimes he is made a into lightning bolt, as stated (in Job 38:35): CAN YOU SEND FORTH LIGHTNINGS SO THAT THEY GO? But as for the miracles (of transformation), he (God) acts himself. And so the angel said to Manoah (in Jud. 13:18): YOU ARE NOT TO ASK MY NAME. (Gen. 32:30 [29]:) WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? (Yalqut Shim‘oni, Jud., 69, explains that names are useless because the angel would not know into what form God might change him.) Immediately the angel blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE BLESSED HIM THERE. (Hos. 12:5 [4]:) SO HE STROVE WITH AN ANGEL AND PREVAILED. What did he say to him? Go, fulfill your vow. (Eccl. 5:4 [5]:) IT IS BETTER NOT TO VOW < THAN TO VOW AND NOT FULFILL >. What did Simeon and Levi do immediately? TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, [SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD] … < AND KILLED EVERY MALE >. < Jacob > immediately fell on his face and did not get up until < the Holy One > gave him permission (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. So also with Joshua (according to Josh. 7:6 & 10): [AND HE FELL ON HIS FACE] < .. . > THEN THE LORD SAID UNTO JOSHUA: ARISE, GO. WHY IS IT THAT YOU FALL UPON YOUR FACE? So also with David (according to I Chron. 21:16): SO DAVID AND THE ELDERS, COVERED IN SACKCLOTH, FELL UPON THEIR FACES. Then what was said to him (in II Sam. 24:18)? GO UP, ERECT AN ALTAR TO THE LORD ON THE THRESHING FLOOR OF ARAUNAH. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. He immediately journeyed with his whole house; and the Holy One put his fear upon all about him, as stated (in Gen. 35:5): AND, AS THEY JOURNEYED, A TERROR FROM GOD CAME < UPON THE CITIES THAT WERE ROUND ABOUT THEM >. It is also stated (in Deut. 28:10): AND ALL THE PEOPLES OF THE EARTH SHALL SEE THAT THE NAME OF THE LORD IS PROCLAIMED OVER YOU, AND THEY SHALL BE AFRAID OF YOU.
(Deut. 33:1:) “And this is the blessing.” This text is related (to Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.” This is the blessing of Moses, (PRK 31:11.) in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but there was none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence, as he blessed one and cursed another, as stated (Gen. 9:27,) “May God enlarge (ypt) Japheth (ypt) [...]; and let Canaan be a slave to them.” Isaac blessed Jacob, but there was strife in it. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:4), “May He give you the blessing of Abraham, but he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35), “Your brother came with deceit”; and it is stated (in vs. 41), “Then Esau hated Jacob […, and Esau said in his heart, ‘Let the days of mourning for my father come, and I will kill my brother Jacob’].” Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he rebuked Reuben, as stated (in Gen. 49:4), “Unstable as water”; and similarly (in vs. 5), “Simeon and Levi [are brothers; weapons of violence are their swords].” And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned it] from the Holy One, blessed be He. When he created Adam, He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:27-28), “male and female. Then [God] blessed them.” And the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7), “And the Lord said, “I will blot out the humanity which I created.” When Noah left the ark, the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1), “Then God blessed Noah and his children.” The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world, and He added blessing, as stated (in Gen. 12:2), “For I will make you into a great nation.” Once Abraham came, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “It is not honorable for Me, that I should be obliged to bless My creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who they issue a blessing, I am placing my seal upon [those blessings], as stated (in vs. 2, cont.), ‘[I will bless you and magnify your name] and so become a blessing.’” (Vs. 3:) “I will bless those who bless you….” What is the meaning of “I will bless?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Take note. I am handing over the blessings to all whom you bless, and I am sealing [them] through you.” But if from then on the blessings were [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said, “If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking.” A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard, (See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5.) [and] gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said, “If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard.” And so also did Abraham say, “If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Rather look here. I will leave him alone until the Holy One, blessed be He, comes, when He will deal with what belongs to Him.” Jacob came and received five blessings: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One, blessed be He. (Cf. Gen. R. 94:5.) From his father, as stated (in Gen. 27:33), “Then Isaac trembled (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why “trembled?” R. Eliezer ben Pedat said, “[He did so] because he saw Gehinnom open in front of him. He wanted to say, ‘Cursed will be [Jacob.’ Instead,] he went back [on it], and added blessing [to it], when he said (ibid., end), ‘he also shall be blessed.’” Here is one [blessing]. A second (is in Gen. 28:1), “So Isaac called Jacob and blessed him.” The blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He, (is in Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob [… and blessed him].” The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4), “And may He grant you the blessing of Abraham.” And the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30), “and he (the angel) blessed him there.” When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessings that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28), “All these are the tribes of Israel, [twelve in number, and this is what their father spoke to them when he blessed them, each one with his own blessing is how he blessed them].” (The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe.) When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” [According to another interpretation, Moses made] an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel, (Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4.) since it was fitting for him to bless them with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars [he had built]; (On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29.) but [Balaam] only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10), “but here you have even blessed them these three times.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O wicked one, your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair; then he will bless Israel.” And it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9), “He that has a benevolent eye shall be blessed (ybrk).” Do not read “ybrk [with vowels meaning] shall be blessed,” but [with vowels meaning] “shall bless.” This refers to Moses our master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel, such that he blessed them with [the other] four blessings: The first is (in Exod. 39:43), “When Moses saw all the work […] he blessed them.” The second is (in Lev. 9:23), “Then Moses and Aaron came unto the tent of meeting; and when they came out, they blessed the people….” The third is (in Deut. 1:11), “May the Lord God of your ancestors add [to your numbers a thousand times more than you are and bless you].” The fourth is (here in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” It is therefore stated (in Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.”(Deut. 33:1:) And this is the blessing.” It was fitting for Moses to bless Israel because he had constantly risked his life for them. (PRK 31(suppl. 1):12.) For this reason, it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing [that Moses blessed... the Children of Israel].” (Deut. 33:1:) “The man of God (the Power).” If it says, “man,” why does it say, “God,” and if it says, “God,” why does it say, “man?” It is simply that at the time he fled from in front of Pharaoh, he was a man, but at the time he trounced [the Egyptians], he was a power. Another interpretation: At the time that he went up to the firmament, he was a man; in front of the angels that were all fire, he was a man. But at the time he came down, he was a power. Before he went up to the firmament, he was a man, as he would eat and drink. But all the time that he was there, he was a power, as stated (in Exod. 34:20), “and they were afraid to approach him.”
It is worthwhile to note that the total number of animals offered on New Moons was 11 as this number corresponds to the 11 hours which the sun is older than the moon. The sun was created (made operational) on the fourth day at the beginning of the day (night), whereas the moon was made operational 11 hours later. The number 11 also recalls the fact that the solar year is (on average) 11 days longer than the lunar year (12 months), seeing the solar year is 365 days and the lunar year 354 days. The reason that the bulls were being offered in respect of Avraham (and Sarah) is because Avraham and Sarah originally were like טומטום ואנדרונינוס, hermaphrodite and epicene (people whose sexual organs were underdeveloped preventing them from bearing or siring children). The ram offered in respect of Yitzchak symbolised the uniqueness of the ram Avraham had slaughtered at the time, of which we learned in Avot 5,6 that it had been designated as such an offering since the days of the creation. The seven sheep offered in respect of Yaakov acknowledge symbolically that his features are engraved on the throne of G’d above the seven heavens (Bereshit Rabbah 68,18). The three tenths ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a gift-offering for each of the bulls correspond to the three verses in which G’d is described as appearing to Avraham (Genesis 12,7; 17,1; 18,1). The two tenths ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as gift-offering which accompanied the ram offering were in respect of the two verses in the Torah in which G’d is described as appearing to Yitzchak (Genesis 26,2; 26,24). The reason that only one tenth ephah fine flour mixed with oil was brought as gift-offering alongside the seven sheep is that we have only one verse in which G’d is described as appearing (וירא) to Yaakov (Genesis 35,9). The reason that the Torah repeats the word עשרון in connection with the single tenth ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as gift-offering in respect of the seven sheep symbolising Yaakov, is that it alludes to both of Yaakov’s names, יעקב and ישראל. It also alludes to the two blessings he received (from his father), one instead of Esau’s blessing, the other prior to his departure to Charan. He also received 10 blessings when he was called Yaakov when his father gave him the first blessing (compare Genesis 27,28-29 and Genesis 32,30 [where the individual blessings are not enumerated; presumably G’d confirmed Yitzchak’s blessing. Ed.]). Yaakov also used the word עשר twice when he promised to tithe (twice) everything G’d would give him (Genesis 28,23). This applied especially to his son Levi as we pointed out in connection with Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 37 why Levi was considered the tenth son (compare author’s comments on Genesis 28,22). It may be worth considering in this connection that Jeremiah 31,8 quotes G’d as saying: “Ephrayim is My firstborn.” When you count backwards from Ephrayim you will find that Levi is the tenth son. When you count from Levi to Aaron in descending order, i.e. Gershon, Kehat, Merari, Livni, Shimi, Amram, Yitzhar Chevron, Uzziel, Aaron you also have Aaron as the tenth (collective) descendant of Levi named by the Torah (compare Chronicles I 6,1-3). This is also why we find in Chronicles I 23,13: “Aaron was set apart, he and his sons, forever to be consecrated most holy, to make burnt-offerings to the Lord, etc.”
Seeing that the Torah tells us that even the spiritual representative of Esau at the celestial court agreed that Yaakov had deserved to be the recipient of these blessings and he himself conferred a blessing on Yaakov (Genesis 32,30), this was a forerunner of what the prophet Isaiah said concerning the redemption in the future: והיו מלכים אומניך ושרותיהם מיניקותיך אפים ארצה ישתחוו לך ועפר רגליך ילחכו וידעת כי אני ה’ אשר לא יבושו קווי, “Kings shall tend your children, their queens shall serve you as nurses; they shall bow before you, face to the ground and they lick the dust of your feet, and you shall know that I am the Lord; those who trust Me shall not be shamed.” (Isaiah 49,23).
I have read in a volume of astrology published by current astrologers called “letter of Galinus,” that if someone makes an iron replica of the planet Saturn, he should do so at a certain date and time of day or night when the horoscope is in a certain constellation, and if such a person will bury it beneath the store of a certain merchant, that that merchant will lose all his profit from the store. If the person who has constructed such an image at such a time as we mentioned buries it beneath the house of the owner of that store, all that owner’s affairs will turn sour. Anyone with eyes in his head knows that this “science” will lead to destruction of the world as we know it, and that the only way to live on earth is by allowing the forces of nature to guide us instead of trying to bend them to our will. These forces were provided by G’d for the benefit of mankind. (This is part of the quotation from “letter of Galinus).” The author of that volume writes further: “if someone is interested in attracting to himself the spiritual influence exerted by the planet Shabbtai (Saturn), a planet which exercises its domain on the Sabbath, he should eat a minimal amount of meat, diet very frugally, abstain from marital relations, wear black garments, construct a picture of a lion made out of copper and at the hour when the constellation of Saturn and that of the lamb intersect he should slaughter a cat. If he then approaches that idol and serves it and consults it concerning his future he will be given such information. Thus far the “letter of Galinus.” (Compare also Parshat Vayishlach, Genesis 32,30 where the author copied from books on philosophy.) It is clear that the Torah, which is most certainly concerned about our welfare and well being, commands us to do exactly the opposite of what is written in the “letter of Galinus.” On the Sabbath we are to eat well (meat) and drink well (wine), to dress in finery, to engage in marital relations with our wives and in general to call the Sabbath ענג, “a delight,” (Isaiah 58,13). Whereas the philosophy preached by Galinus results in man becoming depressed, adopting the ways of the Torah results in man becoming a happy personality. Instead of wearing black garments, we wear colored garments in order to lift our spirits. Our sages base this on Isaiah 58,13 וכבדתו מעשות דרכיך, a references to garments which lend the wearer distinction in the eyes of others. Rabbi Yochanan, in Shabbat 30, used to refer to his clothing as מכבדי, “that which bestows honor upon me.” Thank the good Lord for having given us enough common sense through study of His commandments, thus saving us from falling victim to such foolish philosophies as those espoused in the book of Galinus. This same Torah has warned us not to pay heed to the constellations in the skies when it wrote (Deut. 4,19) “lest you raise your eyes towards the sky and behold the sun and the moon.” He has, instead, given us the heritage of His commandments, observance of which will result in our accumulating a great reward.
When it is mystical. It is concealed. It changes constantly, (According to the angel’s mission at that particular time. Cf. Rashi to Bereishis, 32:30.) so that its identity remains unknown on any given day.
Jacob himself seems sure that he has encountered God Himself. He calls the place where the struggle took place Peniel, saying, “I have seen God face to face and my life was spared” (Gen. 32:30).
The angel said to him, “You must not ask for my name; it is unknowable!”
Yaakov asked him, and said, Please [Now] tell me your name. He said, Why then do you ask my name? He then blessed him [Yaakov] there.
And Jakob asked and said, Show me now thy name. And he said, Why dost thou ask for my name? And he blessed Jakob there.
| וַיִּקְרָ֧א יַעֲקֹ֛ב שֵׁ֥ם הַמָּק֖וֹם פְּנִיאֵ֑ל כִּֽי־רָאִ֤יתִי אֱלֹהִים֙ פָּנִ֣ים אֶל־פָּנִ֔ים וַתִּנָּצֵ֖ל נַפְשִֽׁי׃ | 31 E | So Jacob named the place Peniel, (Peniel Understood as “face of God.”) meaning, “I have seen a divine being face to face, yet my life has been preserved.” |
Genesis 32,30. “Yaakov named the site of this encounter ‘Peniel’, for I have seen the Divine face to face and I have remained alive.” There are people who serve the Lord in order that He in turn will shower them with all His goodness. There are other persons, on a higher level than the first category, who serve the Lord because of their awareness that G’d, by reason of His greatness, deserves to be served, and that it is a privilege to be allowed to serve Him. They do not even think in terms of what they may stand to gain by doing so. As a result of their wholehearted devotion to G’d, G’d in turn “faces” them in acknowledgment of their selfless service, i.e. He relates to them פנים אל פנים. Surviving such an experience is something extraordinary, and that is why Yaakov, realising this, exclaims: ותנצל נפשי, “my life was saved.”
Thus, of Yaakov—who is the aspect of truth, as it is written (Micah 7:20), “Ascribe truth to Yaakov”—it is said (Genesis 32:31), “The sun shone for him”—i.e., the aforementioned “It will be our charity.” This is because the sun is the aspect of charity, as explained above: “But a benevolent sun will shine upon you who fear My Name.” That is, by means of the truth Yaakov was able to draw to himself all the charities, which are the aspect of sun, and cause them to shine on him. This is: “The sun shone for him”—specifically “for him,” the aspect of “It will be our charity,” as explained above.
This is the aspect of Yaakov, who corresponds to wisdom and expanded consciousness. He is the aspect of a healing for the soul, as in “a benevolent sun with healing in its wings” (Malachi 3:20). “A sun” alludes to Yaakov {as it is written (Genesis 32:31), “The sun shone for him”}. He is the aspect of wisdom, of speech-with-wisdom, which corresponds to the Torah, to Simchat Torah—which is a tree with the power to heal, as explained above.
Understood as “face of God.”
פנים אל פנים, face to face. Jacob's amazement was not due to the fact that he had had an encounter with an angel; he had previously encountered angels. What amazed him was that he had been in a confrontation with an angel. The word פנים אל פנים is a term used in warfare as we know from Kings II 14,8.
ויקרא יעקב....פניאל...פנים אל פנים. According to one of the commentaries which we quoted (verse 26) that the angel had assumed human form, this experience was something new for Yaakov. For the first time he had seen a divine being face to face while being awake. Adding to this the fact that this angel had twisted his hip joint out of shape and he had survived this he was amazed that he had survived such an encounter. This is why he used the expression פנים אל פנים. He added the words
ותנצל נפשי, this is a statement Yaakov never made on other occasions when he had other visions. Seeing that we explained that the entire episode with the angel was a prophetic vision, the reason why he used the expression “face to face,” must be that the vision was so real to him that in his vision he reacted physically to the angel that appeared to him. If you were to consider this interpretation as unlikely, consider that we have been told that Moses spoke to G’d “face to face.” (Exodus 33,11 and again in Deuteronomy 5,4) the description “face to face” merely tells us about the realism involved in such prophetic encounters Moses experienced, as well as what the entire people experienced at the revelation at Mount Sinai when the mountain quaked, there was lightning and thunder, etc. Having experienced such an intense vision Yaakov understandably marvels at having survived such an experience, one in which he was totally involved, body and soul. The recollection of such intense experiences though having occurred in the form of visions, was strong enough to carry over into the affected people’s waking hours.
שם המקום פניאל, this name was retained for future generations. There is no difference between פניאל and פנואל. They are variations in the name of the same location. The letters י and ו are well known as interchangeable letters.
Jakob erkennt in dem mit ihm Ringenden auch etwas Göttliches, Berechtigtes, von Gott Bestimmtes. "Bist du denn ein Dieb, ein Spieler" — lassen die Weisen Jakob den Gegner fragen — "daß du dich vor dem Morgen fürchtest?" "Nein, erwidert dieser, מלאך אני, "ich bin auch ein von Gott Gesendeter, aber so lange ich geschaffen, war noch die Zeit für mich nicht gekommen in den Gott verherrlichenden Hymnus einzustimmen bis jetzt, מיום שנבראתי לא הגיע זמני לומר שירה עד עכשיו". Esaus Genius ist auch ein von Gott gesendeter מלאך, aber seine Sendung wird von ihm nur erfüllt, wenn רב יעבר צעיר, wenn er die göttliche Sendung Jakobs huldigend anerkennt, nur dann ist er berufen, in den Gott verherrlichenden Hymnus der Zeiten einzustimmen, nur dann nimmt er als harmonischer Einklang seine Stelle ein in der Gott verherrlichenden Symphonie der Geschichte.
The angel left Jacob at daybreak. The sun then rose upon him as he passed Penuel, and he was limping on his thigh. Jacob was certainly shaken both by the encounter itself and from his injury.
The difference between angel and man lies in the freedom of will possessed by man and the absence of such freedom of choice in angels. Man is able to rise or fall morally, ethically; angels remain forever on the same plateau. Rashi and Onkelos say what they say in addition to the peshat, the plain meaning of the verse. They do so to forestall the impression that G-d is described as talking to Himself or to any of His non existent partners. We find many instances when Onkelos translates elokim as "angels of G-d," such as Jacob saying "I have seen elokim face to face" (Genesis 32,31). In the case of the serpent using this term, seeing the serpent does not have encounters with angels, the term refers simply to elokim as the Creator and His power. Even the she-ass of Bileam did not see the angel as an angel (Numbers 22). It only saw him as a threatening obstruction. Had this not been so, she would not have said to Bileam, "Do I usually act in this fashion?" She would have said, "The angel of the Lord has prevented me."
Despite many opinions to the contrary, the events related in our verse did indeed take place. Abraham did not see all these events only in his mind's eye. True, there are occasions in the Bible when visions described very graphically-- such as Ezekiel's trip to Jerusalem (Ezekiel Chapter 8)-- were in fact merely visions. Those instances do not prove that all supernatural encounters of outstanding men were merely visions of the mind and spirit. The wealth of detail reported about these encounters, such as reports of sitting, standing, running, etc. bear out the claim that these events took place physically. There are numerous reasons for the visions and encounters Abraham was granted which are listed at the beginning of our Parshah:
Rabbi Shimon wept as he said: Even I have feared the Holy One, blessed be He, from what I have heard. He raised his hands to his head and said, You had the privilege of seeing Rav Hamnuna Saba, the shining light of the Torah, face to face, while I have not. He then fell face downward and saw him uprooting mountains and lighting candles in the temple of King Messiah. He said to him, Rabbi in that world you shall both be neighbors of the heads of the Yeshivot (Academies), before the Holy One, blessed be He. From that day, he called Rabbi Elazar his son, and Rabbi Abba פְּנִי''אֵל. As it is written: "For I have seen Elohim face to face (Heb. פָּנִים)" (Gen. 32:31).
Whence do we know that litigants in Israel who are involved in litigation against each other must not turn to an idolatrous judge for a decision in their suit, even though they know that he will judge them according to Israel’s laws? Because it is forbidden (for Jews) to argue before them? Scripture states: Which thou shalt set before them. That is, before the children of Israel and not before the Cuthites. For anyone who shuns Israel’s judges and testifies before an idolatrous judge renounces the Holy One, blessed be He, first, and later renounces Israel’s law, as it is said: For their rock is not our Rock, and our enemies’ judge (Deut. 32:31). To what may this be compared? To a patient examined by a doctor. He tells the members of (the patient’s) household: “Give him whatever food he desires, withhold nothing from him.” (Later) he visits another patient and advises his household: “Be careful that he does not eat or drink certain things.” They remonstrate with him, saying, “One patient you permit to eat whatever he wishes, while the other you advise not to eat certain things.” Thereupon he replied: “The first patient will not survive, and that is why I told them not to deny him anything, for whether he eats or not, he will die. However, the other patient will live, and so I advised him to eat only certain things lest his illness be aggravated.” So, too, are the ordinances of the idolaters, as is said: For the statutes of the people were vanity (Jer. 10:3), and it is written elsewhere: Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and ordinances whereby they should not live (Ezek. 20:25). However, to Israel I gave commandments and desirable statutes, as it is said: Ye shall therefore keep My statutes, and My ordinances, which if a man do, he shall live by them (Lev. 18:5).
"For the conductor, a psalm of David. My God, do not be silent about my praise. As it is written (Deuteronomy 10:20), "You shall fear the LORD your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him." If you do so (Psalms 22:4), He is your praise and He is your God. Israel has no praise except for the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Holy One, blessed be He, has no praise except for Israel, as it is written (Isaiah 43:21), "This people I have formed for Myself; they shall relate My praise." David said before the Holy One, blessed be He, "You are my praise and You are silent. My God, do not be silent about my praise." For the mouths of wicked and deceitful men have opened against me, and so it says (Psalms 37:13), "The LORD laughs at him, for He sees that his day is coming." And You are silent about all this. Thus it says (Psalms 83:2), "O God, be not silent; be not deaf and be not still, O God." And You are silent about what they did in Your Temple, as it says (Isaiah 64:10-11), "Our holy and beautiful house, where our fathers praised You, has become a burning waste." The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (Jeremiah 7:16), "I have been silent from the day your fathers left Egypt, and you have not listened to Me." Now Edom is acting like a woman in labor. For the mouths of wicked and deceitful men have opened. And what did they say? They opened the gates and entered the Holy of Holies and said, "Where is their God, that He may come and fight with us?" As it says (Deuteronomy 32:37-38), "And he will say, 'Where are their gods, the rock in which they sought refuge, who ate the fat of their sacrifices and drank the wine of their libation? Let them rise up and help you! Let them be your protection!'" And they said in the Temple (Psalms 115:2-3), "Why should the nations say, 'Where is their God?' Our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases." Therefore, it is said, "For the mouths of wicked and deceitful men have opened against me." These are words of hatred that surround me. What is the hatred that is spoken in hatred? It is that which Esau did to Jacob, as it is written (Genesis 27:41), "And Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing with which his father had blessed him." And they take revenge and contend with me for no reason. Israel said, "When we sent to him in peace, we dealt with him peacefully," as it says (Numbers 20:14), "And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: 'Thus says your brother Israel...'" But he (Esau) said, "No, I will go out with the sword" (Genesis 32:31). Israel said, "I am for peace; but when I speak, they are for war" (Psalm 120:7). God said, "I did not leave you for that" (Amos 1:11), as it says, "Thus says the Lord, 'For three transgressions of Edom, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because he pursued his brother with the sword, and cast off all pity, and his anger tore perpetually, and he kept his wrath forever'" (Amos 1:11). God said, "Lest I come with the sword and they attack me without cause" (Exodus 20:22). If Esau hated Jacob and took the birthright from him to drink and eat, what did he do?
[FROM BETWEEN HIS KNEES.] Jacob sat on the edge of the bed. (Jacob sat on the edge of the bed with his feet on the ground and Manasseh and Ephraim were between his knees (Cherez).)
AND THE LORD OPENED THE MOUTH OF THE ASS. The rabbis, of blessed memory, said that ten things were created on Sabbath eve at twilight. (Among them the mouth of Balaam’s ass. See Abot 5:6.) I believe that this means that God specifically decreed the creation of these miraculous phenomena, (Mentioned in Abot 5:6.) for they are beyond the laws of nature. (In other words, these miraculous phenomena, one of which was the mouth of Balaam’s ass, were not actually created on Sabbath eve at twilight. God decreed that they come into being at their proper time. Maimonides makes a similar point in his commentary on Abot 5:6.) The Gaon (Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.) says that the ass did not speak. Rabbi Samuel the son of Hofni attacked the Gaon. (For saying this.) However, Rabbi Samuel the Spanish poet tried to save the one who was attacked. (Rabbi Samuel the Spanish tried to defend Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.) Note, the rationalists had a need for a non-literal interpretation of our text, for they said that God would not create signs in the world to change the laws which he created. (The rationalists argue that God would not change the laws of nature.) He would do so only to justify his prophet. (The rationalists argue that God would only change the laws of nature to prove that what a prophet said was true. This was not the case with Balaam’s ass.) However, they did not speak the truth, for, look, a miracle was done for Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who were not prophets. (They were saved from a fiery furnace. See Dan. 2.) Some of them (The rationalists.) say that Balaam was a prophet. (Hence God suspended the laws of nature for him.) However, the truth is that his prophecy (God’s appearance to Balaam.) was because of Israel’s glory, for Balaam was a diviner. Indeed, this is how Scripture refers to him. (Balaam…the soothsayer (Josh. 13:22).) Some say that Balaam knew the mind of the heavenly beings and was able to channel them by images that he made. (Balaam made images which had the power to manipulate the heavenly powers.) This is the meaning of and he whom thou cursest is cursed (v. 6). However, it appears to me that Balaam was an astrologer. When Balaam saw in the star of a given person that an evil time had befallen him, he would curse him. When evil befell the one whom he cursed, then those who witnessed and heard the imprecation thought that the evil came because of Balaam’s curse. The fact that Balaam spoke with guile to the lords of Balak is proof of this. (First he told them that he couldn’t curse Israel. Then he hinted that he could.) The meaning of I can not go beyond the word of the Lord my God (v. 18) is, it is not in the hand of any created being to change a deed or a decree of God. The secret is, the part (A human being. A human being is part of creation.) can not change a part. (Any of the laws of nature.) It is only the decree of the All (God.) which can change the decree of the part. (Of nature.) I cannot reveal this secret for it is very deep. The correct interpretation is, the ass spoke. If you understand the secret of the angels of Abraham (The angels that appeared to Abraham at Elon Moreh took the form of people. See Gen. 18:1,2.) and of Jacob, (The angel that appeared to Jacob at Jabok had the form of a human. See Gen. 32:2; Gen. 32:25-31) then you will understand the truth. (The angel that appeared to Balaam took the form of a man.)
Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”…So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” (Gen. 32:29–31)
There are several theories as to the identity of “the man” who wrestled with the patriarch that night. The Torah calls him a man. The prophet Hosea calls him an angel (Hos. 12:4–5). The sages say it was Samael, guardian angel of Esau and a force for evil. (Genesis Rabba, 77; Rashi to Genesis 32:35; Zohar I, Vayishlaḥ, 170a.) Jacob himself was convinced it was God. “Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, ‘It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared’” (Gen. 32:31).
לא שלח ידו, “He did not stretch out His hand.” This wording proves that they deserved to experience disciplining or worse by G’d. ויחזו את האלו-הים, “they gazed at G’d.” This is a repetition of what had been described earlier with the words ויראו את האלו-הים (24,10). The principal meaning of these verses is that the nobles were content to gaze at G’d from afar and not breach the security fence around the mountain. ויאכלו וישתו, “they ate and they drank, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text they considered the day a festival in view of their having been granted such insights and having survived the experience. This would be comparable to Yaakov who had said after his struggle with the protective guardian of Esau (Genesis 32,31) “for I have seen G’d face to face and my life has been spared.” This is also why the High Priest used to make a feast at the end of Yom Kippur every time after he had come out of the Holy of Holies without having been harmed in body or spirit by the experience (compare Yuma 70).
AND THE ANGEL OF THE ETERNAL APPEARED UNTO HIM IN A FLAME OF FIRE. Because Scripture originally states, And the angel of the Eternal appeared, and then it goes on to say, And when the Eternal saw that he turned aside to see, G-d called unto him, (Verse 4.) Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained that elohim mentioned here [in the second verse] is the angel mentioned [in the first], as in the verse, For I have seen ‘elohim’ face to face. (Genesis 32:31. The reference there is to an angel. See Ramban on Verses 26 and 30, there.) The expression, I am the G-d of thy father, (Verse 6.) is a case of the deputy speaking in the name of Him Who sent him. (See Vol. I, p. 260, for a similar instance.) But this is not correct. Moses the greatest in prophecy, would not have hidden his face from an angel [as is related in Verse 6]. Our Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah: (Bereshith Rabbah 97:4. The complete quote mentioned here by Ramban is found in Shemoth Rabbah 2:8.) “Angel. This refers to the angel Michael. Wherever Rabbi Yosei Ha’aruch (Literally: “Rabbi Yosei the tall one.” He was an outstanding pupil of Rabbeinu Hakadosh, or Rabbi Judah the Prince, redactor of the Mishnah.) was seen, people would say, ‘There is Rabbeinu Hakadosh.’ Similarly, wherever the angel Michael appears, there is also present the Glory of the Divine Presence.” The Rabbis intended to say that at first, the angel Michael appeared to Moses, and there was also the Glory of the Divine Presence, but Moses did not see the Glory, as he had not duly prepared his mind for prophecy. When he duly prepared his heart for it and he turned aside to see, then the vision of the Divine Presence revealed itself to him, and G-d called unto him out of the midst of the bush. (Verse 4.)
AND HE APPEARED TO HIM. Rashi comments: “To visit the sick man. Said Rabbi Chama the son of Chanina, ‘It was the third day after his circumcision, and the Holy One, blessed be He, came and inquired after him.’ (“After him.” In our text of Rashi: “after the state of his health.”) And, lo, three men: (Verse 2 here.) angels who came to him in the form of men. Three: one to announce to Sarah that she would bear a son, one to heal Abraham, and one to overthrow Sodom. Raphael who healed Abraham went from there to rescue Lot” for these do not constitute two commissions. (“One angel does not carry out two commissions.” (Bereshith Rabbah 50:2 and mentioned in Rashi here.) But, continues Ramban, these two missions given to the angel Raphael—healing Abraham and rescuing Lot from Sodom—do not violate the principle. See text.) This is because the second mission was in another place, and he was commanded thereon after [he had completed his first mission]. (It is as if he was sent on a new mission in another place after he had completed his mission in a different place. For it is clear that the principle of one angel not carrying out two commissions applies only to two simultaneous commissions, as explained in Mizrachi’s commentary on Rashi.) Perhaps it is because the two missions had rescue as their common goal. (Since healing and rescue are missions with a common purpose, one angel could be charged with both missions.) “And they did eat: (Verse 8 here.) they appeared to be eating.” In the book Moreh Nebuchim (Ibn Tibbon’s translation, II, 42: in Al Charizi, Chapter 43.) it is said that this portion of Scripture consists of a general statement followed by a detailed description. Thus Scripture first says that the Eternal appeared to Abraham in the form of prophetic visions, and then explains in what manner this vision took place, namely, that he [Abraham] lifted up his eyes in the vision, and lo, three men stood by him, (Verse 2 here.) and he said, if now I have found favor in thy eyes. (Verse 3 here.) This is the account of what he said in the prophetic vision to one of them, namely, their chief. Now if in the vision there appeared to Abraham only men partaking of food, how then does Scripture say, And the Eternal appeared to him, as G-d did not appear to him in vision or in thought? (In other words, why does Scripture begin the chapter with the statement, And the Eternal appeared to him, when in the detailed account of the vision it is explained that he saw only angels?) Such is not found with respect to all the prophecies. And according to his (The author of the Moreh Nebuchim.) words, Sarah did not knead cakes, nor did Abraham prepare a bullock, and also, Sarah did not laugh. It was all a vision! If so, this dream came through a multitude of business, (See Ecclesiastes 5:2.) like dreams of falsehood, for what is the purpose of showing him all this! (Since the vision concerning the preparation and the eating of the meal were not relevant to the prophecy of the birth of Isaac.) Similarly did the author of the Moreh Nebuchim say (Ibn Tibbon’s translation, II, 42: in Al Charizi, Chapter 43.) in the case of the verse, And a man wrestled with him, (Further, 32:25. The reference deals with Jacob wrestling with the angel.) that it was all a prophetic vision. But if this be the case, I do not know why Jacob limped on his thigh when he awoke! And why did Jacob say, For I have seen an angel face to face, and my life is preserved? (Ibid., Verse 31.) The prophets did not fear that they might die on account of having experienced prophetic visions. Jacob, moreover, had already seen a greater and more distinguished vision than this since many times, in prophetic visions, he had also seen the Revered Divinity. (Ibid., 28:13.) Now according to this author’s opinion, he will find it necessary for the sake of consistency to say similarly in the affair of Lot that the angels did not come to his house, nor did he bake for them unleavened bread and they did eat. (Ibid., 19:3.) Rather, it was all a vision! But if Lot could ascend to the height of a prophetic vision, how did the wicked and sinful people of Sodom become prophets? Who told them that men had come into Lot’s house? And if all these [i.e., the actions of the inhabitants of Sodom], were part of prophetic visions, then it follows that the account related in the verses, And the angels hastened Lot, saying: Arise take thy wife. …And he said, Escape for thy life… See, I have accepted thee, (Ibid., Verses 17-21.) as well as the entire chapter is but a vision, and if so, Lot could have remained in Sodom! But the author of the Moreh Nebuchim thinks that the events took place of themselves, but the conversations relating to all matters were in a vision! But such words contradict Scripture. It is forbidden to listen to them, all the more to believe in them! In truth, (Ramban partially agrees with Rambam’s position. He says that wherever seeing or hearing an angel is mentioned in Scripture, it refers to a vision since the human senses can not perceive an angel. However, wherever Scripture ascribes human appearances to the angels, as in the case of Abraham, then their presence is sensually perceived. Other differences of opinion between Ramban and Rambam regarding prophecy are mentioned further on in the text.) wherever Scripture mentions an angel being seen or heard speaking it is in a vision or in a dream for the human senses cannot perceive the angels. But these are not visions of prophecy since he who attains the vision of an angel or the hearing of his speech is not yet a prophet. For the matter is not as the Rabbi (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides). See Seder Bereshith, Note 139.) pronounced, (Moreh Nebuchim, II, 41.) i.e., that every prophet, Moses our teacher excepted, received his prophecy through the medium of an angel. The Sages have already said (Megillah 3a.) concerning Daniel: “They (Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi—three prophets who lived at the beginning of the second Temple.) were greater than he for they were prophets and he was not a prophet.” His book, likewise, was not grouped together (The Men of the Great Assembly redacted the books of the Bible. See Baba Bathra 15a. They placed the book of Daniel in the section of the Writings. (Ibid., 14 b).) with the books of the prophets since his affair was with the angel Gabriel, even though he appeared to him and spoke with him when he was awake, as it is said in the vision concerning the second Temple: Yea, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel,etc. (Daniel 9:1.) The vision concerning the ultimate redemption (From the beginning of Chapter 10 there.) also occurred when Daniel was awake as he walked with his friends beside the Tigris River. (Ibid., 10:4. As for his friends, see ibid., Verse 7. Tradition specifies that these were Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. (Megillah 3a.)) Hagar the Egyptian (She was not a prophetess even though angels appeared to her. (Above, 16: 7.) Ramban thus differs with Rambam, who had said that all prophets received the prophecy through the medium of an angel. Rambam’s position is defended as follows: Rambam’s intent was not that whenever an angel is seen it is an instance of prophecy. Rather his intent was that whenever prophecy comes to any of the prophets it comes through an angel. However, it is possible that an angel may appear for the purpose of conveying information to one who is not a prophet. This was the case with Daniel and Hagar.) is not included in the group of prophetesses. (In Megillah 14 a, the Rabbis list seven prophetesses who arose in Israel: Sarah, Miriam, Deborah, Hannah, Abigail, Huldah and Esther. Hagar however was not listed among them. See Note 103 further.) It is also clear that hers was not a case of the bath kol (prophetic echo), (Guide of the Perplexed, II, 42. See Friedlander’s note on bath kol, p. 199, n.2.) as the Rabbi (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides). See Seder Bereshith, Note 139.) would have it. Scripture, furthermore, sets apart the prophecy of Moses our teacher from that of the patriarchs, as it is said, And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by [the name of] G-d Almighty, (Exodus 6:3.) this name being one of the sacred names for the Creator, and not a designation for an angel. Our Rabbis also taught concerning the difference in the degree of prophecy between Moses and the other prophets, and they said: (Vayikra Rabbah 1:14.) “What is the difference between Moses and all the prophets? The Rabbis say that all prophets saw through unclear vision. It is to this matter that Scripture refers in saying, And I have multiplied visions, and by the ministry of the prophets have I used similitudes. (Hosea 12:11.) Moses saw through a clear vision. It is to this matter that Scripture refers in saying, And the similitudes of the Eternal doth he behold,” (Numbers 12:8.) as is explained in Vayikra Rabbah (Vayikra Rabbah 1:14.) and other places. But in no place did the Sages attribute the prophecy of the prophets to an angel. Do not expose yourself to argument by quoting the verse, I also am a prophet as thou art; and an angel spoke unto me by the word of the Eternal, saying, (I Kings 13:18. From this you might argue that the prophets themselves attributed their prophecy to an angel. This is not correct, as is explained in the text.) since its meaning is as follows: “I also am a prophet as thou art, and I know that the angel who spoke to me was by word of G-d, this being one of the degrees of prophecy, as the man of G-d said, For so was it charged me by the word of the Eternal, (Ibid., Verse 9.) and he further said, For it was said to me by the word of the Eternal. (Ibid., Verse 17.) Our Rabbis have further stated (Bamidbar Rabbah 20:13.) in the matter of Balaam, who said, Now, therefore, if it displease thee, I will get me back, (Numbers 22:34.) [that is as if Balaam commented]: “I did not go [with the messengers of Balak] until the Holy One, blessed be He, told me, Rise up, go with them, (Ibid., 22:20.) and you [i.e., an angel], tell me that I should return. Such is His conduct! Did He not tell Abraham to sacrifice his son, after which the angel of the Eternal called to Abraham, And he said, Lay not thy hand upon the lad. (Further, 22:12.) He is accustomed to saying something and to have an angel revoke it, etc.” Thus the Sages were prompted to say that the prophecy comprising the first charge where G-d is mentioned is not like the second charge of which it is said that it was through an angel, only this was not unusual, for it is customary with the prophets that He would command by a prophecy and revoke the command through an angel since the prophet knew that the revocation was the word of G-d. In the beginning of Vayikra Rabbah (1:9.) the Sages have said: “And He called to Moses, (Leviticus 1:1.) unlike Abraham. Concerning Abraham it is written, And the angel of the Eternal called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven. (Further, 22:15.) The angel called, and G-d spoke the word, but here with respect to Moses, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘It is I Who called, and it is I Who spoke the word.’” That is to say, Abraham did not attain prophecy until he prepared his soul first to perceive an angel, and from that degree he ascended to attain the word of prophecy, but Moses was prepared for prophecy at all times. Thus the Sages were prompted to inform us everywhere that seeing an angel is not prophecy, and those who see angels and speak with them are not included among the prophets, as I have mentioned concerning Daniel. Rather, this is only a vision called “opening of eyes,” as in the verse: And the Eternal opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Eternal; (Numbers 22:31.) similarly: And Elisha prayed, and said, O Eternal, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. (II Kings 6:17.) But where Scripture mentions the angels as men, as is the case in this portion, and the portion concerning Lot — likewise, And a man wrestled with him, (Further, 32:25. The reference deals with Jacob wrestling with the angel.) And a certain man found him, (Further, 37:15.) in the opinion of our Rabbis (According to the Sages the man who wrestled with Jacob was the angel of Esau (Bereshith Rabbah 77:2), and the man who found Joseph was the angel Gabriel (Tanchuma Vayeshev 2).) — in all these cases there was a special glory created in the angels, called among those who know the mysteries of the Torah “a garment,” perceptible to the human vision of such pure persons as the pious and the disciples of the prophets, and I cannot explain any further. And in those places in Scripture where you find the sight of G-d and the speech of an angel, or the sight of an angel and the speech of G-d, as is written concerning Moses at the outset of his prophecy, (Exodus 3:2.) and in the words of Zechariah, (Zechariah 1:14, etc.) I will yet disclose words of the living G-d in allusions. Concerning on the matter of the verse, And they did eat, (Verse 8 here.) the Usages have said: (Bereshith Rabbah 48:16.) “One course after the other disappeared.” (That is, the angels really did not eat. Rather as soon as a dish of food was brought, it was consumed by fire.) The matter of “disappearance” you will understand from the account about Manoah, (Judges 13:19.) if you will be worthy to attain it. Now here is the interpretation of this portion of Scripture. After it says that In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, (Above, 17:26.) Scripture says that G-d appeared to him while he was sick from the circumcision as he was sitting and cooling himself in his tent door on account of the heat of the day which weakened him. Scripture mentions this in order to inform us that Abraham had no intention for prophecy. He had neither fallen on his face nor prayed, yet this vision did come to him.
AND HE OFFERED SACRIFICES UNTO THE G-D OF HIS FATHER ISAAC. The duty of honoring one’s father is more imperative than that of honoring one’s grandfather. Therefore the sacrifices are associated with the name of Isaac, and not with that of Abraham. Thus the language of Rashi. But this is not sufficient, for it would have been proper for Scripture to say, “and he offered sacrifices unto the G-d of his fathers,” without singling out any one person, just as Jacob said, The G-d before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk; (Further 48:15.) and in his prayer he said, O G-d of my father Abraham, and G-d of my father Isaac. (Above, 32:10.) Or Scripture should have said, “and he offered sacrifices to the Eternal,” just as it says in the case of Abraham, And he built there an altar unto the Eternal. (Ibid., 12:7.) And what need was there to explain it further? However, this verse contains a secret, which the Rabbis revealed to us there in Bereshith Rabbah: (94:5.) When Jacob was about to go down to Egypt he saw that the exile was beginning for him and his children, and he feared it, and so he offered many sacrifices to the Fear of his father Isaac (Above, 31:53.) in order that Divine judgment should not be aimed against him. This he did in Beer-sheba which was a place of prayer for his father, and from there he had taken permission when he went to Haran. (See Ramban above, 28:17.) Now Scripture uses the word z’vachim, [a term connoting peace-offerings], to inform us that they were not burnt-offerings as were his fathers’, as Abraham offered burnt-offerings. Our Rabbis have said (Zebachim 116a.) that Noachides (See Note 148 in Seder Vayishlach, also Note 222 in Seder Bereshith.) did not offer peace-offerings; they offered burnt-offerings. And concerning Noah it is clearly written, And he offered burnt-offerings on the altar. (Above 8:20.) But on account of his fear of the Eternal, Jacob offered peace-offerings in order to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him, even as the Rabbis have expounded: (Torath Kohanim Vayikra 16:1.) “They are called sh’lamim (peace-offerings) because they bring shalom (peace) into the world.” Now his original intent was directed at the Divine attribute of power, this being nearest to Isaac. This is the explanation of that which the Rabbis mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah, (94:5.) i.e., that the duty of honoring one’s father is more imperative than that of honoring one’s grandfather. This explanation applies to that which the Rabbis have said there in yet another form: “First you greet the pupil and afterward you greet the Rabbi.” (The case refers to a procession of a Rabbi and his pupils on the road. Since the pupils travel in advance of the Rabbi, a person coming from the opposite direction would first meet the pupils and then the Rabbi. Similarly, Isaac is the pupil and Abraham is the Rabbi. Hence Jacob offered sacrifices to the G-d of his father Isaac.) I have seen this text in the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah: (Sefer Habahir, 135. See Note 42 in Seder Bereshith.) “And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac. (Above, 31:53.) Is there any one who swears by the belief of the Fear of his father? However, it was because Jacob was not yet given strength, and so he swore by the power given to his father, as it is said, And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac. (Above, 31:53.) And what is this? It is this concerning which Scripture writes, Then the fire of the Eternal fell, and consumed the burnt-offering, (I Kings 18:38.) and it is further written, For the Eternal thy G-d is a devouring fire, etc.” (Deuteronomy 4:24.) Thus far the Midrash. From the words of the Rabbis of this Midrash, we learn that it was for this reason that it does not say here, “and he offered sacrifices to the Eternal,” [but instead it says, “to the G-d of his father Isaac],” because now in Beer-sheba Jacob had already become privileged to possess his own portion [and needed only to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him], (The words in the brackets are from the Commentary of Lvush to the Rekanati on the Torah, who quotes these words of Ramban.) as it is said, Thou wilt give truth to Jacob, mercy to Abraham, as Thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old. (Micah 7:20.) It was therefore necessary to explain it now. Thus by the merit of the sacrifices, the G-d of his father Isaac appeared to him in the visions of the night (Verse 2 here.) with an ameliorated Divine attribute of justice. It is this which Scripture says concerning them, in the visions of the night, complementing that which He said, I am G-d, the G-d of thy father, (Verse 3 here.) for He is the G-d of Beth-el Who said to him in Haran, I am the G-d of Beth-el, where thou didst anoint a pillar; (Above, 31:13.) it is He Who is the G-d of thy father. This is the Name and this is the attribute. And He assured him that he should have no fear in Egypt for he will be found righteous in Divine judgment, and he will be redeemed after the affliction. This is the meaning of the Divine promise, And I will also surely bring thee up again. (Verse 4 here.) Now the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] has written in the twenty-seventh chapter of the first part of the Moreh Nebuchim (Guide of the Perplexed) concerning Onkelos’ translation of the verse, I will go down with thee into Egypt, and I will also surely bring thee up again, (Verse 4 here.) [which Onkelos rendered here literally]: “I will go down with thee…and I will bring thee up.” And the Rabbi was amazed at the opinion of Onkelos, [namely, that the literal translation should be used], saying that Onkelos had exerted all his effort to remove any implication of G-d’s corporeality from all narratives in the Torah. Accordingly, in the case of any expression found in the Torah implying any mode of motion that refers to G-d, Onkelos ascribed the action to a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, or a manifestation of Divine Providence. Thus he translated And G-d came down (Exodus 19:20.) as “and G-d manifested Himself;” I will go down now and see (Above, 18:21.) as “I will manifest Myself now and see.” And if so, why did Onkelos here translate literally, “I will go down”? And so the Rabbi explained that since Scripture said at the outset of the matter, And G-d spoke unto Israel in the visions of the night, (Verse 2 here.) thus indicating that it is an account of what Jacob was told and not what actually took place, Onkelos therefore did not hesitate to literally translate the words as they were addressed to Jacob in the visions of the night, for the words in question represent an account of what Jacob was told, not what actually took place. There is thus a great difference between a communication transmitted in a dream or a vision of the night, or a communication designated as having been made in a vision or manifestation, and a communication given clearly, [not in a dream, such as communications introduced by phrases like these]: “And the word of the Eternal came unto me, saying,” or “And the Eternal spoke unto me, saying.” These are the words of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon. Similarly he said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 48.) that Onkelos never translated expressions of “hearing” literally [when the Scriptural references were to G-d], but instead explained them as expressing that a certain matter reached the Creator, or that He accepted a prayer. Thus Onkelos translated the Eternal heard (Above, 29:33.) as “it was heard before the Eternal;” he translated the verse, I will surely hear his crying (Exodus 22:22.) as “I will surely accept his complaint.” But if the matter is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said, why does Onkelos shun literal translations of expressions of movement, and also avoid literal expressions of hearing due to his fear that they might indicate corporeality, but he does not in any place shy away from literally expressing “saying,” “speaking” or “calling,” whether the communication was in a dream or manifestation or overt speech, for in every case he translates: “and G-d said,” “G-d spoke,” “and G-d called unto Moses”? These expressions likewise signify corporeality, and Onkelos should have translated, “and it was said from before G-d,” or “and the glory of G-d said,” or “and G-d willed,” as is appropriate in each case, just as the Rabbi has explained (Moreh Nebuchim I, 65.) with reference to the terms “speaking” and “saying” when they refer to G-d. And why did Onkelos avoid literal translation in the case of “hearing” and did not do so with respect to “seeing,” which he translated as: “and the Eternal saw”? (Above, 6:5.) And that which the Rabbi has said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 48.) that “seeing” indicates mental perception as well as the sensation of sight, this applies all the more to “hearing” for it is employed in many places to indicate mental perception and will, such as: And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai; (Above 16:2.) Hear the voice of my supplications; (Psalms 28:2.) Yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; (Isaiah 1:15.) And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Eternal thy G-d. (Deuteronomy 28:1.) And so also, leiv shomei’ah (I Kings 3:9.) (literally: a hearing heart, an understanding heart), and so also in the case of most of [the verses cited by Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon]. So Onkelos should not have been apprehensive of expressions of “hearing” as they only indicate acceptance of a matter by G-d and His being pleased with it, for he does not avoid literal translations of expressions of sight any place, but translates it literally in all cases even when seeing alone is involved. However, where a matter is not conceived by sight alone, but requires attention and discernment, Onkelos renders it as befits the subject. For example, when Scripture says, Because the Eternal hath looked upon my affliction, (Above, 29:32.) [Onkelos rendered it as, “because my affliction is manifested before the Eternal”]. The verse, I have surely seen the affliction of My people, (Exodus 3:7.) [was rendered by Onkelos as, “the enslavement of my people is manifest before me,” and the verse], And G-d saw the children of Israel, (Ibid., 2:25.) [he rendered as, “and the enslavement of the children of Israel was manifest before G-d],” since His seeing them was not just as a matter of perceiving their bodies but of His attention to their situation and His knowledge thereof. This is Onkelos’ method throughout the Torah, and not as the Rabbi’s opinion would have it, as a consquence of which opinion he had to declare [our version of Targum Onkelos] erroneous (Ramban refers here to Chapter 48 of the first part of the Moreh Nebuchim mentioned above, in which Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam) sets forth the theory that Onkelos always renders “seeing” literally except where it is connected with wrong, injury or violence, in which cases he expresses it as “It was manifest before the Eternal.” Onkelos is thus consistent with the prophetic phrase, Thou canst not look on iniquity (Habakkuk 1:13). However, Rambam mentions that he found three passages which contradict his theory. One is the verse, And the Eternal saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, (above, 6:5), and the other two are mentioned in the following note. In these three cases which are connected with wrong and violence, Onkelos should have expressed “seeing” in the form of “being manifest before the Eternal,” and yet he translated them literally! Rambam then concludes that our version of Onkelos is inaccurate in those three cases! It is this conclusion of Rambam with which Ramban takes issue in the text before us.) in [the following three places: the verse mentioned above, namely, And the Eternal saw], (Above, 6:5.) and two other verses, (And G-d saw the earth, and behold it was corrupt, (above, 6:12). And the Eternal saw that Leah was hated, (above, 29:31).) which Onkelos translated as, “and He saw,” since these translations do not fit his theory. With reference to expressions of “passing” Onkelos paraphrased and thus translated the expression, And the Eternal passed by before him, (Exodus 34:6.) as, “and He caused His Presence to pass before his [Moses’] face.” He did this so that the passing object would be, in accordance with Onkelos’ opinion, something created, as he would not ascribe any expression of motion to the Creator in accordance with what the Rabbi has mentioned. (Moreh Nebuchim I, 21.) But if this is so, why did Onkelos literally translate the verse, The Eternal thy G-d, He will go over before thee? (Deuteronomy 31:3. In our version of Onkelos, the text reads, “His word will go over.” Ramban’s objection is thus removed.) This is a form of motion occurring in a narrative (As opposed to “the visions of the night.” See the beginning of the section where Ramban explains this distinction which Rambam makes.) and yet Onkelos was not apprehensive about it! Similarly, Onkelos translated the verse, And Israel saw the great hand, (Exodus 14:31.) as, “and Israel saw the power of the great hand.” He added the term “power” due to the subsequent expression, that the Eternal did, (Exodus 14:31.) yet he left intact the expression, “the great hand” and was not apprehensive and fearful of the term “hand” being ascribed to G-d and did not paraphrase it at all! He did the same in literally translating, written with the finger of G-d. (Ibid., 31:18.) The Rabbi’s answer (Moreh Nebuchim I, 66.) that Onkelos thought that “the finger” was a created instrument which, by the will of the Creator, engraved the writing on the tablets, is not the truth. There is the verse, At His right hand was a fiery law unto them, (Deuteronomy 33:2.) in translation of which Onkelos wrote, “His right hand,” and he was not apprehensive of “the right hand writing,” that is lest it indicate corporeality, and such is the case also with “the finger” as mentioned above. He furthermore literally translated: Thou stretchest forth Thy right hand (Exodus 15:12.) as, “Thou raisest Thy right hand.” So also the verses: Thy right hand, O Eternal, dasheth in pieces the enemy; (Ibid., Verse 6.) Thy strong hand; (Deuteronomy 3:24.) By a mighty hand, and by an outstretched arm; (Ibid., 4:34.) And My hand take hold on judgment; (Ibid., 32:41.) The eyes of the Eternal thy G-d are always upon it. (Ibid., 11:12.) [Onkelos literally translated all of these verses without fear that the terms “hand” and “eyes” might indicate corporeality.] Now in the case of Jacob, the Scriptural narrative begins, And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, etc., and yet Onkelos, fearing corporeality, translated [the verse, And, behold, the Eternal stood beside him], (Above, 28:12-13.) as “and, behold, the Glory of G-d stood beside him,” and he did not translate literally, “and, behold, the Eternal” although it was in a dream. (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon’s thesis is that the reason Onkelos did not paraphrase the verse, I will go down with thee into Egypt, but translated it literally, is that the narrative begins with a statement that it was in a vision of the night. Ramban questions this thesis, for in the story of the ladder, which is also introduced as a dream, Onkelos avoided possible indications of corporeality, and accordingly he paraphrased the verses.) He further translated the expression, And, behold, I am with thee, (Above, 28:15.) as “and, behold, My word will be in thy help,” and did not say literally, “and, behold, I am with thee,” just as he literally translated, “I will go down with thee,” even though the story of the ladder is a statement of what Jacob was told, [not a narrative of what took place], and is completely analogous to the narrative of the dream here. Again, Onkelos literally translated the expression, And I will be with thy mouth, (Exodus 4:12.) [even though the story there is not introduced as a vision of the night or a dream], and on the other hand he translated the verse, And He said, Certainly I will be with thee, and this shall be the token unto thee, (Ibid., 3:12.) as “behold, My word will be with thee.” Furthermore, Onkelos does not always translate literally in the case of dreams. Thus he rendered the verses, And G-d came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, (Above, 20:3.) And G-d came to Laban in a dream, (Ibid., 41:22.) as “and the word came from before G-d.” Should you say that Onkelos paraphrased it there because he was concerned lest one think that G-d came to them before the dream, and one might thus think that G-d’s appearance actually took place, [this would still not justify his using the expression, “and the word came,”] for in the case of Solomon it is written, In Gibeon the Eternal appeared to Solomon in a dream, (I Kings 3:5.) and yet Jonathan ben Uziel (See Note 152 in Seder Noach.) translated it as, “G-d revealed Himself to Solomon,” even though, according to Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, a narrative introduced as a dream is rendered by Onkelos and Jonathan as it was actually said. They find no difficulty in translating such a statement literally, even though the expression connotes corporeality, because since it occurs in a dream, they understand that it is inexact. Thus in the case of Solomon, since the Eternal appeared to him in a dream, it was proper for Jonathan to give a literal account of the occurrence, for since Scripture relates that it was in a dream by night, (I Kings 3:5.) one would himself infer that it was not real but only a dream in which the person dreaming imagined it to be so. [Now since Jonathan did not paraphrase the account of Solomon’s dream, although Onkelos did so in the case of the dreams of Abimelech and Laban, it thus helps to disprove the thesis of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon that accounts of what occurred in man’s imagination are not paraphrased by the Targum.] Now do not think that Jonathan ben Uziel did this because the term “seeing” in reference to dreams is not found in Aramaic — for the verse, And I saw in my dream, (Above, 41:22.) is indeed translated [in Targum Onkelos] as “I saw,” and in the case of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, it likewise says in Aramaic, Thou O King, sawest. (Daniel 2:31.) And so did Onkelos translate the verse, Your murmurings are not against us, but against the Eternal, (Exodus 16:8.) as “but against the word of G-d.” Onkelos thus paraphrased here even though there is no fear or apprehension of corporeality connoted by literal translation. Likewise, he translated And the people spoke against G-d, and against Moses (Numbers 21:5.) as, “and the people murmured against the word of G-d.” So also the verses, Between Me and you, (Above, 9:12.) and Between G-d and every living creature, (Ibid., Verse 16.) were translated by Onkelos as: “between My word and you,” “between the word of G-d and every living creature.” There are many similar examples [of verses which he paraphrased in spite of the fact that there would have been no apprehension of intimating corporeality had he translated literally]. And so also he translated The Eternal watch (Ibid., 31:49.) as “the word of G-d watch;” G-d is witness (Ibid., Verse 50.) as “the word of G-d is witness.” Yet there would be no apprehension of corporeality had those expressions been literally translated. Besides, what sense is conveyed here by the expression, “the word of G-d’ watch or witness”? Similarly the verse, Swear unto me here by G-d, (Ibid., 21:23.) is rendered by Onkelos as “swear unto me by the word of G-d,” although people who swear do not mention, “I swear by the word of G-d.” There are many other such cases in Onkelos, and their secret meaning is known to the learned students [of the mystic lore of the Torah]. Likewise, with respect to the term “standing” when applied to G-d, the Rabbi said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 28.) that Jonathan ben Uziel’s intent was to explain it as meaning “to endure permanently,” and therefore he translated the expression, And His feet shall stand, (Zechariah 14:4.) as “and He will appear in His might.” So also all expressions denoting contact and motion were rendered by him as “the might of G-d.” Yet Onkelos had no apprehension of the term “standing.” and he translated it literally: Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock. (Exodus 17:6.) And concerning that which the Rabbi has said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) that all expressions denoting any mode of motion are rendered by Onkelos as the revelation of the Divine Presence, or the manifestation of a certain Glory that had been created for the occasion, now Onkelos avoids even literal translation of verses which mention “seeing” the Glory [of G-d, and would certainly oppose using it to denote expressions of motion]. Thus he translates the verse, And the glory of the Eternal appeared unto all the congregation, (Numbers 16:19.) as “and the glory of G-d was manifested,” just as he said in translation of the verse, And the Eternal came down, (Exodus 19:20.) “and the Eternal manifested Himself,” and did not translate it literally as “and the glory of the Eternal appeared.” He also likewise translates “seeing,” when referring to angels, as “and he manifested himself.” (Onkelos, ibid., 3:2.) Now if it is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) that in the case of angels, or manifestation of a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, Onkelos does not hesitate to literally translate expressions denoting corporeality, it would have been proper for him not to avoid expressions of literal “seeing” of angels by man, and should there translate it as “and he appeared,” just as he has literally rendered the verse, For I have seen ‘Elokim’ face to face, (Above, Verse 32.) as “for I have seen an angel of G-d.” Heaven forbid that the Divine Presence or the Glory created for the occasion be anything except the glorious Divine Name, blessed be He, as the Rabbi has expressed himself here (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) and in many chapters of his book. Thus Onkelos translated the expression, If Thy face go not, (Exodus 33:15.) as “if Thy Divine Presence go not among us.” Now, other than the glorious Divine Name, blessed be He, Moses did not want a special Glory created to go with him, since the Holy One, blessed be He, had already told him, Behold Mine angel shall go before thee, (Ibid., 32:34.) and Moses was not pleased with it. He instead wanted that G-d in His own glory should go with him. Also, after G-d heard his plea and told him, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken, (Ibid., 33:17.) Moses said, Let the Lord, I pray thee, go in the midst of us, (Ibid., 34:9.) and this Onkelos rendered as “let now G-d’s Divine Presence go among us.” (We thus see that even here, where it is clear from the context that the verse refers to G-d and not an angel, Onkelos does not hesitate to translate “going” literally.) He similarly translated the expression, Thou canst not see My face, (Ibid., 33:20.) “thou cannot see the face of My Divine Presence, for man shall not see Me.” [In translating the verse in the book of Ezekiel, Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from His place,] (Ezekiel 3:12.) Jonathan ben Uziel said, “Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from the region of His Divine abode.” Now if by this “Glory,” [which is mentioned in the book of Ezekiel] Scripture refers to the Creator in His true essence, analogous to the verse, Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory, (Exodus 33:18.) which the Rabbi has indeed so interpreted, (Moreh Nebuchim I, 54 and 64.) then how did [Jonathan ben Uziel] in translating the verse mention “the region of His Divine abode” [when the terms “region,” “abode,” etc., indicate corporeality]? And if one would say that the verse in Ezekiel refers to a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, as is the opinion of the Rabbi with respect to the verse, And the glory of the Eternal filled the tabernacle, (Exodus 40:35. Moreh Nebuchim I, 64.) and other similar verses, then how did the angels direct their words, “Blessed, etc.,” towards it when he who blesses and prays to a glory created for an occasion is as he who worshipped idols? The teachings of our Rabbis also contain many texts which indicate that the name Shechinah (Divine Presence) is identical with G-d, blessed be He. But all these subjects, [some of which are rendered literally and some of which are paraphrased, are not influenced by a fear of using terms denoting corporeality but rather by secrets] of the Cabala (See Note 56 in Introduction to Sefer Bereshith.) known to Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uziel, and the secrets thereof are revealed to those who know the mystic lore of the Torah. Thus in the Revelation on Mount Sinai, wherever Elokim is mentioned in that section, Onkelos renders it as “the Glory” or “the Word of G-d,” but when Scripture mentions the Tetragrammaton he does not so render it. All this is done by Onkelos with extraordinary care and wisdom, and I will yet mention (See Ramban on Exodus 20:19.) this with the help of G-d, blessed be He. Now the reason that Onkelos literally translated the verse, And ‘Elokim’ spoke all these words, saying, (Ibid., 20:1.) [rather than render it, “and the Glory of G-d spoke,” as he usually does wherever Elokim is mentioned], is that it is said, Face to face the Eternal spoke (Deuteronomy 5:4.) unto your whole assembly. (Ibid., Verse 19.) The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand. However, the reason why Onkelos here literally translated, I will go down with thee to Egypt, [and did not paraphrase it as “My Glory will go down with thee],” is that he wanted to allude to that which the Rabbis have said: (Mechilta Shirah 3. See also Megillah 29a.) “When they were exiled to Egypt, the Divine Presence went with them, as it is said, I will go down with thee to Egypt. When they were exiled to Elam, the Divine Presence went down with them, as it is said, And I will set My throne in Elam.” (Jeremiah 49:38.) Thus both the verse which speaks of G-d “saying” [namely, And He said, I am G-d, the G-d of thy father, etc.], (Verse 3 here.) and [the verse which speaks of G-d] “going down,” [namely, I will go down with thee], are alike [for they both refer to the Creator in His true essence], as I have explained above, and therefore he could not, under any circumstances, have translated in any other way, as I have hinted. But there in the case of Jacob’s dream, Onkelos could not have literally translated, “and behold I am with thee,” [and was forced to paraphrase it as, “and My word will be in thy help],” (Above, 28:15.) because it is written there, And, behold, the Eternal stood beside him. (28:13. Since the Tetragrammaton (“the Eternal”) represents the attribute of mercy, had Onkelos literally translated Verse 15, “and, behold, I am with thee,” it would have indicated that this attribute would follow Jacob into exile since at the outset of this matter in Verse 13, Scripture uses the Tetragrammaton. Hence Onkelos translated Verse 15 as, ‘and My word will be in thy help,’ which is a reference to the attribute of judgment. (Bei’ur Ha’lvush to Rekanati on the Torah, who quotes the words of Ramban.)) The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand. And due to the fact that Onkelos found the meaning of this verse not to be in line with its plain meaning, he therefore spurned [literally translating the rest of the verse, and rendered it as referring to assistance], and thus he said, “My word will be in thy help,” instead of saying “My word will be with you,” as he said in the case of Moses. (Ibid., 3:12.) And may G-d show us wonders in His Torah.
AND SHE TURNED ASIDE ‘L’PHANAI’ (BEFORE ME). Commentators (I have not identified these sources. — The difficulty in the verse is that it should have said and she turned aside ‘mipanai’ (‘from’ before me) and not l’phanai (‘before’ me).) have explained this [word ‘l’phanai’ as meaning]: “and she turned aside into the field when she was before me.” But there is no need [for this interpretation and addition], for the meaning [of the word l’phanai] is like mipanai (“from” before me), for such is the usage of the letter lamed, as in [the verses]; and they left off ‘livnoth’ (to build) the city (Genesis 11:8.) [which is like mivnoth — literally: “from building” the city]; he hath left off ‘l’haskil’ (to be wise), to do good (Psalms 36:4.) [which is like meihaskil — literally: “from being wise”]. There are also many other cases [like this]. Similarly: And Joab and the captains of the host went out ‘liphnei’ [literally: “before,” but really meaning mipnei — “from before,” i.e. “from the presence of”] the king, to number the people of Israel. (II Samuel 24:4.)
ULAI’ (The word ulai normally means “perhaps,” which is inappropriate in the context of this verse, since there was no doubt as to whether the ass had turned aside. Hence the commentators explained it as meaning lulei — “unless,” and the angel is thus saying, in defense of the animal, that “had she not turned aside from me, I would have killed you [Balaam].” Ramban later on offers his own interpretation of the verse and the word ulai actually used by Scripture.) SHE HAD TURNED ASIDE FROM ME. In the opinion of the commentators (Rashi and Ibn Ezra.) [the word ‘ulai’ here] is like lulei — “‘unless’ she had turned aside from me [surely now also I had slain thee.” The word ulai] in this context is thus used [with a meaning] different than that of all the other occasions where it is found. But in my opinion it is used here in its literal meaning [“perhaps:” — implying a doubt]; for the ass felt the presence of — or saw (See Ramban above, Verse 23.) — the angel, but did not know what it meant, and [the reason why she turned aside] was because of the drawn sword, as animals are wont to do [when they see a drawn sword]. Therefore the angel said to Balaam: “And the ass saw me and turned aside from me, [although it was only] because of a doubt that she turned aside from before me [not knowing my intentions], for I came to slay you, but I would have saved her life, since the sin is in you and not in the ass.”
GAM OTHCHAH HARAGTI’ (“ALSO” THEE I HAD SURELY SLAIN). Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that “the word gam [meaning “also”] is a proof that the ass died after it had spoken. And the meaning of [the phrase] and saved her alive [which implies that she should have died, were it not for the angel that kept her alive] is that when [even] a human being sees an angel, he dies [straightaway, whereas the ass lived on for a while until after she had spoken to Balaam] — proof being [Jacob’s statement]: and my life is preserved (Genesis 32:31. Since Jacob gave thanks to G-d for preserving his life after seeing the angel, one can deduce that it is usual for a person to die after having seen an angel. See this also clearly in Judges 13:22.) — and how much more so [does it follow that] an animal, which has no common factor with an angel, as a human being has [ought to die immediately upon seeing an angel].” (Thus according to Ibn Ezra the angel was saying: “Since even a human being, who shares with an angel the spirit of G-d, dies upon seeing an angel, how much more so the ass should have died immediately she saw me! But I saved her alive for some time after she had seen me, in order that she should speak to you.” Nonetheless, after she had spoken to Balaam she did die, as implied by the angel’s words: “had the ass not turned aside, ‘also’ you I would have killed,” meaning: The ass will now have to die, because I [only] saved her life so that she should speak to you. But had she not turned aside, I would have ‘also’ killed you.” Ramban disagrees with this interpretation, and explains that the ass did not die, as explained further on.) But the word gam cannot be interpreted as Ibn Ezra explains it, for [if so, we do not find any circumstances under which] both of them [Balaam and the ass] would die; because now when she did turn aside, the ass died and Balaam was saved alive, and had she not turned aside, he [the angel] would have killed Balaam and saved the ass alive! (Ramban’s meaning is as follows. According to Ibn Ezra’s explanation, now that the ass turned aside, she alone was killed [since she had fulfilled her purpose of arousing Balaam], but had she not turned aside, both Balaam and the ass would have been killed by the angel. To this Ramban replies that this cannot be so, because Scripture states explicitly here that had the ass not turned aside, the angel would have killed Balaam but saved her [the ass] alive; and now that she did turn aside, he saved Balaam, but killed the ass [according to Ibn Ezra]! Hence Ibn Ezra’s statement that both Balaam and the ass would have been killed is not possible under any circumstances! Therefore the word gam must be interpreted differently. [See my Hebrew commentary p. 292, for sources in Hebrew commentaries on the elucidation of this difficult text of Ramban].) However, the word gam is [to be interpreted] as Rashi explains it, its meaning being as if [the word-order of the verse were] inverted, namely: gam haragti othchah [“also would I slay thee,” meaning to say: “not only would I have held you up on your journey, but I would also have killed you”]. And the meaning of the expression and saved her alive is [not that “I would have kept her alive temporarily, but later on killed her,” as Ibn Ezra explained, but that the angel was stressing that] “the entire [burden of] sin is upon you [Balaam], and [therefore] I would have killed you because of it, [but would have kept her alive even had she not turned aside], for she has done no sin for which she ought to die. Thus her act of turning aside, which she did on account of me, was for your good [only] and not for her sake at all, [because she would anyhow not have been killed], and you have therefore smitten her for no reason, and have repaid her evil for good.” Now Scripture does not say whether Balak’s princes were present with Balaam at these events, or [it may be] that they were riding ahead of him and there was a [considerable] distance between them and him [so that they did not notice any of these events]. The most likely [interpretation, however] is that they were together with him, because they did not become separated from him, and they saw the ass turning aside and Balaam smiting her, but thought that she was merely behaving as bad animals do, because they did not hear her speak; and they certainly [did not hear] the words of the angel, who was [visible only] to the opened eyes (Further, 24:4.) of Balaam. But our Rabbis have said (Bamidbar Rabbah 20:12.) that the princes of Moab were astonished, because they saw a miracle the like of which had never occurred in the world. And they [also] said (Bamidbar Rabbah 20:12.) that as soon as the ass had finished speaking; she died, in order that the nations should not say [about her]: “This is [the ass] that spoke,” and should not make her [an object of] idol-worship. Moreover, the Holy One, blessed be He, was concerned [even] about the honor of the wicked, [and therefore killed the ass so that] people should not say: “This is [the ass] that caused Balaam’s downfall.” All this is possible, [but is] in accordance with a tradition, for Scripture [itself] does not speak about her dying at all, as I have explained.
אל תביט אחריך, first of all on account of their going to experience the anguish of seeing the destruction of their city; secondly, in order not to afford them an opportunity to see the angels performing their destructive work as angels when there was no need for them to witness this. Watching divine beings in action and being saved by such spectacles requires Divine intervention and should therefore be avoided. Compare the awe with which Manoach comments on what he has seen in Judges 13,22, as well as Yaakov’s reaction in Genesis 32,31 after his wrestling match with the angel of Esau.
וירא מלאך ה', “An angel of the Lord appeared to him;” First the Torah reports that an angel of the Lord appeared to Moses, and afterwards we read that G’d saw that Moses had taken note of the spectacle of the burning bush whereupon G’d called out to him. This prompted Ibn Ezra to say that the word אלוקים in verse 4 refers to the angel mentioned in verse 2 as מלאך ה', “an angel of the Lord.” We find a parallel construction in Genesis 32,31 where Yaakov describes himself as having “seen G’d face to face.” This in spite of the fact that G’d had described himself to Yaakov as “the G’d of your father.” The fact is that the messenger is permitted to assume the name of the One Who has dispatched him while he is carrying out the instructions of his master. [clearly, Yaakov had not had a vision of G’d Himself, face to face, something which is impossible, as explained by G’d to Moses in Exodus Ed.] Nachmanides disagrees with the commentary of Ibn Ezra, claiming that Moses, the most outstanding of all the prophets would certainly not be afraid to look at the vision of an angel, a vision granted to many prophets who were inferior to him. He goes on to say that our sages describe the angel Moses saw as being Michael, a most high ranking angel, not one of the lower ranking angels that appeared to other prophets. He identified this angel with the one described by Yaakov before his death as המלאך הגואל אותי in Genesis Elsewhere this angel is described by G’d as incorporating some of G’d’s essence, שמי, “within him.” (compare Exodus 23,21). (see Bereshit Rabbah 97,3 that whenever Rabbi Yossi ha-aruch is mentioned the listeners felt that his mentor, Rabbi Yehudah hanassi, was personally present. [Rabbi Yossi ha-aruch was not only a disciple but a personal valet of Rabbi Yehudah hanassi while the latter was alive. Ed.] The Midrash brings this example in order to illustrate the concept of angels of the caliber of, for instance, the one describing himself as שר צבא ה' in Joshua This type of angel, the one described as bearing the name of the Lord, is understood as being the category closest to the throne of G’d in the celestial regions. At the revelation of the burning bush, Moses encountered one of these angels.
[79] Secondly, Moses uses “sun” figuratively for sense-perception, inasmuch as it shews all objects of sense to the understanding. It is of sense-perception that Moses has spoken on this wise: “the sun arose upon him when he passed by the appearance of God” (Gen. 32:31); for in truth, when we are no longer able to remain in company with holiest forms, which are as it were incorporeal images, but turn in a different direction and go elsewhere, we are led by another light, even that which answers to sense-perception, a light, as compared with sound reason, differing no whit from darkness.
יהוה would speak to Moses face to face, as one person speaks to another. And he would then return to the camp; but his attendant, Joshua son of Nun, [serving as] deputy, ([serving as] deputy Trad. “a youth.” See Dictionary under na‘ar.) would not stir out of the Tent.
He strove with an angel and prevailed— The other had to weep and implore him. At Bethel [Jacob] would meet him, There to commune with him. (him Heb. “us.”)
Yaakov named the place Peniel [God’s Face], For I have seen God[ly beings] [Angles of God] face to face, and my soul has survived.
And Jakob called the name of the place Peniel; for he said, I have seen the Angels of the Lord face to face, and my soul is saved.
| וַיִּֽזְרַֽח־ל֣וֹ הַשֶּׁ֔מֶשׁ כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר עָבַ֖ר אֶת־פְּנוּאֵ֑ל וְה֥וּא צֹלֵ֖עַ עַל־יְרֵכֽוֹ׃ | 32 E | The sun rose upon him as he passed Penuel, limping on his hip. |
Thus, of Yaakov—who is the aspect of truth, as it is written (Micah 7:20), “Ascribe truth to Yaakov”—it is said (Genesis 32:31), “The sun shone for him”—i.e., the aforementioned “It will be our charity.” This is because the sun is the aspect of charity, as explained above: “But a benevolent sun will shine upon you who fear My Name.” That is, by means of the truth Yaakov was able to draw to himself all the charities, which are the aspect of sun, and cause them to shine on him. This is: “The sun shone for him”—specifically “for him,” the aspect of “It will be our charity,” as explained above.
This is the aspect of Yaakov, who corresponds to wisdom and expanded consciousness. He is the aspect of a healing for the soul, as in “a benevolent sun with healing in its wings” (Malachi 3:20). “A sun” alludes to Yaakov {as it is written (Genesis 32:31), “The sun shone for him”}. He is the aspect of wisdom, of speech-with-wisdom, which corresponds to the Torah, to Simchat Torah—which is a tree with the power to heal, as explained above.
Prior to rectification—i.e., before one expresses the sparks as words of holiness—they correspond to “limping on his hip” (Genesis 32:32), which is a blemish of the feet. Afterwards, when he expresses them as speech and builds words of holiness from them, this is the aspect of “[The Lord God] built the TZeLA (rib)” (ibid. 2:22)—which rectifies the aspect of “TZoLeA on his hip.”
And the sun, which corresponds to charity, gives strength to the legs, as it is said, “TZeDeK (Righteousness) will walk before him”—i.e., TZeDaKah (charity) will enable him to walk. And it is also said, “The sun shone for him,” and Rashi explains: [It shone] for his benefit, to heal his limp. From this we see that the Shabbat charity one does corresponds to the light of the sun, “like the light of the seven days.” It is this that gives strength to the aforementioned aspect of the three legs.
And this that is said regarding our father Yaakov, PBUH, "and the sun shone as he passed Penuel [and he as limping at the thigh]" (Genesis 32:32) meaning the "Sun" is lucidity and great holiness, that was shining and illuminating him as he passed through Penuel. Penuel is an expression for Panu El, [vacating God] and this is when a person separates their awareness from holiness, then, immediately, "and he limps on his thigh", meaning, that one has a lack in the thigh. And when he [Yaakov] passed through Penuel, meaning, that he did not separate his awareness at all from holiness, and this why then "the sun shone to him".
ויזרח לו השמש, “the sun shone for him.” In the In the Western hemisphere, the sun’s rays rise earlier and became stronger on a daily basis starting in the month of Tevet, until in the month of Tammuz the days again start to become shorter and the sun’s rays weaker. Our author tries to show how the season’s variations are hinted at in the words of the Torah here. The reason why the author does this is because he was troubled by the Torah in our verse making it appear as if the sun shone only for Yaakov and not the rest of the world. He uses the numerical value of the word: 36=לו, as the basis of this exegesis. [I have decided to omit the details of this astronomical part of his exegesis of this verse. Ed.]
והוא צולע על ירכו, “and he was limping, i.e. dragging his feet.” He had not been able to leave Peduel before the sun was shining strongly and its healing rays enabled him to walk. An alternate exegesis: no one had noticed his limp until the sun shone. The grammatical construction of our verse would be parallel to Genesis 29,25 when the Torah writes: ויהי בבקר והנה היא לאה, “it was morning when he found out (Yaakov) that it was Leah (in bed with him)”.
כאשר עבר את פנואל, as he passed Pnu-el. Perhaps Jacob was the only one who called that place Pni-el instead of Pnu-el. We find the name Pnue-el also in Judges 8.
ויזרח לו השמש, an expression similar in principle to Samuel II 2,39 ויאור להם בחברון, “it became light for them in Chevron,” when Yaakov passed Penuel the sun had just risen. An aggadic explanation (Bereshit Rabbah 78,8) of the wording, based on the word לו, “for him,” is that the sun had a therapeutic effect on Yaakov’s limp. Rabbi Berechyah explains the wording to mean that whereas everyone in Yaakov’s retinue appreciated the sun for its light, Yaakov appreciated it for its therapeutic effect on his injury. Rabbi Hunna says whereas the heat of the sun’s rays had a therapeutic effect on Yaakov, it had a debilitating effect on Esau and his hordes. He quotes Maleachi 3 10-20 “For lo! The day is at hand, burning like an oven. The arrogant and all the doers of evil shall be straw, and the day that is coming-said the Lord of Hosts- shall burn them to ashes and leave of them neither stock nor boughs. But for you who revere My name a sun of victory shall rise, a healing” You shall go forth and stamp like stall-fed calves and you shall trample the wicked to a pulp for they shall be dust beneath your feet on the day I am preparing, said the Lord of Hosts.
והוא צולע על ירכו. When he passed Peniel he felt the injury as more painful and found himself forced to limp.
והוא צולע על ירכו, now that the sun was shining he realised that he was walking with a limp, a belated discovery, just as when he discovered that he had spent a night in bed with Leah thinking that she was Rachel (29,25).
ויזרח לו השמש AND THE SUN SHONE UPON HIM— This is the expression that people use: “When we reached such-and-such a place the dawn broke upon us”. This is its literal sense. But the Midrash says that לו means, “for his needs” — to heal his lameness. Thus, too, you read in Scripture a similar metaphor (Malachi 3:20) “the sun of righteousness with healing in its wings”. The hours that it had set before its time for his sake when he left Beer-Sheba (cp. Genesis 18:11) it now rose before its time for his sake (Sanhedrin 75b).
והוא צלע AND HE LIMPED — He was limping when the sun rose.
Vor zwanzig Jahren, bemerken die Weisen, als er auf die Wanderschaft gegangen war, war ihm an der Grenze des Heimatlandes die Sonne untergegangen, die ganze Zwischenzeit waren nächtliche Zustände, jetzt bei der Heimkehr ging sie ihm wieder auf — er war nicht geschlagen, nicht gebrochen, aber hinkend.
The sun shone upon him. This verse must be inverted — after he passed Penuel, still limping, the sun shone and healed him. Similarly, in the time to come the “sun” of the redemption will shine and heal the righteous.
Those hours that the sun prematurely set ... it prematurely rose for him. Rashi is answering the question: Even if we say that the sun shone for him [to heal him], did it shine only “for him”?
He was limping when the sun rose. Rashi is saying he was limping when the sun began to rise, but he was cured right afterward.
At this juncture, the Torah inserts a legal statement: Therefore, the children of Israel do not eat the sciatic nerve, which is upon the joint of the thigh, the large nerve that extends along the entire thigh and leg all the way to the heel, to this day, because he touched the joint of Jacob’s thigh, at the sciatic nerve, a vulnerable area of the body. Due to Jacob’s injury, his descendants are prohibited from eating the sciatic nerve of animals throughout their generations.
ויזרח לו השמש כאשר עבר את פנואל, “the sun shone for him as son as he had passed Penuel.” The Torah means that the sun had risen already long before Yaakov reached Penuel. The reason why it took him so long to get there was that he now had a limp to contend with. Another interpretation of the words והוא צולע על ירכו, “he was limping on his thigh-joint,” is that he walked deliberately so slowly that onlookers did not even notice that he was limping. During the extra time it took Yaakov to reach Penuel the sun had already long risen and begun to shine. Only now did his limp become recognizable, due to the bright light of the sun.
“The sun rose” [32:32]. The sun shined for Jacob. Rashi asks a question. Why does the sun shine for Jacob alone? When the sun shines, it shines for the whole world. The explanation is that the sun shined for Jacob’s sake, in the expectation that it will be a remedy for Jacob to heal hiship, since Jacob was limping. Therefore, the Holy One let the sun rise earlier than its normal time. We find that the sun set earlier for Jacob when he left Beer Sheva. Now the Holy One let the sun rise early for the sake of Jacob. (Rashi, Genesis, 32:32.)
It seems to this writer that Mor u-Kezi'ah regarded the establishment of halakhic time, and hence of the Sabbath, in the places under discussion to be a matter of unresolvable doubt. To be sure, as clearly enunciated by R. David ibn Zimra, Teshuvot ha-Radvaz, I, no. 76, (See also Parashat Derakhim, Drush 23, s.v. od nakdim; R. Israel Lipschutz, Tiferet Yisra’el, Berakhot, note appended to Bo‘az, end of chapter 1; R. Chaim Joseph David Azulai, Birkei Yosef, Oraḥ Ḥayyim 242:1; R. Joseph Saul Nathanson, Teshuvot Sho’el u-Meshiv, Mahadura Revi’a’ah, no. 154; and R. Benjamin Aryeh Weiss, Teshuvot Even Yekarah (Lemberg, 5654), no. 11.) determination of the onset and conclusion of Shabbat is determined locally. Leviticus 23:3 mandates that the Sabbath be observed "in all your habitations." That phrase is understood by Radvaz (A similar interpretation of that verse was earlier advanced by Seforno in his commentary ad locum. See also the interpretation of Exodus 31:16 advanced by the Zohar, Genesis 56a. The verse “And the children of Israel observed the Sabbath to make the Sabbath for their generations (le-dorotam)” is rendered by the Zohar as “to make the Sabbath for their dwellings (le-dirotam).”) as signifying that the onset and conclusion of Shabbat is to be determined in accordance with sunset at each particular "habitation." (R. Abraham ibn Ezra, in his commentary to Genesis 33:10, understands the verse “And the sun rose upon him” (Genesis 32:32) as reflecting this underlying solar phenomenon, i.e., the sun rose for Jacob in the locale in which he found himself but did not rise simultaneously in other areas. R. Isaac di Trani, renowned as the author of Teshuvot Maharit, declares in his Ẓofnat Pa‘aneaḥ (Venice, 5413), Drush le-Parashat Bereshit, that the work of creation did not cease throughout the globe at a single instant. Rather, the process of creation came to a halt at each point when night fell at that spot. In effect, in observing Shabbat as determined by local sunset, man emulates the Creator who ceased from the process of creation at different times in different places. Ḥatam Sofer, cited by R. Israel David Jaffe, Ḥazon le-Mo‘ed, no. 8, sec. 7, also stated that this was the case during each of the six days of creation: the work of each day did not take place simultaneously throughout the world; rather, the entities created on each day of the week were created in every geographic area while it was day in that locale. This, Ḥatam Sofer asserts, applied even to the “ten things” which the Mishnah, Avot 5:6, declared to have been created on the sixth day between sunset and nightfall, i.e., those objects were created in different places at different times. Ḥatam Sofer interprets the verse “And God finished on the seventh day… and He rested on the seventh day” (Genesis 2:2) as referring, not to a single act of cessation of labor, but to a divine comportment at two different places, viz., God completed the work of creation at one locale while at the same time resting at another locale. See also R. Yechiel Michal Tucatzinsky, Bein ha-Shemashot (Jerusalem, 5729), p. 53; idem, Yomam (Jerusalem, 5703), p. 73; and R. Ben-Ẓion Uziel, Mishpetei Uzi’el, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, II, no. 29. Cf., R. Menachem Kasher, “Shabbat Bereshit u-Shabbat Sinai,” Talpiyot, vol. I, no. 1 (Tishri 5704), pp. 415-420. Cf., however, Teshuvot Sho’el u-Meshiv, Mahadura Revi’a’ah, who candidly acknowledges that, in observing Shabbat according to local time “in all their habitations,” Jews do not observe Shabbat during the same time period in which the Creator ceased from the work of creation. Moreover, he regards that concept to be reflected in the otherwise problematic words of the musaf prayer: “a people who sanctify the seventh day (am mekaddeshei shevi‘i).” Jews sanctify the month and hence the festivals which are calendar dependent. Shabbat, however, is predetermined and does not require sanctification of the new moon by the Bet Din. Nevertheless, explains Sho’el u-Meshiv, since Jews must observe Shabbat “in all their habitations” at different times they are indeed a “people who sanctify the seventh day.”) Shabbat is designed as a "sign between Me and between you" (Exodus 31:13) and accordingly, is to be observed during the period representing the culmination of six days of labor in each person's locale. The Sabbath day, which includes a period of darkness and a period of daylight, is roughly twenty-four hours in length in all places other than in the extreme northern and southern regions. As a result, the Sabbath is observed on the same day of the week in all parts of the globe. Accordingly, Mor u-Kezi'ah assumes that in locales in which that cannot be the case there is no discernible method for determining the days of the week. Hence, determination of the advent of Shabbat remains either a matter of irresolvable doubt or, alternatively, there is no concept of halakhic time in such places. Therefore, Mor u-Kezi'ah rules that a person finding himself in such a place faces a problem that is no different from that confronting a person lost in the desert or confused with regard to a sequence of days and must conduct himself in an identical manner. That is precisely the import of Mor u-Kezi'ah's concluding phrase "in the manner indicated earlier with regard to one who travels in the desert," i.e., he may perform no forbidden act on any day of the week and must recite kiddush and havdalah on the seventh day of every seven-day cycle subsequent to his arrival.
It is from the roots of this commandment [that it is to serve as] a hint to Israel that though they will suffer many troubles in the exile by the hand of the nations and by the hand of the [descendants] of Esav (i.e. the Christians), [the Jews] should trust that they will not perish, but rather that their descendants and name will stand firm forever, and that their redeemer will come and redeem them from their oppressor. And in continually remembering this idea through the commandment that serves as a reminder, they will stand firm in their faith and righteousness forever. And this hint [stems from the fact that] that the angel who fought with Yaakov our forefather — who according to tradition (Bereshit Rabbah 78) was the guardian angel of Esav — wished to eliminate Yaakov from the world, he and his descendants; but he could not [get the better] of him, (Genesis 32:26) but anguished him in injuring his thigh. Likewise, Esav’s seed anguishes the seed of Yaakov; but in the end, [the latter] will be saved from them. As we find (Genesis 32:32) with respect to [our] forefather that the sun shone to heal him and he was saved from pain, so will the sun of the messiah shine and he will heal us from our pain and redeem us speedily in our days, amen!
And Jacob, because he drew Her near to Her Master with his encounter, he certainly made it the evening prayer an obligation. And when the sun comes in the morning, of which it is stated: (Ps. 84:12) For a sun and a shield is Y”Y ELQYM, then it is stated of him: (Gen. 32:32) ... and the sun rose upon him...
And of Ya’AQoV (Jacob) – with that [Var. with this] thigh – it is stated of him: (Gen. 32:32) ... and he was limping on his thigh. For the letter Yod (י) had flown away from him, and he remained’AQEV (heel) . And the mystery of the matter: (Gen. 3:15) ... he will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel.
like him for whom the sun shone. (Him refers to Jacob for whom the healthy rays of the sun shone especially after his battle with the guardian angel of Esau. See Genesis 32:32, “The sun shone for him.”)
Fortunate is everyone who anticipates the double reward (A person is rewarded doubly for all he spends to beautify and enhance the enjoyment of Shabbos.) from the One Who sees all Who dwells in the dense cloud. An inheritance he will merit for himself in the mountain and in the valley; an inheritance and a resting-place like him for whom the sun shone. (Him refers to Jacob for whom the healthy rays of the sun shone especially after his battle with the guardian angel of Esau. See Genesis 32:32, “The sun shone for him.”) Refrain: -The preserver of the Sabbath—man and woman alike—are to the Almighty as pleasing as a meal-offering in a [sacred] pan.
“He encountered the place” – he sought to pass, but the entire world became a barrier of sorts before him. (So he could not continue on his way.) “Because the sun had set” – the Rabbis say: “Because the sun had set” – it teaches that the Holy One blessed be He caused the orb of the sun to set not at its proper time, in order to speak with Jacob privately. This is analogous to a king’s friend who would come to him on occasion. The king said: ‘Extinguish the lamps, extinguish the lanterns, as I wish to speak with my friend privately.’ So, the Holy One blessed be He caused the orb of the sun to set not at its proper time, in order to speak with Jacob privately. Rabbi Pinḥas said in the name of Rabbi Ḥanin of Tzippori: He heard the voices of the ministering angels saying: ‘The sun has arrived, the sun has arrived.’ (This was a reference to the fact that Jacob had come.) When Joseph said: “Behold, the sun and the moon” (Genesis 37:9), Jacob said: ‘Who revealed to him that My name is “sun”?’ Those two hours that the Holy One blessed be He caused the orb of the sun to set when he left his father’s house, when did He restore them? It was when he returned to his father’s house. That is what is written: “The sun rose for him” (Genesis 32:32). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You are a model for your descendants; just as you, when you departed, I caused the sun to set, and upon your return, I restored the orb of the sun for you, so, your descendants, upon their departure: “The one who bore seven is miserable…[her sun set while still day]” (Jeremiah 15:9), and upon their return: “But the [sun of righteousness] will shine for those who fear My name…”’ (Malachi 3:20).
“The sun rose for him as he passed Penuel, and he was limping from his hip” (Genesis 32:32). “The sun rose for him…” – Rabbi Berekhya said: For whom did the sun not rise? Rather, for him it is for his healing, but for others, light. Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Aḥa: So, the sun was healing our patriarch Jacob and beating down on Esau and his chieftains. The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You are a paradigm for your descendants. Just as you, the sun was healing you and beating down on Esau and his chieftains, so, your descendants, the sun will heal them and beat down on the idolaters. Will heal them – “but the sun of righteousness will shine for you who fear My name, with healing in its rays” (Malachi 3:20); and will beat down on the idolaters – “behold, the day is coming, burning like a furnace […and all that do evil will be straw, and the day that is coming will set them ablaze]”’ (Malachi 3:19). “And he was limping from his hip” – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi was going up to Rome. (Rome is identified as Edom (Esau).) When he reached Akko, Rabbi Ḥanina came out to greet him. He found him [Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi] limping from his hip. He said to him: ‘You are like your ancestor –”and he was limping from his hip.”‘
“Jacob arrived intact” – intact in his body. Because it is written: “He was limping because of his hip” (Genesis 32:32); nevertheless, intact in his body. Intact in his children; because it is written in his regard: “If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will survive” (Genesis 32:9); nevertheless, here, intact in his children. Intact in his wealth; although, Rabbi Avun said in the name of Rav Aḥa: Our patriarch Jacob would give Esau that same gift (See Genesis 32:14–16.) for nine years; nevertheless, here, intact in his wealth. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Intact in his studies, but Joseph forgot, as it is stated: “As God has made me forget all my toil” (Genesis 41:51). Elsewhere it says: “The toiling soul toils for itself” (Proverbs 16:26). (The toil of the soul is Torah study.)
R. Akiba said: "I once asked Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua while we were at the meat-market of Imum, when they went to buy meat for the feast of the son of Rabban Gamaliel, it is written (Gen. 32, 32) And the sun rose unto him as he passed by Penuel; did then the sun only rise to him? Behold it rose to the whole world? R. Isaac said that the sun which was set for his sake rose now for him, for it is written (Ib. 28, 10) And Jacob went out from BeerSheba and went towards Charan, and further it says, And he lighted (Vayifga) upon a certain place and tarried there all night, because the sun was set. When he reached Charan, he said: "Is it right of me not to have prayed when I passed the place my parents passed?" He resolved to return, and soon after his resolution, the earth jumped and he met Bethel. He wanted to return after he prayed, but the Holy One, praised be He! however, said: "This upright came to my inn and he should go away without staying over night." Immediately thereupon the sun was set. It is written (Ib. 28, 2) And he took from the stones of the place, and again it is written (Ib. ib. 18) And he took the stone (singular). Said R. Isaac: "From this it may be inferred that all these stones gathered themselves together into one place, as if each were eager that the saint should lay his hand upon it." We are taught that all the stones were swallowed up by one another, and thus merged into one stone.(Ib.) And he said: 'Let me go, for the day breaketh.' Jacob then said to the angel: "Art thou then a thief or a murderer that thou fearest daybreak?" "I am an angel," came the reply, "and since I have been created I never had a chance to recite a song of praise but now." This will support R. Chananel, who said in the name of Rab, that three classes of ministering angels recite a song of praise every day. One class says, Holy! The second responds, Holy! And the third continues, Holy is the Lord of Hosts! The following contradictions were introduced from a Baraitha: Israel is beloved before the Holy One, praised be He! even more so than the ministering angels; for Israel reiterates the song every hour, while the ministering angels repeat it only once a day, according to some once a week, others again say, once a month, still according to others, only once a year. There are others who say once in seven years, and according to still others, once in a jubilee, and other authorities say, only once in eternity. Again, Israel mentions the Tetragrammaton after two words, as the passage says (Deut. 6, 4) Hear, Israel Yehova, but the ministering angels do not mention the Tetragrammaton till after three words, as it is written (Is. 6, 3) Holy, Holy, Holy! Yehova Tzebaoth. Moreover, the ministering angels do not start the song above till Israel has started it below; for it is said (Job 38, 7) When the morning stars sang together, and afterwards it says, Then all the sons of God shouted for joy. [Hence how can Rab state that the angels say Holy Tzebaoth and mention the Tetragrammaton after one word?] We must therefore explain that Rab meant thus: One class says, Holy! The second, Holy! Holy! and the third says, Holy! Holy! Holy! Yehova Tzebaoth. But there is also the praise Baruch [where the Tetragrammaton is mentioned after two words]? (Fol. 92) The praise Baruch, belongs to the angels Ofan [that are part of the Divine throne]. You may also explain that after the Tetragrammaton it is mentioned that the angels themselves have the privilege of repeating it at their own option.
Ergo (in Job 22:28): WHEN YOU DECREE SOMETHING, IT SHALL COME TO PASS FOR YOU; AND LIGHT SHALL SHINE UPON YOUR WAYS. < The plural, WAYS, signifies > two times. Thus the Holy One caused the sun to go down ahead of time when he wanted to go forth and when he wanted to speak with him. (Gen. 28:12:) AND JACOB SET OUT FROM BEERSHEBA. What is written there (in vs. 13)? AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD OVER HIM (on Jacob's ladder)…. (According to Gen. R. 68:10, God caused the sun to set prematurely in order to speak with Jacob in privacy.) Also, when he came < back >, he made the sun rise for him ahead of time (according to Gen. 32:32 [31]): THE SUN ROSE FOR HIM. Now did the sun rise, not over the whole world, but over Jacob alone? < It > merely < rose > in order to heal him (from his lameness). (Sanh. 95b; Rashi on Gen. 32:32.) Thus it is stated (in Mal. 3:20 [4:2]): BUT FOR YOU WHO FEAR MY NAME A SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS SHALL ARISE < WITH HEALING IN ITS WINGS >. R. Berekhyah the Priest said: What is the meaning of (Gen. 32:32 [31]): THE SUN ROSE FOR HIM? That he made the sun rise for him [three hours] ahead of time just as it had set for him ahead of time. Jacob said: On five things did the Holy One make agreements with me (in Gen. 28:20-21) and carry them out. As for me, should I not on my part carry out what I said, now that I have returned < safely unto my father's house > (in accordance with Gen. 28:21)? Immediately (according to Gen. 33:20), HE ERECTED AN ALTAR THERE AND CALLED IT EL, THE GOD OF ISRAEL. When Israel endured (as a people), the Holy One said to Moses: Moses, the five things that I did with Jacob I have done for his children.
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE < TO THE CITY OF SHECHEM >. Let our master instruct us: What is meant by "saying something (DBR) superfluous on the Sabbath"? Thus have our masters taught (in Shab. 24:5): VOWS MAY BE QUESTIONED (with a view to annulment) WHEN NECESSARY FOR THE SABBATH. (Note that the wording differs somewhat from modern editions of the Mishnah.) Ergo: Something (DBR) which is not necessary for the Sabbath is not < to be > questioned. (See Shab. 157a.) And needless to say, it is forbidden to multiply < superfluous > things (DBR) on the Sabbath. R. Huna said: If someone is corrupted by a transgression, angels of destruction immediately denounce him. It is so stated (in Job 33:22): HIS SOUL DRAWS NEAR TO THE GRAVE. What should one do? Let him be engaged in < the study of > the Torah and be preserved. And, if he does not know how to recite < oral tradition >, let him read < Scripture >. And if he does not know how to read < Scripture >, let him take hold of the Torah and live, as stated (in Prov. 3:18): < WISDOM > IS A TREE OF LIFE TO THOSE WHO TAKE HOLD OF IT. Thus, if one is not a Torah scholar, let him be one who takes hold of a Bible teacher and a Mishnah teacher so that they may instruct him in Torah. Then he will merit living, as stated (ibid.): < WISDOM > IS A TREE OF LIFE TO THOSE WHO TAKE HOLD OF IT. But, if he is a Torah scholar, the Torah will heal him from every evil and from all suffering. Thus it is stated (in Prov. 15:4): A HEALING TONGUE IS A TREE OF LIFE…. This is the Torah. There is no one who would labor at the Torah as our ancestor Jacob < did >. It is just as you say (in Gen. 25:27): BUT JACOB WAS A PERFECT MAN DWELLING IN TENTS. "Dwelling in a tent" is not written here but DWELLING IN TENTS. He would go out from the academy (bet midrash) of Shem and enter the academy of Eber. Then < he would go > from the academy of Eber to the academy of Abraham. Therefore, when he had wrestled with the angel < and when > he was limping on his thigh, as stated (in Gen. 32:32 [31]): THE SUN ROSE UPON HIM … AND HE WAS LIMPING ON HIS THIGH, the Holy One immediately appeared to him, healed him, and brought him whole to the city of Shechem. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Gen. 33:18): NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE < TO THE CITY OF SHECHEM >.
THE WORK OF CREATION ON THE SIXTH DAY ON the sixth day (God) brought forth from the earth all kinds of animals, male and female, clean and unclean. By two signs are they declared to be clean: (the signs are) chewing the cud, and dividing the hoof. Three kinds of animals were chosen for the sacrifice of a burnt-offering, namely, the ox, the lamb, and the goat. Every kind of clean animal which is neither Nevelah (i.e. which has not been slaughtered according to the rules of Shechiṭah) nor Ṭerephah (i.e. torn) in the field is permitted to be eaten, except with regard to three parts, namely, the fat, || the blood, and the sinew of the thigh, as it is said, "As the green herb have I given you all" (Gen. 9:3).
Another matter, “these are [ve’eleh] the ordinances.” “It was on the third day when it was morning” (Exodus 19:16), in the morning the Torah was given, and in the evening the ordinances were given. (The vav at the beginning of ve’eleh links the ordinances in the upcoming passage to the previous portion, in which the Torah was given. The midrash understands this to mean that they were given on the same day. ) That is what is written: “From morning to evening they are broken; [forever unaware, they perish]” (Job 4:20). (The wicked are punished due to their having ignored the Torah, which was given in the morning, and the ordinances, which were given in the evening. ) This is analogous to two men who went to court, (This translation is based on Etz Yosef; see also Matnot Kehuna. ) one was a professional [lawyer] and one was a layman. What caused the layman to be punished? It is that he had no one to teach him. So too, the Holy One blessed be He was standing on Mount Sinai and was holding back judgment, as it is stated: “My hand grasps judgment” (Deuteronomy 32:41). David said: “Judge me, Lord, in accordance with my righteousness” (Psalms 7:9). He checked, but he did not find anyone to teach him, (He believed that he was righteous because there was no one to teach him the parameters of the divine attribute of justice.) and he was punished. He began shouting: “Do not enter into judgment with Your servant” (Psalms 143:2). When was all this? It was before he organized the ordinances for himself, to realize what is stated: “From morning to evening they are broken; [forever unaware [mesim], they perish]” (Job 4:20). (The term mesim is taken as an allusion to the ordinances, of which it is stated: “These are the ordinances that you shall place [tasim] before them.” Thus, the punishment is due to an insufficient knowledge of the ordinances, and of the extent to which an individual is held accountable in the Divine process of judgment. ) Another matter, “these are the ordinances.” What is: “Forever unaware, they perish”? (Job 4:20). Job said to the Holy One blessed be He: “If only I could know and find Him…I would organize my case before Him” (Job 23:3–4). This is analogous to a ruffian who was intoxicated. He kicked the prison [door] and freed the prisoners. He stoned the statue of the governor of the city, cursed a policeman, and said: ‘Show me the place where the governor of the city is located and I will teach him justice.’ He entered; they showed him the mayor of the city sitting on the podium. [The governor] incarcerated a noblewoman and expelled a city official, blinded a duke, sentenced a judge, and placed a magistrate in stocks. When [the ruffian] saw the governor of the city doing so, he was afraid. He said: ‘I implore you, I was intoxicated and was unaware of the power of the governor of the city.’ So too, Job was standing and screaming: “If only I could know and find Him…I would organize my case before Him.” He stoned the image, as he said: “Perish the day I was born” (Job 3:3). (Man is created in the image of God. By cursing the day of his birth, it was as though Job stoned the image of God. ) He kicked the prison and freed prisoners: “Let the stars of its twilight be dark” (Job 3:9). (The stars are like prisoners imprisoned in darkness.) He cursed the officer: “May that night be taken by blackness” (Job 3:6). (Night is viewed as an officer in charge of darkness (see Bereishit Rabba 3:6; Maharzu). ) He saw the king sitting on the podium. [The King] incarcerated the noblewoman: “Behold, Miriam is leprous as snow” (Numbers 12:10). He expelled Moses: “Therefore, you will not bring this congregation [into the land which I have given them]” (Numbers 20:12). He blinded the duke, this is Isaac, as it is stated: “His eyes were dimmed from seeing” (Genesis 27:1). He sentenced Abraham, as it is stated: “Know that your descendants will be strangers” (Genesis 15:13). He placed Jacob in stocks: “He was limping on his thigh” (Genesis 32:32). When Job saw, he said: ‘I implore You, I was intoxicated,’ as it is stated: “Indeed I erred, my error rests with me’ (Job 19:4). Why to that extent? It is because they did not know the power of judgment. (They did not understand how exacting Divine judgment is. ) That is, “forever unaware, they perish.”
Rabbi Azarya, and some say Rabbi Elazar, Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥanina, and the Rabbis, Rabbi Elazar says: This is analogous to a king who had a wine cellar. One came, the first guest; he poured him a cup and gave it to him. The second came, and he poured him a cup and gave it to him. When the king’s son came, he gave him the entire cellar. So too, Adam, the first man, was commanded with seven commandments. (The commentaries write that the text should state “six commandments,” as the midrash goes on to list only six. This is also consistent with the text of Bereshit Rabba 16:6 (see Matnot Kehuna).) That is what is written: “The Lord God commanded the man, saying: From all the trees in the Garden you shall eat” (Genesis 2:16). “He commanded [vaytzav],” this is [the prohibition against] idol worship, just as you say: “Because he willingly followed an order [tzav]” (Hosea 5:11). (In this verse, the prophet is expressing that the kingdom of Israel is oppressed because of the sin of idolatry.) “The Lord,” this is [the prohibition against] blaspheming the name, as it is stated: “One who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely die” (Leviticus 24:16). “God [Elohim],” this is [the commandment to appoint] judges, as it is stated: “The statement of the two of them shall come to the judges [elohim]” (Exodus 22:8). “The man,” this is [the prohibition against] bloodshed, as it is written: “One who spills the blood of the man [by man shall his blood be shed]” (Genesis 9:6). “Saying,” these are forbidden sexual relations, as it is stated: “Saying: If a man divorces his wife and she goes from him [and becomes another man’s wife, may he return to her again?]” (Jeremiah 3:1). “From all the trees in the Garden,” this is robbery, as it is written: “[Did you eat] from the tree that I commanded you [not to eat?]” (Genesis 3:11). Noah, [the prohibition against eating] a limb [detached] from a living animal was added for him, as it is written: “But flesh with its life, its blood [you shall not eat]” (Genesis 9:4). Abraham was commanded regarding circumcision. Isaac inaugurated it on the eighth day. (Isaac was the first to have been circumcised on the eighth day of his life (see Genesis 21:4).) Jacob [was commanded] regarding the [prohibition against eating the] sciatic nerve, as it is stated: “Therefore, the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33). Judah [was commanded] regarding [levirate marriage with] a childless sister-in-law, as it is stated: “Judah said to Onan: Consort with your brother's wife, and consummate levirate marriage with her” (Genesis 38:8). [The children of] Israel [were commanded] regarding all the positive commandments and the negative commandments. Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥanina and the Rabbis say: This is analogous to a king who would distribute provisions to his troops by means of dukes, governors, and commanders. When his son came, he gave it to him directly. (Similarly, God gave the commandments to Adam and Noah without direct and public Divine revelation, but He gave the Torah to Israel with direct and public Divine revelation.) Rabbi Yitzḥak says: This is analogous to a king who was partaking of fine pastry; when his son came, he gave it to him directly. (He shared the fine royal pastry with his son, and gave it to him directly. So too, God gave Israel the Divine Torah, and did so through direct revelation.) The Rabbis say: This is analogous to a king who was partaking of slices [of food]; when his son came, he gave it to him directly. (The king gave his son a slice of food from his own plate.) Some say that he took it from his mouth and gave it to him, as it is stated: “For the Lord grants wisdom; from His mouth are knowledge and understanding” (Proverbs 2:6). Rabbi Abahu, and some say Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Neḥemya, Rabbi Neḥemya said: [This is analogous to] two friends who were engaged in a halakhic matter. This one says the source of the halakha and that one says the source of the halakha. (Each one provided a source for his opinion as to the halakhic conclusion in the matter under discussion.) The Holy One blessed be He says: ‘Their passion comes from Me.’ (Their commitment to arrive at the true halakha is for the sake of Heaven, and therefore, are the words of the living God (see Eiruvin 13b). Rabbi Neḥemya explains the meaning of the phrase: “Let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses of his mouth” as related to “their passion” [shukeyotehon]. ) Rabbi Yehuda said: Even the vanity that emerges from his mouth, (Even if those discussing the halakhic matter are mistaken in their analysis and claims.) as it is stated: “Job opens his mouth in vanity” (Job 35:16), the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘His passion is from Me.’ The Rabbis say: The souls of these are destined to be taken with a kiss. Rabbi Azarya said: We find that the soul of Aaron was taken only with a kiss; that is what is written: “Aaron the priest ascended Mount Hor at the command of [al pi] God and he died there” (Numbers 33:38). (The midrash interprets the phrase al pi according to its literal meaning, such that the verse states “with the mouth of God,” meaning with a Divine kiss.) From where is it derived that the soul of Moses [also departed with a kiss]? As it is stated: “Moses, servant of the Lord, died there…at the command of [al pi] God” (Deuteronomy 34:5). From where is it derived that [the soul of] Miriam [departed with a kiss]? As it is written: “Miriam died there” (Numbers 20:1). Just as “there” that is written below, was with the mouth of God, so, too, here, it is the same, but it is improper to state it explicitly. (Since the word “there” appears regarding the death of Moses, who died with a kiss, the use of the term “there” regarding the death of Miriam implies that she died in the same manner. However, the verse did not state this explicitly regarding Miriam because it would have been improper to indicate the kiss regarding a woman (see Bava Batra 17a).) The rest of the righteous, from where is it derived? It is as it is stated: “Let him kiss me from the kisses of his mouth.” If you engaged in matters of Torah that kiss your lips, ultimately, everyone will kiss you on the mouth. (So too, God will collect your soul with a Divine kiss (Midrash HaMevoar).) Another matter, “let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses”—He will arm me, He will purify me, He will cleave to me. (All of these are connoted by the word yishakeni, as the midrash will explain.) Yishakeni, He will arm me, from what is written: “Armed [noshekei] with bows, right-handed and left-handed” (I Chronicles 12:2). Rabbi Shimon bar Naḥman said: Matters of Torah were likened to weapons. Just as these weapons serve their owners in times of war, so, too, matters of Torah serve one who exerts sufficient effort in their study. Rabbi Ḥana bar Aḥa cites it from here: “Exaltation of God [is in their throats, and a double-edged [pifiyot] sword is in their hand]” (Psalms 149:6); just as this sword cuts with both its edges, (It can thereby save the life of its owner on two planes.) so too, Torah provides life in this world and life in the World to Come. Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis. Rabbi Yehuda says: The Torah that was stated by one mouth [peh] is stated by many mouths [piyot]. (This is based on the verse from Psalms cited above, which compares Torah to a double-edged [pifiyot] sword. Originally it was stated to Israel by Moses, and then all of the children of Israel spoke about it. Similarly, throughout the generations, when a scholar teaches a Torah insight, it is later repeated by his students (Maharzu).) Rabbi Neḥemya said: Two Torahs were stated, one oral and one written. (This is a continuation of the previous statement. The written Torah is stated in one matter, compared to one mouth, whereas the oral Torah, which was not given with one exact text, is communicated in different forms by different people. This is comparable to a plurality of mouths (Maharzu).) The Rabbis say: They decree on the supernal, and they perform, on the earthly, and they perform. (The Sages have multiple mouths in the sense of multiple audiences, as the angels and human beings both observe their decrees.) Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: The reason of the Rabbis is as it is written: “As there were princes of sanctity and princes of God” (I Chronicles 24:5). “Princes of sanctity,” these are the ministering angels, as it is written: “I profaned the princes of sanctity” (Isaiah 43:28). “Princes of God, these are Israel, as it is written in their regard: “I said: You are divine” (Psalms 82:6), as they decree on the heavenly, and they perform, on the earthly, and they perform, when they conduct themselves in purity. Another matter, “let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses of his mouth”—let him purify me, like a person who causes two pools to meet [mashik] each other and unites them, (If there is not enough water in one or both of the pools to serve as a ritual bath, which purifies, joining them together can allow them to serve in this capacity.) as it is stated: “Like the meeting [mashak] of cascading pools he joins it” (Isaiah 33:4). Another matter, “let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses of his mouth”—yishakeni, He will cleave to me, as it is stated: “The sound of the wings of the creatures would touch [mashikot] one another” (Ezekiel 3:13). Alternatively, “let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth,” He will put forth for me the sound of kisses (He will speak to me lovingly.) from His mouth.
How does this Midrash fit in with the opening words of our portion, ואלה המשפטים? Besides, why did the Midrash bring so many (5) examples of people who were punished, and why is the order in which those people are listed so peculiar? The order Miriam, Moses, Isaac, Abraham, Jacob, certainly needs some explanation! One cannot say that the punishments listed represent some ascending or descending order of severity, since "blinding" is certainly less severe than banishing Moses from entry into the Holy Land! Most commentators are also agreed that Genesis 15,13, is a prediction of what is to come, not a punishment for Abraham whose faith had not wavered. It is rather a promise that his descendants through the experience in Egypt would qualify for liberation and possession of the Holy Land after they had experienced the revelation at Mount Sinai and had accepted the Torah. Jacob's "punishment" was certainly quite minor and brief, since Genesis 32,32, tells us that the "sun shone for him because he was limping," i.e. he was cured by Divine intervention.
Jacob, on the other hand, had gracefully accepted his injury without protest, and as a result Israel was given an additional מצוה, not to eat the גיד הנשה, to commemorate Jacob's quality of cheerfully accepting a rebuke. He is the prime example of how to walk away from a guilty verdict in a happy frame of mind.
Jacob attained the distinction of ים, seeing that he said of himself כי במקלי עברת את הירדן הזה, "Originally I crossed this river Jordan with no more than my walking staff." Bereshit Rabbah 76, 5 states that the crossing of the Sea of Reeds by the Israelites became possible through the merit acquired by Jacob when he crossed the Jordan on his way to Laban, relying only on G–d for he was bereft of material possessions. Jacob merited the horizon of the sun, (רקיע), that the sun set or shone especially for him, as we know from Genesis 32, 32: "The sun shone for him." Jacob also merited a special relation with the "throne" of G–d in that we have a tradition that his features were engraved on it.
ודישון ואצר ודשן, as well as Dishon, Atzar, and Dishan.” According to the vocalisation by the authors of the tradition that we rely on, the sequence for reading these names is as follows: דישון, דישן, דישון, דישן, דישן דישון, דישן to help us memorize this sequence (these names appear a total of seven times) it pays to commence with the seventh day, i.e. Shabbat. On the seventh day the second day and the fifth day of the week (the three days of the week the Torah is read in public) this recalls the spelling with the letter ו. On the days of the week when we do not read from the Torah in public, i.e. first, third, fourth and sixth day, this recalls the times it is read as if spelled defectively. Do not be astounded concerning the phrasing of: ואלה בני דישן חמדן וגו', “and these were the sons of Dishon, Chemdon,” in verse 27. This refers to the first time we read about דישון. Verse 27 refers back to דישן in verse 26 which should have been vocalised as דישון. We must understand that whenever in the Holy Scriptures books written later, refer to names of persons or places which appear spelled differently from the first time they had appeared, they refer to the ones mentioned the first time in the Bible, unless otherwise stated. Examples of the names of the same people, or the same verbs, being spelled differently in different Books of the Bible, are: Samuel II 22 as opposed to Psalms chapter 18, where the word מגדל, in verse 51 of the former means the same as the word מגדיל in the verse 51 of Psalms.[You will note the similarity of the subject matter in both chapters, plus the fact that both of these words appear in verse 51 of the chapter mentioned. Compare also Genesis 32,32 and 31 respectively, where the name of the place פנואל is once spelled with the letter ו and the other time with the letter י in the middle. Compare the spelling of the ears of corn in Pharaoh’s dream in Genesis 41,7 as דקות, and when Joseph interprets it in about it in Genesis 41,27, as רקות. Our author cites a few more examples which I have decided to skip as he has made his point. Ed.]
Thus, in the case of Jacob, I admit that the entire narrative of “and Jacob sent messengers” (4. Gen. 32:4 ff.) occurred as something seen in a dream. Nonetheless, in my opinion Jacob carried this out when he awoke, as happened in many such cases. (5. Maimonides, in the Guide II:42, asserts that the entire section occurred in a vision, including the preparations for the meeting with Esau (vv. 14-24) and the wrestling with the angel (vv. 25-32). Kaspi, both here and in the Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 22), asserts that the intermediary passage, where Jacob prepared to meet Esau, did occur outside of the prophetic vision.) As for the wrestling with the angel, (6. Gen. 32:25-32.) this never occurred other than in a dream. The touching of the hollow of his thigh (and the passage following) until “the sinew of the thigh vein” (7. Gen. 32:26, 33. This comment is intended to answer the following problem: If indeed the wrestling with the angel was but a mental occurrence, how and why did Jacob limp in the morning (v. 32)?) was intended as an allusion to evil events that would befall Jacob in respect of women, for nasheh (“thigh vein”) is equivocal, (8. The Hebrew term could also be taken as the root for ’ishah (“woman”); consequently, the maiming of that limb would be an oblique allusion to being maimed on account of woman. Accordingly, Jacob was maimed in the thigh during the course of the vision, through some divine instrument.) similar to ḥovlim and the like. (9. Cf. Guide II:43, which refers to ḥovlim and other instances of metathesis. On Kaspi’s use of metathesis, see above Chapter 2.) Accordingly he experienced the events of Dinah, (10. He is referring to the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) Rachel, (11. He is referring to the tragic death of Rachel in Gen. 35:16 ff.) and Rebeccah’s handmaid. (12. Gen. 35:8. All three instances caused Jacob much grief.)
A Midrashic approach on the words ויהי ידיו אמונה: Moses based his prayer on the faith the patriarchs had always displayed in their relationship with G’d, a faith which G’d had acknowledged. He had lauded Avraham for his faith in Genesis 15,6). He had lauded Yitzchak for his faith in Genesis 24,62 (based on the words עד בא, because the Torah writes: ויצחק בא מבוא, whereas He had lauded Yaakov’s אמונה based on the word השמש, in Genesis 32,32 ויזרח לו השמש,”the sun shone for him.” Thus far the Midrash. I believe that the meaning of all this is that Amalek had relied on Esau his patriarch who had received his blessing from the spiritual power of Yitzchak his father. This power was the attribute גבורה, an attribute identical with the attribute of Justice. Amalek (his spiritual representative) hoped to be able to exploit this attribute to overcome Israel. This is why Moses had to outmaneuver the celestial representative of Amalek in order for the Israelites on earth to prevail in this armed conflict. He therefore mentioned all three patriarchs in his prayer. He was “the son” of Yaakov, representing the principle that החוט המשולש לא במהרה ינתק, “that a three-plied cord will not easily come apart.” Amalek, i.e. Esau did not have such a three-plied cord to call on. Our sages (Mechilta Amalek section 1) also commented that the words עד בא השמש, “until sunset,” allude to a peculiarity in that battle. Normally, other kingdoms engage in battle only until midday. This evil Kingdom of Amalek engaged in fighting both in the early morning and in the evening. Tanchuma Beshalach 28 adds that on that day the sun stood still for the sake of Moses. This is why the Torah added the words: “until the sun set.” The Amalekites were able to calculate what hour of day it was by means of astronomical calculations. What did Moses do in order to confuse them? He arrested the orbits of both sun and moon and thereby interfered with their calculations. The Midrash bases itself on the words: והיה כאשר ירים משה ידו; we also have a verse in Chabakuk 3,10, רום ידיהו נשא, followed by the words שמש ירח עמד זבולה. In other words: the prophet mentions the raising of the hands with the arrest of the sun’s and the moon’s orbit. Thus far Tanchuma.
דמים לו, “there is blood guilt on his account.” Anyone who kills unless his own life was in danger is subject to the penalty for murder or manslaughter. In this instance, when the identity of the thief has become known, he would not threaten his victim with death as he would be aware that he would suffer the penalty for murder. Seeing that the owner of the house was not in danger he must not kill the intruder. The reason why the Torah describes the sun shining by using the feminine form of the word זרחה, rather than the customary זרח (compare Kohelet 1,5 or Genesis 32,32) is that the Bible usually does so when it describes the sun spreading its rays over the earth during the day. Examples are: Samuel II 12,11 לעיני השמש הזאת, “in view of this bright sunlight.” The sun is described as masculine in the Bible when it is only at the beginning of its daily journey across the sky. Example: השמש יצא על הארץ, “the sun had risen over the earth” (Genesis 19,23). The author quotes additional examples. At any rate, the meaning is that if the sun has already spread its light all over the earth and it is clear that the thief will be caught and cannot escape, דמים לו, anyone killing him will be guilty. The words have a dual meaning, i.e. they also mean that the thief has to pay compensation to the victim failing which the court will sell his labor for the next 6 years to the kind of master described in 21,2 so that the owner of the stolen property can be compensated.
והיו שמונה קרשים, “there shall be eight beams, etc.” Two of the eight beams overlapped with the beams forming the long sides of the Tabernacle, one at the southern end and one at the northern end. There were therefore six beams left which formed the western wall without any part of them serving as extensions of the long walls. This is what was meant by verse 22 ולירכתי המשכן תעשה ששה קרשים, “and for the end of the Tabernacle you are to construct 6 beams. This verse reveals a mystical dimension. Seeing that the Shechinah which is situated in the west is composed of 6 extremities, the west is referred to as ים in order to allude to this fact. The west is known as ים, “ocean” because the ocean is a collection point for all the waters just as the Shechinah is a collection point for all the directions of the globe from the farthest extremities. The order of the four geographical directions of the world in the celestial entourage, מרכבה, are: the three patriarchs of the world (Avraham Yitzchak and Yaakov), and David. South ranks first as Avraham was the first of the patriarchs, and it is written of him that Avraham journeyed southwards to the land of the south (Genesis 20,1). This is followed by north, as Yitzchak made a supreme effort at the time he was bound on the altar. This is followed by east seeing it is written of Yaakov that the sun shone for him (Genesis 32,32), and his son Joseph has also been compared to the sun (Genesis 37,9). Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 84,11) have said quoting Yaakov: “who told this one (Joseph) that my name is “sun?” West is the סוף, the end; it is the harp on which David played which used to play all by itself on occasion (Berachot 3). This direction was called ים, i.e. the sea known as ים האחרון, the westernmost sea. In order to allude to these four great men the directions of the earth have been identified with these people through their names.
The statues on which the oath was inscribed. This refers to the oath sworn by Avraham and Yitzchak to Avimelech. The blind statues represent Yitzchak, and the lame statues represent Yaakov, about whom the verse writes (Bereishis 32:32), “And he limped due to his hip.”
Josephus notes that the Greek toponym for Mahanaim, Manalis, is translated as “camps,” which parallels the plurality of the original Hebrew name. The twin tels seem to reflect the dual nature of the name “encampments” topographically, even though certain scholars identify the eastern mound (Tel edh-Dhahab esh-Sherqiyeh) separately as Penuel, the site of Jacob’s nighttime wrestle with the angel. (Genesis 32:31–32.) While many other cities were apportioned to Gad, this particular site stirs up associations with the very symbol of the tribe, the tent, emblazoned on its standard.
Rav said that the source is from here: “And the sun rose for him as he passed over Peniel, and he limped upon his thigh” (Genesis 32:32). This indicates that Jacob remained where he was all night and left in the morning, because a Torah scholar should not go out alone at night.
The Gemara cites an incident involving the final verse cited above. Rabbi Akiva says: I asked the following question of Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua in the meat market [be’itliz] of the town Emmaus, where they went to purchase an animal for the wedding feast of Rabban Gamliel’s son: It is written in the verse: “And the sun shone for him when he passed Peniel, and he limped upon his thigh” (Genesis 32:32). But did the sun shine only for him? Didn’t it shine for the entire world?
But is it not written (Lev. 7:23): “Any fat of cattle, sheep, or goats you shall not eat”? Do you not have to understand the prohibition of usufruct from the prohibition of eating? There is a difference, for it is written (Lev. 7:24): “But fat of a carcass and fat of a torn animal” (“But fat of a carcass and fat of a torn animal may be used for any work, only you shall not eat it.” This paragraph discusses verses which present a difficulty for R. Eleazar. In the opinion of the Babli, Pesaḥim 23a, the verse is needed to permit any use of profane fat since otherwise one would argue that since fat is forbidden for humans but required for the altar, fat of animals unfit for the altar should be permitted for use in the Temple but forbidden for profane use. In the Sifra(Ẓaw Paraša 10), the argument of the Babli is attributed to R. Yose the Galilean; R. Aqiba concludes that fat of domesticated animals is not food and not subject to the impurity of food. In the opinion of the Yerushalmi, since some fat is permitted for unrestricted use, no fat can be forbidden for usufruct in the absence of an explicit verse. For Ḥizqiah, this is a third verse that could be used for R. Eleazar’s argument; nobody will contest that three parallel verses invalidate the argument. In the second version of Ḥizqiah’s position (below, after Note 33), he needs the verse to permit use of fat for work on Temple property.) . But is it not written (Deut. 12:16): “Only the blood”? There is a difference, for it is written: “You shall pour it on the ground like water.” (“Only the blood you shall not eat; pour it on the ground like water.” The Babli, Pesaḥim 22b, deduces from here that animal blood is a fluid which prepares for impurity only if it is spilled on the ground (cf. Demay 2:3, Note 136). The argument of the Yerushalmi, and an argument that animal blood prepares for impurity in all cases, is in Sifry Deut. 73 and later here, in the second version of Ḥizqiah.) Since water is permitted for use, so blood is permitted for use. But is it not written (Gen. 32:33): “Therefore, the Children of Israel do not eat the sinew of the schiatic muscle”? Rebbi Abbahu said, I explained it by the sinew of a carcass or a torn animal (The argument is more explicit in the Babli, Pesaḥim 22a. R. Abbahu holds that when carcass and torn meat was permitted for the sojourner (a monotheistic Gentile adhering to the Seven Commandments observed by Noe) and the pagan, the entire animal was permitted, including the fat. Then the last paragraph of Note 15 establishes that the schiatic sinew cannot be forbidden for usufruct.) . But is it not written (Lev. 23:14): “Bread, parched or fresh grains you shall not eat” (“Bread, parched or fresh grains you shall not eat until that very day” referring to new grains before the ‘omer ceremony.) ? Rebbi Abba Mari the brother of Rebbi Yose said there is a difference since the verse fixed a time for it. But is it not written (Lev. 11:42): “Do not eat them for they are abominations”? Rebbi Mana said, that excludes their prohibition of usufruct (The argument seems to be that the verse has to be read: “For they are abominations”, they (snakes and centipedes) are abominations but not anything manufactured from them. (Explanation of R. H. Kanievski.)) .
But is it not written (Lev. 7:23. This paragraph discusses verses which present difficulties for R. Eleazar.) : Any fat of cattle, sheep, or goats you shall not eat? Do you not have to understand the prohibition of usufruct from the prohibition of eating? There is a difference, for it is written (Lev. 7:23. In the opinion of the Babli 23a, the verse is needed to permit any use of profane fat since otherwise one would argue that since fat is forbidden for humans but required for the altar, fat of animals unfit for the altar should be permitted for use in the Temple but forbidden for profane use. In the Sifra Ṣaw (Parasha 10), the argument of the Babli is attributed to R. Yose the Galilean; R. Aqiba concludes that fat of domesticated animals is not food nor subject to the impurity of food. In the opinion of the Yerushalmi, since some fat is permitted for unrestricted use, no fat can be forbidden for usufruct in the absence of an explicit verse. For Ḥizqiah, this is a third verse that could be used for R. Eleazar’s argument; nobody will contest that three parallel verses invalidate the argument. In the second version of Ḥizqiah’s position (below, after Note 49), he needs the verse to permit use of fat for work on Temple property.) : But fat of a carcass and fat of a torn animal may be used for any work, only it may not be eaten. But is it not written (Deut. 12:16.) : Only the blood you may not eat? Do you not have to understand the prohibition of usufruct from the prohibition of eating? There is a difference, for it is written: You shall pour it on the ground like water (The Babli 22b deduces from here that animal blood is a fluid which prepares for impurity only if it is spilled on the ground (cf. Demay 2:3, Note 136). The argument of the Yerushalmi, and an argument that animal blood prepares for impurity in all cases, is in Sifry Deut. 73 and later here, in the second version of Ḥizqiah. (Preparation for impurity is explained in Demay 2:3, Notes 136–141.)) . Since water is permitted for use, so blood shall be permitted for use. But is it not written (Gen. 32:33.) : Therefore, the Children of Israel do not eat the sinew of the sciatic nerve? Rebbi Abbahu said, I explained it by the sinew of a carcass (The argument is more explicit in the Babli 22a. R. Abbahu holds that when carcass and tom meat was permitted for the sojourner (Note 53) and the pagan, the entire animal was permitted, including the fat. Then the last paragraph of Note 24 establishes that the schiatic sinew cannot be forbidden for usufruct.) . But is it not written (Lev. 23:14.) : Bread, parched or fresh grains you shall not eat until this very day? Rebbi Abba Mari, the brother of Rebbi Yose, said there is a difference since the verse fixed a time for it. But is it not written (Lev. 11:42.) : Do not eat them for they are abominations? Rebbi [Mana] (Added from Orlah, missing here.) said, that excludes their prohibition of usufruct (Latin splenium, Greek σπληνίον, τό, “pad, wound dressing.”) .
But a mitzva that was stated with regard to the descendants of Noah and was not repeated at Sinai among the mitzvot given to the Jewish people was stated for the Jewish people and not for the descendants of Noah. And we have only the prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve to which this classification applies, and this is according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that the verse: “Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sciatic nerve, which is on the hollow of the thigh, until this day” (Genesis 32:32), is referring to the sons of Jacob, who were commanded to observe this prohibition even though they had the status of descendants of Noah.
It is written: “And he slept there because the sun had set” (Genesis 28:11). After Jacob prayed and he sought to return to his travels, the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: This righteous man came to My inn. Will I allow him to take leave without sleeping here? Immediately the sun set, not at the proper time, and that is the meaning of that which is written with regard to Jacob: “And the sun shone for him when he passed Penuel” (Genesis 32:32). The Gemara asks: And did the sun shine only for him? But didn’t the sun shine for the entire world? Rather, Rabbi Yitzḥak says: The sun that set not at the proper time exclusively for him shone not at the proper time exclusively for him in order to rectify the disparity created by the premature sunset.
The sun shone for him as he passed by Penuel, and he limped due to his hip.
And the sun rose upon him before his time, (the sun) which on his account had set before his time, on his going out from Beersheba, as he crossed over Peniel. And he began to journey, and was lame upon his thigh.
| עַל־כֵּ֡ן לֹֽא־יֹאכְל֨וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אֶת־גִּ֣יד הַנָּשֶׁ֗ה אֲשֶׁר֙ עַל־כַּ֣ף הַיָּרֵ֔ךְ עַ֖ד הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה כִּ֤י נָגַע֙ בְּכַף־יֶ֣רֶךְ יַעֲקֹ֔ב בְּגִ֖יד הַנָּשֶֽׁה׃ | 33 E | That is why the children of Israel to this day do not eat the thigh muscle that is on the socket of the hip, since Jacob’s hip socket was wrenched at the thigh muscle. |
This is to say that [the angel] hit him in the aspect of Netzach, “in the sinew of the thigh-vein,” (Genesis 32:33) to the point that the external [forces of impurity] receive [their sustenance] from there.
It is to be a commemoration for them that their forefather fought with the angel, and [the latter] could not subdue him. And so [the angel] pressed him on the hollow of his thigh, in the place where there is the the sciatic nerve. And it is a commemoration of glory and greatness.
על כן לא יאכלו, “therefore it is appropriate that the Israelites do not eat, etc.;” this construction is parallel to Isaiah 10,7: והוא לא כן ידמה, “but it does not seem like this to him;” in other words: it would be right and proper to punish the Israelites not to eat that particular sinew as they should not have allowed their founding father to be exposed to hostile forces at night. Yaakov’s sons were physically strong, and they should have been at hand to assist their father if the need arose to do so. Seeing that they failed to do this, the blame for the injury sustained by their father was theirs. From now on they would have learned their lesson and would practice the commandment to accompany their father, or for that matter, any older and wiser person, especially at night. Yaakov himself set an example when he accompanied his son Joseph part of the way on a mission which he had sent him on, and which was potentially dangerous. (Genesis 37,14) A different approach to the verse above: as a result of their father Yaakov having stood up to the protective celestial force of Esau, his sons stopped eating the part of the body that the angel had been able to injure. They did this out of a feeling of pride in their founding father. A third approach to this verse: due to their father Yaakov having sustained an injury, his descendants voluntarily decided not to eat the part of the body of an animal that had been injured in their father’s body. This has to be understood better by the use of a parable; a person suffered from a headache or from pains in a different part of his body. As a reminder of that pain he decides not to eat that part of the body of an animal as a symbol of his having been healed from that pain, so that it (abstention) would serve as a remedy for them (preventive medicine) in the future. We have a Baraitah in Chulin 101 which relates that people came to Rabbi Yehudah who had expressed the opinion that the prohibition not to eat that part of an animal also applied to animals that were altogether forbidden to be eaten, questioning his interpretation by citing the fact that only the descendants of Israel were forbidden to eat this part of an animal, and that the Jews had never been called “Children of Israel” until they had been given the Torah at Mount Sinai. He answered them that it is true that this custom did not become law until the Torah was given, but it had been observed already earlier. It was recorded here only in order for us to understand the reason behind this prohibition. Prior to the legislation of dietary laws at Mount Sinai, Yaakov’s descendants were allowed to eat also the meat of animals that were outlawed at Mount Sinai.
על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל, “therefore the Children of Israel to this day do not eat the thigh muscle, etc.” the words על כן here mean: ”as a permanent reminder of” the miracle that had saved their founding father in his contest with the angel who had only been able to inflict a minor injury on him, instead of killing him as he had intended. The undertaking is similar to a person who after suffering for long periods from headaches or and pains in the region of his heart, vows not to eat the head or the heart of an animal forthwith, as a sign of gratitude for having been healed. An alternate interpretation. The words על כן, mean: “as a result of this,” i.e. as a result of having narrowly escaped death as a result of having remained exposed to danger alone during the night, the Israelites learned that this is not the correct way to behave at night and alone. Abstaining from eating the thigh muscle is the visible reminder of the fact that this lesson had been internalised by the people as an inadmissible way to behave. Yaakov’s wives and children accepted part of the responsibility for their leader’s injury by having allowed him to cross the river alone at night and thus having exposed him to danger. This is why G–d forbade them (his descendants the Jewish people) to eat this part of the animal. They should be meticulous in observing the commandment to give people safe conduct. This is why already Yaakov was commanded to give Joseph safe conduct on his fateful mission. (Genesis 37,14) [where he accompanied him part of the way where he might be exposed to danger by the Canaanites. Ed.]
THE SINEW OF THE THIGH-VEIN. The meaning of the term gid ha-nasheh (the sinew of the thigh-vein) is known from the tradition received and transmitted to us by the Talmudic sages. (Chullin 91a. The rabbis interpret gid na-nasheh to mean the sinew that slipped from its place.) No one but those lacking in understanding and knowledge of nature have any doubt as to its definition. The latter interpret gid (sinew) to refer to the penis and hold that nassheh (thigh-vein) comes from the same root as nashim (women). (There was an anti-Rabbinic interpretation that explained the prohibition against eating the gid ha-nashah as follows: Therefore the children of Israel do not engage (eat) in abnormal intercourse with women (gid ha-nasheh). According to Krinsky it is this interpretation which I.E. negates.) Note, the angel that appeared to Jacob was corporeal. (This translation follows Vat. Ebr. 38. It reads, ve-da (note). The printed text reads, la-da’at (to know).) This will be explained to you, if God will enlighten you, in the chapter that begins, for My name is in him (Ex. 23:21).
We find in [statements of] the Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, that deep things, the comprehension of which are difficult, are compared to tendons; as Rashi explained in Parshat Yitro (Exodus 19:3), s.v., and tell the Children of Israel (he explained, "[Tell] to the males, matters as difficult as tendons"). And comprehension is called eating; as we find that about the four that entered the 'orchard,' it cites the verse, 'eat your fill of honey,' about investigation that is hidden from 'the eye of all the living.' And this commandment is a hint for the [future] generations to prevent Israel from hidden (mystical) investigations; as [Ben Sira] said, "You have no businesses in hidden things." For one should be concerned [about this], lest their minds be destroyed and they come to heresy. As the many will not have the wisdom to understand the secrets properly, because their minds travel through the muddied valley. [This is] because the vanities of this world and its pleasures confuse the mind of man. And the hint in the prevention from eating the sciatic tendon for the generations is to be a commemoration that God prevented them from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, such that they not feed their minds things as difficult as tendons - as he [injured] the hollow of Jacob's thigh. And if this setback temporarily occurred to the perfect Jacob when he veered a little from the even path, what will the 'hyssop of the wall' (average people) - whose primary occupation is with the vanities of this world and its pleasures - do? Therefore they should not be occupied with hidden things, except for the special few, like R. Shimon Bar Yochai and his likeness - who become repulsed by, and renounce, the vanities of this world.
על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל את גיד הנשה. This is why the children of Israel do not eat the disjointed sinew, etc. This sinew was dislocated from its holy origin and became subject to dominance by the קליפה ["external forces" in the scheme of the emanations, Ed.]. G'd forbade anything which has thus become defiled wherever it appears. There is a mystical element in this. This sinew does not have a taste, an allusion to its originating in the "external forces." The reason is that it had been uprooted from a holier source.
על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל, the children of Yaakov adopted this prohibition for themselves in commemoration of their father whose thigh muscle had been injured. They in turn commanded their children to abstain from eating this part of any animal. This continued until the Torah was given and it became law. It reminds us of the descendants of Yonadav ben Rechev who faithfully adhered to the clan’s founding father’s injunction not to drink wine (Jeremiah 35,6) in honour of the oath they swore to their forefather. They are described as loyalists par excellence in the Book of Chronicles. Moses recorded the custom of the Israelites not to eat this organ as one of the 613 commandments. Although the Torah does not generally consider it necessary to justify G’d’s legislation with a reason, in this case, since this law had been observed as a Jewish tribal custom for so many hundreds of years prior to the giving of the Torah, we are told how the custom which became enshrined in Torah law originated.
את גיד הנשה, our sages in Chulin 91 explain the name of this muscle or ligament (sciatic nerve) as due to the fact that it is apt to move from its original location, from the spoon shaped joint to which it is attached.
אשר על כף הירך, the only part of the sinew prohibited by Biblical injunction is the part directly attached to the hip joint.. What is above and below is forbidden by Rabbinic decree. Similarly, the exterior sinew is also only forbidden by Rabbinic decree (Chulin 91) The prohibition applies equally to domesticated beasts, free roaming beasts, as well as to the שליל, the as yet unborn embryo. The prohibition applies to both the right and the left hind leg of the animal, even though the sages are agreed that only one of Yaakov’s sciatic nerves was injured as seems clear from the words (singular) “he dislocated the sinew of the thigh-vein.” The halachic ruling follows the view of Rabbi Yossi that although only one sinew was injured they are both forbidden to be eaten. The fatty tissue on top of these sinews is also forbidden as a Rabbinic injunction.
על כן לא יאכלו, as a reminder of the heroism displayed by Yaakov, as well as a reminder of the miracle that G’d performed for him as a result of which he did not die.
גיד הנשה THE SINEW OF THE THIGH-VEIN — Why is its name called גיד הנשה? Because it sprang נשה) and rose from its proper position. The word has the meaning of “springing”. Other examples are: (Jeremiah 51:30) “Their strength sprang away (נשתה)” and (41:51) “for God hath made all my trouble spring away from me נַשַּׁנִי)".
עד היום הזה bezieht sich nicht auf den Schreibenden, sondern auf den Lesenden, so lange dies gelesen wird, also: immer. So von Mosche Grab ולא ידע איש את קבורתו עד היום הזה (Dewarim 34, 6).
נשֶה, Wurzel von נשים, iFrauen, und נשה iGläubiger, scheint als Grundbedeutung: sich, oder etwas von dem Seinigen in die Macht eines andern gegeben haben, in die Macht eines andern geraten sein, auszudrücken. Daher נשה ב־: mit einem Teil seines Gutes in der Macht eines andern sein, etwas an ihn zu fordern haben. Was נשה widerstandslos ausdrückt, das bezeichnet, dem צ-Laut gemäß, נצה mit Widerstand, also: der Widerstand gegen eine Unterordnung, oder das Streben, Widerstehendes unterzuordnen, d. i. Streit. Daher vielleicht auch נצה: der Flügel, als das durch Widerstand gegen die Luft fortbewegende Organ. Ebenso מצה als Gegensatz zu חמץ. Im חמץ-Prozesse treten alle bisher zu einheitlicher Masse verbundenen Teile in Gegensatz und Widerstand zu einander; die Unterdrückung dieses im Entstehen begriffenen Widerstandes ist: מצה. Hat der eine der streitenden Gegensätze sein Ziel erreicht, so ist es נצח der Sieg (vergl. נוע und נוח). Auf die Einbuße eines geistigen Gutes übertragen, heißt נשה nicht eigentlich vergessen, sondern: aufgeben, die Hoffnung auf Wiedererlangung aufgeben. Von אשה, Frau im Singular ist nicht נשה, sondern איש die Wurzel כי מאיש לקחה, denn im Singular erscheint sie im Verhältnis zum Manne als Gattin zum Gatten, ist sie nicht eine widerstandslos Preisgegebene, sondern ein Korrelat, eine Ergänzung des Mannes, ihm paritätisch gleichgestellt. Im Plural jedoch tritt das öffentliche Verhältnis des weiblichen Geschlechtes, somit als dasjenige hervor, das von seinen Rechten an das männliche abgegeben, dessen Rechte durch das männliche mit vertreten werden. Nur im öffentlichen Leben, in der Pluralität, erscheinen sie als die Machtloseren, Schwächeren, aber sie sind נשים, die "Gläubiger" des Männlichen.
גיד הנשה wäre somit: die Sehne der Unterordnung, der Widerstandslosigkeit, Machtlosigkeit, somit nicht die anatomische, sondern die historische Bezeichnung der Spannader. Durch Losreißung derselben hat Jakobs Gegner dem durch sie an das Bein gehefteten Hüftmuskel die Kraft genommen, das Bein zu regieren, diesen Verlust hat Jakob durch seinen Gegner erlitten, in dieser Beziehung hat er ihm nicht Widerstand leisten können. Die Sehne ist da, der Muskel ist da, das Bein ist da, aber der Gebrauch ist gehindert. Jedoch nicht auf ewig. נשה ist ein nur zeitweiliges Aufgeben, kein ewiger Verlust. Jakob ist ein נשֶה, hat einst eine große Rechnung mit שרו של עשו abzumachen.
Wenn aber die Erinnerung an dieses Ereignis für alle Zeiten durch das Genussverbot der Spannader unter Jakobs Nachkommen festgehalten werden soll, so kann sicherlich nicht die Absicht sein, daß alle seine Nachkommen von der Tatsache Kunde erhalten, es habe ihr Stammvater in Folge eines Ringkampfes gehinkt, eben so wenig wie das Chamezverbot uns nur darüber für alle Zeiten au fait halten soll, welches Brot unsere Väter bei ihrem Auszuge aus Ägypten gegessen. Beide Tatsachen sind an sich von so geringfügiger Bedeutung, daß deren Verewigung durch ein göttliches Gesetz nur dann erklärlich wird, wenn sich, wie es in der Tat ist, daran Wahrheiten von tiefeingreifenden Folgen für unsere Gesamtbestimmung knüpfen, die eben durch ein solches Genussverbot ihren Ausdruck und ihre ewige Neubelebung gewinnen sollen.
In einer solchen Bedeutsamkeit haben auch die Weisen dieses Verbot aufgefasst, indem sie die Stelle: Jesaias 9, 7 f.: דבר שלח אדני ביעקב ונפל בישראל וידעו העם םימקש הנבנ תיזגו ולפנ םינבל רמאל בבל לדגבו הואגב ןורמש בשויו םירפא ולכ גדעו וארזים נחליף וישגב ד׳ וגוי והעם לא שב עד המכהו ואת ד׳ צבאו׳ לא דרשו. "Ein Wort hat Gott einst an Jakob gesendet und es hat in Israel seine Stelle gefunden, das soll das Volk ganz kennen lernen, Ephraim und Samariens Bewohner, die so stolz und hochmütig sind zu sprechen: (eigentlich: in ihrem Stolz und Hochmut zu sprechen): Ziegel sind gefallen, Quadern bauen wir auf, Sykomoren sind gefällt, mit Zedern ersetzen wir. Und während Gott Rezins Feinde usw. kehrt das Volk doch nicht zurück zu dem, der es in Wahrheit schlägt, und Gott Zebaoth haben sie in allem dem nicht gesucht", — also erläutern: דבר שלח ד׳ ביעקב זה גיד הנשה ונפל בישראל שפשט איסורו בכל ישראל (Chulin 91a.). Das Wort, das Gott an Jakob gesandt, auf welches der Prophet hier hinweist, ist das Spannaderverbot (es war dies ein tatsächlich an Jakob gesendetes Wort), es hat in Israel seine Stätte gefunden, d. h. das Verbot in Israel Platz gegriffen.
Nach allem diesem dürfte die Bedeutung dieses Verbotes nicht zweifelhaft bleiben. Nicht zu besiegen und nicht niederzuwerfen vermag Esaus Genius Jakob während des ganzen nächtlichen Kampfes, wohl aber ihm die Sehnen zu durchschneiden, ihn an dem Gebrauch seiner natürlich ihm zustehenden materiellen Kräfte zu hindern. Hinkend nur, nicht auf beiden Füßen stehend, ohne festen Stand und Gang auf Erden, schreitet Jakob durch die Geschichte. Und diese irdische Haltlosigkeit ist notwendig, um Esau endlich die Augen zu öffnen. Stünde Jakob gleich Esau an der Spitze seiner vierhundert Reisigen, seine Unbesiegbarkeit wäre nie der Gottesfinger in der Geschichte geworden. Darum sollen auch die Söhne Jakobs, (der ja eben durch diese materielle Schwäche und in ihr "Israel", der Fingerzeig für die allein obsiegende Gottesmacht sein soll), "diese Sehne der Unterordnung und materiellen Schwäche nicht essen", es soll ihnen, so oft sie sich an den Tisch setzen, aus dem Wanderbuch ihres Lebens die Mahnung entgegentreten, daß sie auf diese Sehne, auf die der Unterordnung unter Esau verfallende Kraft, heiter Verzicht leisten, sich mit ihrem Dasein und dessen Erhaltung nicht auf sie hingewiesen, und etwa deshalb weniger geschützt und zum Gange durch die Zeiten weniger gesichert fühlen sollen, weil sie nicht wie Esau mit dem Schwerte gerüstet, ja nicht einmal festen Schrittes auf Erden auftreten. Für Jakob-Israel liegt in anderem, höherem, nicht von Esau zu schwächendem die Kraft. Wenn Jakob fällt, fällt es nicht, weil es an materieller Macht Esau nicht gleichkommt, sondern weil es nicht verstanden, sich den Schutz seines Gottes zu erhalten. Wenn Israel steht, steht es nicht, weil eine feste materielle Stütze, sondern weil sein Gott es auf Adlerflügeln seiner Allmacht trägt. Das ist das Wort, das an Jakob gesandt worden und seine ewige Beherzigung in Israel finden sollte, das ist das Wort, dessen voller, ganzer Inhalt dem Volke zum Bewusstsein kommen soll, das, wenn es sich geschlagen sieht, die Ursache seiner Kalamität nicht in Gott, sondern darin sucht, daß es sich bisher nicht hinreichend mit materieller Schutzwehr vorgesehen, und statt durch Rückkehr zu Gott seine Zukunft zu sichern, in nichtigem Selbstgefühl spricht: was von Ziegeln zusammengefallen, bauen wir mit Quadern auf, Weiden konnte man umhauen, Zedern wird man nicht!
Vier göttliche Institutionen zählt das Buch שבת :בראשית und מילה ,קשת und גיד הנשה; was die ersten beiden für die Gesamtmenschheit bedeuten, das sind die beiden letzten für den engeren jüdischen Kreis. שבת sichert die geistig sittliche Bestimmung der Menschheit, מילה Israels. קשת ist das Wahrzeichen für die Geschichte der Menschheit, גיד הנשה für die jüdische Geschichte. Die vom Menschen ausgehende sittliche Tat und das von Gott dem Menschen werdende Geschick, diese beiden Seiten bilden aber die Summe alles Einzeln- und Gesamtdaseins auf Erden.
על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל, in order to ensure that the damage inflicted to Yaakov’s offspring as predicted by the angel should be kept to a minimum as long as they remind themselves of the symbolic meaning of that injury suffered by Yaakov during his nocturnal encounter with this angel. [I believe that even commentators who concentrate on the plain meaning of the text, such the ones whose commentaries I am translating in these volumes, feel free to treat the text allegorically when the narrative of the Torah itself appears pointless unless we understand it in historical terms, offering moral and ethical teachings and warnings of long term significance. Ed.] Alternatively, the moral lesson is that just as the gid hanashe is totally devoid of taste, does not appeal to the palate, so that consuming it would not provide the sinner with any kind of gratification, we are taught not to second-guess G’d’s legislation by treating this commandment as not important.
על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל את גיד הנשה, “this is why in the future the Jewish people would not eat the disjointed sinew.” The Jews not eating this sinew are comparable to sons who make a point of fasting on the anniversary of their father’s death. Another way of looking at this law: In the future, the Jewish people would be commanded not to eat this sinew in order that they should remain aware of the miracle which had occurred when a mortal man, their ancestor Yaakov, had been able to prevail against a celestial force trying to wrestle him to the ground.
“That is why the children of Israel do not eat the thigh muscle” [32:33]. The children of Israel should not eat the hindquarter of the animals, but they should first remove the veins. Hizkuni writes. It is just that Israel should be punished that they should not eat the hindquarter, because they allowed Jacob to stand in the field. The angel wrenched Jacob’s hip, but if his children had been with Jacob, he would not have been hurt. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 32:33.) Toldot Yizhak writes. The angel caused Jacob to limp so that he would have to bow to Esau. When someone limps and walks, people think that he is bowing all the time. Therefore, it is written in the verse “he bowed low to the ground seven times” [33:3]. He bowed seven times. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 32:32.)
Therefore the children of Yisra᾽el eat not of the sinew of the vein, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, to this day: because he touched the hollow of Ya῾aqov’s thigh in the sinew of the vein. (Genesis 32:33)
Rav J. David Bleich and Rav Moshe Shternbuch (Moadim Uzmanim 5:351) add that we similarly do not know how to resolve halachic disputes concerning the Temple service, due to the lack of a tradition on how to conduct various rituals. (Rav Shternbuch notes that without the ability to resolve these disputes, offering korbanot risks violating many prohibitions entailing the severe punishment of kareit. He suggests, however, that the desire to explore the possibility of offering korbanot in the pre-Messianic era pleases God, as it shows that His people sincerely desire to fulfill His mitzvot. Rav Shternbuch uses this approach to explain the phenomenon of an extensive literature exploring the viability of offering korbanot today.) Only the Mashiach’s arrival will enable us to renew this tradition. (See Tosafot (Pesachim 114b s.v. Echad Zeicher), who write that Moshe and Aharon will instruct us in the rituals of the korbanot for the Third Temple. ) For example, Rav Bleich (Contemporary Halakhic Problems 1:266-267), citing Rav Meir Auerbach (Halevanon 1:8 p. 54), notes a disagreement between the Rambam and the Ra’avad (Hilchot Korban Pesach 10:11) about whether the gid hanasheh (sciatic nerve) (The Torah prohibits eating this nerve (Bereishit 32:33).) of the sheep is roasted along with the rest of the Korban Pesach. One cannot simply be strict and follow both opinions, since if one were to follow the Ra’avad and remove the nerve, the animal would no longer be “whole” according to the Rambam, thus invalidating it. On the other hand, leaving the gid hanasheh in the animal invalidates it according to the Ra’avad. Rav Shternbuch lists a host of other gray issues regarding the priestly garments, such as how to design the avnet (belt), ketonet (tunic), and migba’at (hat) of the ordinary Kohein. We do not even know how to identify the color argaman, used in the making of the priestly garments.
[The prohibition against partaking of] the gid hanesheh (Genesis, ch. 32, relates that before his confrontation with Esau, Jacob remained alone in his camp. An unidentified being - interpreted by the Torah commentaries to be Esau's archangel - wrestled with him the entire night. When he saw that he could not defeat Jacob, he gave him a blow to his upper thigh, dislocating his gid hanesheh. In commemoration of this event, "The children of Israel do not eat the gid hanesheh. The Rabbis identified the gid hanesheh as the sciatic nerve, the large main nerve running down the back of an animal's hind leg. The term gid, though sometimes translated as "sinew," is a general term. As the Rambam writes in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 3:4), it is used to refer to arteries, veins, tendons, nerves, and sinews.) applies with regard to kosher (See Halachah 5.) domesticated animals and wild beasts, (Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 183) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 3) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.) even nevelot and trefot. (See Halachah 6.) It applies to a fetus (The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 65:7 does not cite the Rambam's view, but instead quotes two differing opinions: one that the prohibition does not apply to a fetus at all and another, that it applies only when the fetus has completed the period of gestation and is discovered alive.) and to animals that have been consecrated, both those consecrated [for sacrifices] of which we partake and for sacrifices of which we do not partake. It applies to [the gid] on the right thigh and that on the left thigh. (Although the angel only dislodged the nerve on one of Jacob's legs, we are forbidden to partake of the nerves from both sides.) According to Scriptural Law, only [the gid] on the hip socket is forbidden, as [Genesis 32:33] states: "which is on the hip-socket." The remainder of the gid which is above the socket or below the socket - and similarly, the fat which is on the gid - are forbidden only according to Rabbinic decree. (See Halachah 7 concerning the removal of this nerve.) There are two giddim. The inner one next to the bone is forbidden according to Scriptural Law. The entire outer one is forbidden by Rabbinic decree.
Not to eat the displaced [sciatic] nerve as [Genesis 32:33] states: "Therefore, the children of Israel do not eat the displaced nerve."
Not to eat the sciatic nerve: [Parashat] Vayishlach has one negative commandment, and it is the prohibition of [eating] the sciatic nerve; as it is stated (Genesis 32:33), “Therefore the Children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve.” And this [phrase] “they shall not eat” is not to be taken as part of the story, to mean that because this event occurred to [our] forefather, [we, his] descendants refrain from eating that nerve. Rather, it is a warning (prohibition) of God that they shall not eat it.
He prohibited [us] from eating the sciatic nerve. And that is His saying, "Therefore, the Children of Israel do not eat the sciatic nerve" (Genesis 32:33). And one who ate all of it - even if it was very small - or ate a kazayit of it is lashed. And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in Chapter 7 of Chullin. (See Parashat Vayishlach; Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Foods 6.)
The reason why the sinew that shrank is prohibited is stated in the Law (Gen. 32:33).
After Abraham through his own understanding and in the uprightness of his heart abandoned the idols of his fathers and believed in one G-d, the L-rd chose him, revealed Himself to him, and blessed him. All this, "because he commands his children and his household after him to keep the way of the L-rd." That is, He did not choose him for himself alone, but to be the father of a holy people. And so that his seed not assimilate with the other peoples, who were idolators, He commanded him concerning circumcision, which, (at that time) was the only Divine precept in that religion. After some time, the children of Israel took upon themselves the stringency of not eating the thigh sinew in commemoration of the miracle performed for their father Jacob, at which time the honorific title of "Israel" was conferred upon him, (viz. Bereshith 32:29-33).
Moreover, our sages, of blessed memory, established these very two verses at the end of Pesukei d’Zimrah-Verses of Song [recited every day in the morning prayers]. (As mentioned at the beginning of Gate One, “They are called “songs-Zemirot-זמירות” [or Verses of Song-Pesukei d’Zimra-פסוקי דזמרה] from the term “machete-mazmer-מזמר,” as in the verse (Isaiah 18:5), “He will cut down the young branches with machetes-mazmerot-מזמרות.” About this scripture states (Psalms 119:54), “Your statutes were like machetes-zemirot-זמירות for me in the house of my fears-megurai-מגורי.” This is to say that in those places on the way that I was in fear and terror-magor-מגור, I scattered and cut through them with those machetes-zemirot-זמירות [the verses (Torah) and statutes (mitzvot)].”) That is, every morning we pray, “And saviors will ascend Mount Zion to judge the Mount of Esav, and the Kingdom will be HaShem’s-יהו״ה; And HaShem-יהו״ה will be King over all the earth. On that day HaShem will be One-HaShem Echad-יהו״ה אחד and His Name One-u’Shmo Echad-ושמו אחד.” It is at this point in our prayers that the sages joined these two prophecies, this one-Zu-זו with that one-Zu-זו. (That is, the One-Echad-אחד-13 Above with the one-Echad-אחד-13 below, thus affecting the unification of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה-26.) For, upon the joining of these two prophecies as one, the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, is unified. Whoever understands the depth of what the sages established here, will understand the secret of the verse, (Psalms 118:10) “All the nations surround me, in the Name of HaShem-יהו״ה, I cut them off!” (See Ginat Egoz of our master and teacher, Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, translated as HaShem Is One, Vol. 1, The Gate of Intrinsic Being (Shaar HaHavayah) and on.) and the secret of the verse, “The first of the nations is Amalek,” and the secret of the Torah portion of Remember-Zachor-זכור (Parshat Zachor), and the secret of the Torah portion of the crossing of the Ford of Yabok-יבק. (Genesis 32:23-33 – See the previous note regarding this.) It therefore behooves you to contemplate the verse in Torah, (Exodus 17:16) “For a hand is [raised in oath] upon the throne of Ya”h-י״ה,” and realize that by means of this, (The name Ya”h-י״ה, referring to the upper three Sefirot.) salvations, redemptions and goodness will come to the Jewish people. For when the Jewish people are in exile, it is as though the travails have also come upon Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov, and David, all of whom are included in the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה. (This is because Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov and David are the four legs of the Throne (Kis’eh-כסא) and Chariot (Merkavah) as explained before. That is, Avraham is Kindness-Chessed (and Victory-Netzach branches from kindness), Yitzchak is Might-Gevurah (and Majesty-Hod branches from might), Yaakov is Splendor-Tiferet (and Foundation-Yesod branches from Splendor-Tiferet) and David is Kingship-Malchut. They thus are all included in the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה. Therefore, during a time of exile, it is as though they too are afflicted. Therefore, salvation and redemption must come from above them, that is, from the letters Yod-Hey-י״ה, which are the three upper Sefirot.) Thus, the name Ya”h-י״ה must bring salvation and redemption. The sign for this is the verse, (Exodus 15:2, recited in the Pesukei d’Zimra as part of the Song of the Sea.) “The might and vengeance (See Rashi to Exodus 15:2 about the word “Zimrat-זמרת” in this verse, which Onkelos translated as “Song of Ya”h-י״ה” or “The Praise of Ya”h-י״ה.” However, as explained in Gate One, it also means “to cut off,” as explained in Gate One.) of Ya”h-י״ה was salvation for me.” Similarly, another verse states, (Psalms 118:5-6) “From the straits I called Ya”h-י״ה.” That is, from the constraints (Meitzar-מיצר), which refer to the secret of the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה, which has castigators and constraints (Meitzarim-מצרים), in that they are surrounded by the ministering angels of the seventy nations. This is as explained before (In the Eighth Gate.) on the verse, (Lamentations 1:3) “[Judah has gone into exile because of suffering and great servitude. She dwelled amongst the nations, but found no rest;] all her pursuers overtook her between the straits-Mitzarim-מצרים.” The verse therefore specifies, “From the straits I called Ya”h-י״ה,” being that Ya’h-י"ה has no constraints, limitations, or castigators, since it is the place of the Expansiveness of the River-Rechovot HaNahar-רחובות הנהר, (That is, the Sefirah of Understanding-Binah (and the other two upper Sefirot that are revealed through it), as explained in the preceding Gate Eight. It is for this reason that the verse concludes, “Ya”h-י״ה answered me with expansiveness-Merchav-מרחב,” as discussed there, and as will be mentioned shortly.) and the World of Mercy-Olam HaRachamim, where there is no room whatsoever for the ministering angels or their nations to have a hold. Rather, it solely is given to Yaakov, who is the middle line-Kav HaEmtza’ee-קו האמצעי that ascends higher than Avraham and Yitzchak. The verse therefore states, (Isaiah 58:14; Also see Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 118b ibid.) “Then you will delight in HaShem-יהו״ה, and I will mount you astride the heights of the earth-Bamatei Aretz-במתי ארץ; I will provide you the inheritance of your forefather Yaakov.” (See Gate Eight at length.) The verse therefore specifies, “From the straits (Meitzar-מיצר) I called Ya”h-י״ה.”
Whoever understands this, will understand the secret of the Torah portion of “Remember-Zachor-זכור,” (That is, the Torah portion of (Deuteronomy 25:17), “Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you,” in which the aspect of Remember-Zachor-זכור corresponds to the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod, which is where Amalek tries to cause blemish in order to separate the upper Sefirot from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut, that is, to separate the Name HaShem-יהו״ה from His title of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ״י, as mentioned before. Thus, to repair this, the Torah portion of Zachor-זכור is recited daily. Also see Zohar II 66a.) as well as the Torah portion of the crossing of the Ford of Yabok-יבק, (Genesis 32:23-33, about the incident in which Yaakov was attacked by the angel of Esav and wrestled with him. See previous citations where this is explained further. Now, it should be pointed out that the name Yabok-יבק-112 has the same numerical value of the three names of the middle line (mentioned in the introduction and elsewhere). These names are Eheye”h-אהי״ה-21 HaShem-יהו״ה-26 and Adona”y-אדנ״י-65, equaling Yabok-יבק-112. That is, Amalek wanted to cause a separation of the union of the Crown-Keter, Splendor-Tiferet and Kingship-Malchut, of the middle line. Also see Ginat Egoz of Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, translated as HaShem Is One, Vol. 1, The Gate of Intrinsic Being (Shaar HaHavayah).) for both these Torah portions include this matter.
And the Shekhinah has departed from it, and She is in exile, and there cleaves, in Her stead, the [another] husk of the foreskin, which separates between the Righteous-One and the Shekhinah, (Gen. 32:33) Therefore, they shall not
“Therefore, the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve, which is upon the hip socket, to this day, because he touched Jacob’s hip socket, at the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33). “Therefore, the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve [gid hanashe]” – why is it called gid hanashe? It is because it was dislocated [nasha] from its place. Rav Huna said: These extensions of the sciatic nerve are permitted, but Israel is holy and they prohibited it upon themselves. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei: Rabbi Yehuda said: He touched one of them, and one of them was prohibited. Rabbi Yosei said: He touched one of them, (But the Torah did not specify which leg, implying that it is prohibited to eat the sciatic nerve from either leg.) and both of them were prohibited. There is a tanna who teaches that logic dictates that it is the right one, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. There is a tanna who teaches that logic dictates that it is the left one, (It might have been the left one.) in accordance with Rabbi Yosei. The one who says that logic dictates that it is the right one – “he touched his hip [yerekho] socket.” (“His” indicates that it is the nerve in his stronger leg.) The one who says that logic dictates that it is the left one, it is as it is stated: “Because he touched Jacob’s hip [yerekh] socket.”
And he did not even suffer me to kiss my daughters and their children, but he carried away my daughters like captives taken by the sword, and he stole also my gods and ran away. And now I have left him in the mountains near the river Jabbok with all that is his; he lacketh nothing. And now if it be thy desire to go unto him thou canst find him there, and thou canst do unto him whatsoever pleaseth thee best. And Laban's messengers went and told unto Esau all these words. And when Esau heard the words of Laban's messengers, his anger was kindled against his brother, and he remembered his hatred and his wrath burned within him. And Esau hastened and gathered together his sons and his servants and the people of his household, sixty men, and he assembled likewise all the sons of Seir the Horite, and their people, three hundred and forty men, and he went with this number of four hundred men, to smite his brother Jacob. And Esau divided this number into several bands. And he took the sixty men of his sons and servants and the people of his household in one band, and intrusted them to Eliphaz his oldest son. And the remaining bands he intrusted to the care of the six sons of Seir the Horite, placing every man over his family and their children. And the entire camp moved ahead with Esau among them, who urged them on to great speed. And Laban's messengers, after having left Esau, went into the land of Canaan to the house of Rebekah, the mother of Jacob and Esau and they said unto her: Be hold Esau thy son went with four hundred men against his brother Jacob; for he hath heard of his coming, and therefore he went to wage war with him and to kill him and to take away all that he hath. And Rebekah sent hastily seventy-two men of Isaac's servants to go and meet Jacob, for she said Esau might perhaps surprise him on the road when meeting him. And those messengers went and they met Jacob on the road on the opposite side of the brook Jabbok, and Jacob saw them and he exclaimed: This camp is sent to me from God, and he called the name of that place Mahanaim. And Jacob recognized all his father's men, and he kissed and embraced them and came together with all of them, and inquired concerning his father and mother, and they said: All is peace with them. And the messengers said unto Jacob: Thy mother Rebekah sent us to thee, saying: I have heard that thy brother Esau hath gone to meet thee on the road with men from the midst of the sons of Seir the Horite. Now therefore my son, listen unto my voice and reflect what thou art to do. And when he meeteth thee entreat him, and do not speak unto him harshly, and give him gifts from whatsoever thou findest in thy hands, wherewith the Lord hath favored thee graciously. And when he inquires of thee concerning thy matters and affairs do not withhold it from him, maybe he will thus be turned from his anger and thou wilt save thyself and all those that are with thee, for it is in thy place to give him respectful answers as he is the oldest brother. And when Jacob heard the words of his mother as told unto him by the messengers, Jacob lifted up his voice and he wept a great weeping and he did at once according to the command of his mother.
And Jacob sent messengers at the same time to Esau his brother in the land of Seir, and he spoke unto him words of prayer and supplication. And he commanded them saying: Thus shall ye speak unto my lord, unto Esau: Thy servant Jacob saith thus: Let not my lord think that the blessings wherewith my father hath blessed me was of any benefit to me. For I have sojourned with Laban these twenty years and he hath deceived me, changing my wages ten times as it hath already been stated unto my lord. And I have served him in his house a very hard servitude until God saw my trouble, my servitude and the work of my hands, and he granted me to find grace and mercy in his eyes, and afterwards I became possessed through God’s kindness and his great mercy, of oxen and of asses, and of men servants and of maid servants. And I am returning now to my land and my native place, to my father and mother who are in the land of Canaan, and I am desirous to impart all these things to my lord in order to find favor in the eyes of my lord, so that he may not think that I have acquired wealth by reason of the blessings by which my father hath blessed me. And the messengers went unto Esau and they met him on the boundary of the land of Edom, marching against Jacob with four hundred men of the sons of Seir the Horite with their drawn swords. And Jacob's messengers spoke unto Esau all that Jacob had told them concerning Esau. And Esau answered them in pride and contempt, saying unto them: Verily I have heard of it and I have been correctly informed of what Jacob hath done unto Laban. For Laban made him great and gave him his daughters to wives; and he begat sons and daughters, and he increased greatly in possession and wealth in Laban’s house. But as soon as he saw the abundance of his possessions and wealth he fled from Laban's house with all that belonged unto him, carrying away Laban's daughters from the presence of their father like captives taken by the sword, without telling Laban a word about it. But Laban is not the only one whom Jacob hath treated in such a way, for he hath done unto me after the same manner, and he hath supplanted me twice. And shall I now be silent? And now behold I have come with my camp to meet him, and I will deal with him according to the best of my mind. And the messengers returned unto Jacob saying: We came to thy brother Esau and we spoke unto him according to all thou hast said, and such was his answer unto us, and also he cometh to meet thee and four hundred men with him. And when he heard the words which Esau had spoken to his messengers, Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed. And Jacob prayed unto the Lord his God saying: Oh Lord, God of my fathers Abraham and Isaac, thou hast said unto me at my departure from my father's house, saying: I am the Lord, the God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac, the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed. And behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and I will cause thy enemies to fall down before thee, and when they shall wage war against thee they shall never prevail over thee. And I will bring thee back into this land in joy and gladness, with children and with great wealth. And thou hast fulfilled thy words and thou hast given unto me wealth and children and cattle, whatsoever the heart of thy servant wished for thou hast given unto me, and whatsoever I asked for thou hast granted unto me, so that I was not wanting in the least. And thou hast finally said unto me: Return unto thy country and thy kindred and I will deal well with thee. And now behold I have fol lowed thy words and thou hast delivered me from the hands of Laban, and shall I fall now into the hands of Esau who will smite me and the mothers with the children? Oh deliver me, I pray thee, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, and if there be no merit in me do it for the sake of Abraham and Isaac my father, for I know that simply through grace and mercy have I obtained all this wealth. And behold, I beseech thee now for the same reason to deliver me to day in thy kindness, and to answer unto me.
4) I might think that the entire beast is permitted; it is, therefore, written (Bereshith 9:4): "Only the flesh with its life, its blood, you shall not eat" — ever min hechai (a limb torn from a living animal) is forbidden. (Bereshith 32:33): "Therefore, the children of Israel may not eat the thigh sinew (gid hanasheh)" — the gid hanasheh is forbidden. (Vayikra 7:3): "All fats (cheilev) of ox or sheep or goat you shall not eat" — cheilev is forbidden. (Vayikra 7:26): "And all blood you shall not eat" — blood is forbidden. I might think that they are permitted whether slaughtered (by shechitah) or not slaughtered, (but killed in some other way); it is, therefore, written (Devarim 27:7): "And you shall slaughter (by shechitah) … and you shall eat."
The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of, i.e., the time of, the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. And it applies to domesticated animals and to undomesticated animals, to the thigh of the right leg and to the thigh of the left leg. But it does not apply to a bird, due to the fact that the verse makes reference to the sciatic nerve as being “upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh. And the prohibition applies to a late-term animal fetus [shalil] in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus; and similarly, its fat is permitted. And butchers are not deemed credible to say that the sciatic nerve was removed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They are deemed credible about the sciatic nerve and about the forbidden fat.
The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then.
“Therefore the Children of Israel do not eat the sciatic tendon” (Genesis 32:33). The sciatic tendon is forbidden in benefit, so it is forbidden to give it to one’s Canaanite slave or maidservant. And it is forbidden to send a thigh (as a gift) to a Canaanite with the sciatic tendon inside it. (And likewise does Rosh bring in the name of [Rabbeinu Yonah] at the beginning of the chapter [entitled] Gid HaNashei in the discussion of a man sending a thigh to a Canaanite. But we do not establish [the law to be] like him in this, but rather like the opinion of Rambam - that the sciatic tendon is permissible in benefit, so one may send a thigh to a Canaanite with the sciatic tendon inside it. And it is explained in Tur and Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh Deah 65.)
The following is the way the Zohar and other Kabbalistic books explain the mystical dimension of the prohibition of this commandment. Man's various limbs are perceived as branches of the מרכבה in the higher regions The Torah has given us 248 positive commandments which correspond to each one of the 248 limbs of אדם העליון man's counterpart in the spiritual regions. Kabbalists speak of 248 angels bearing the name of their Master. These angels are perceived as the clothing of the שכינה. There are also 365 branches of דין, Justice, on the "tree" in the "upper regions," corresponding to the 365 days of the year and the 365 sinews of man. There is both a sinew and a negative commandment for every day of the year, and the ninth of Av is the day which corresponds to the prohibition of the גיד הנשה. Our sages saw an allusion in the extra word את in על כן לא יאכלו בני ישראל את גיד הנשה (Genesis 32, 33), to include תשעה באב [a day when any food intake is prohibited anyways]. They also included סמאל ויצה"ר Satan and the evil urge. Both the eating of that sinew and profiting from it in some other manner is prohibited. Neither Israel, nor any of its limbs could be defeated on any other calendar date, nor could any other sinew have succumbed to its adversary except the גיד הנשה. Only on that date was the power of דין strong enough to undermine the strength of Israel. On that date G–d abandoned us in exile, until a wind (spirit) will blow from the Heavens. Anyone who eats on the Ninth of Av, is considered as if he had eaten the גיד הנשה.
אינו סופג אלא ארבעים – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that this is not practiced other than with the right [thigh] for he expounds (Genesis 32:33): “[the socket] of the hip,” that means the strongest of the hips (i.e., the right” (see Talmud Hullin 91a). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
Introduction At the conclusion of the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel, Genesis 32:33 states, “That is why the children of Israel to this day do not eat the thigh muscle that is on the socket of the hip, since Jacob’s hip was wrenched at the thigh muscle.” The “thigh muscle” is identified by the rabbis as the sciatic nerve. Our chapter is about this prohibition.
Am Sinai erst ist es geboten worden und nur in der Schrift an der passenden Stelle eingefügt worden. Nach Maimon, ist dies so zu erklären: allerdings ist es bereits den Söhnen Jakobs verboten gewesen, die Spannader zu geniessen, als Toravorschrift ist dieses Verbot aber doch erst am Sinai verkündet worden; wenn es deshalb in der Tora auch in die Lebensgeschichte Jakobs eingefügt worden ist, darf es als Toravorschrift doch nur als auf die Zeit nach der Gesetzgebung sich beziehend ausgelegt werden, danach kann es sich aber nur auf die Spannader reiner Tiere beziehen, da unreine Tiere überhaupt zum Genusse verboten sind. Eine andere Auslegung im Talmud gibt als Grund für die Ansicht der Weisen, dass sich das Verbot der Spannader auf unreine Tiere nicht bezieht, den Grundsatz an, dass im Allgemeinen eine bereits verbotene Sache nicht aus einem anderen Grunde nochmals verboten werden kann (אין איסיר חל על איסור); die Spannader eines unreinen Tieres ist bereits, weil sie von einem unreinen Tiere kommt, verboten, das besondere Verbot, die Spannader nicht zu essen, kann sich deshalb auf sie nicht erstrecken. R. Jehuda wendet dagegen ein, das dieser Grundsatz doch nur da Geltung habe, wo das zweite Verbot nicht ein weitergehendes als das erste ist; das Verbot der Spannader sei aber ein strengeres Verbot (איסור חמור) im Vergleich zu dem, das den Genuss der unreinen Tiere verbietet, da es bereits für die Söhne Jakobs gegolten hat, denen unreine Tiere noch nicht verboten waren. Die Weisen widerlegen dann diesen Einwand, indem sie meinen, das tatsächlich der Genuss den Söhnen Jakobs noch gar nicht verboten gewesen ist, das לא יאכלו בני ישראל את גיד הגשה (Gen. 32, 33), beziehe sich erst auf die Zeit nach der Gesetzgebung.
Perhaps the reason G'd did not mention all this to Abraham at the time was so that people should not think that only the patriarchs were allowed to violate the Sabbath in order to circumcise the baby on the eighth day, seeing they had not yet been commanded to observe the Sabbath as a day of rest and that therefore the observance of the Sabbath was not so important. However, the Israelites, who were warned in Exodus 31,14 not to violate the Sabbath on pain of execution, were not expected to circumcise their babies on the Sabbath. The Torah repeated the legislation here in order to include the detail that the Sabbath was not to take precedence over circumcision on the eighth day. While it is true that the Talmud in Chulin 101 states that the legislation about גיד הנשה was legislated at Mount Sinai, the Torah decided to record it in Genesis 32,33 to inform us of the reason for this legislation. Similar considerations may have motivated the Torah in recording the legislation about circumcision already in Genesis 17,12 though it was commanded to the Jewish people collectively at Mount Sinai. All of this still enables those who want to, to argue that there is reason to be more lenient about the date of the circumcision prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai than afterwards.
To the Yevusi. The fortress of Tzion was called Yevus. [Its inhabitants] were from the descendants of Avimelech. They had two idols, one [depicting] a blind person and one [depicting] a lame person. They were made to represent Yitzhok and Yakov. (Yitzchak was blind at the end of his life (Bereshis, 27,1). Yakov was lamed during the course of his struggle with the angel (Bereishis 32,33).) [Placed] in their mouths was the oath Avrohom swore to Avimelech, (Bereishis 21,23–24.) This is why they were not displaced [from Tzion]. When Yerushalayim was conquored The tribe of Yehuda did not conquor the fortress [of Tzion], as the verse states, (Yehoshua, 15, 63). "However the Yevusim who lived in Yerushalyim, the descendants of Yehudah were unable to expel them. [About this verse] it is learned: Rebbe Yohoshua, the son of Levi said, They had the ability to [expel the Yevusim] but they were not permitted to. (Because of Avrohom’s oath to Avimelech. This point is made in the Sifri, Re’ey, Piska 72. However, there it’s brought in the name of Rebbe Yehoshua, the son of Korcho.)
and I will exile an expression of “the sinew that was dislocated (גִיד הַנָֹּשֶה)” (Gen. 32:33), and an expression of “their might has failed (נָֹשְתָה),” it jumps and moves from place to place.
It teaches that He established a condition, etc.: The sixth implies the sixth specified in another place. It is like we say in general, "the thigh" (Genesis 32:33) is [referring to] the most important thigh. Here too, "And there was evening and there was morning" (Genesis 1:31) of the end of creation, was dependent on the sixth day; and that is the sixth of Sivan upon which the Torah was given. This is also expounded from the inclusion of the [letter,] hey (the definite article, the).
Genesis 32:25-33
Unexpectedly there is a break in the narrative. The stage has been set for something mysterious to happen with a nighttime backdrop and accented references to “crossing” (vv.23–24), which clearly refers to more than just the river. The great wrestling scene at the Yabbok both symbolizes and resolves beforehand Yaakov’s meeting with Esav, much as Shakespeare’s prebattle dream scenes (e.g., Julius Caesar, Richard III, Macbeth) will do with his characters. Struggle, the motif already introduced in the mother’s womb (Chap. 25), returns here, but that is not the only consideration. At issue is Yaakov’s whole life and personality, which despite his recent material successes are still under the pall of Esav’s curse (27:36). Central, then, is the change of name in v.29, which suggests both a victorious struggle and the emergence of a new power. This is further supported by the Hebrew plays on sound: Y’KB (Yaakov), YBK (Yabbok), and Y’BK (wrestling). The story may have originated as the well-known tale of a hero fighting a river divinity, but it clearly has been transformed into something much broader by its position and vocabulary. On the mysterious aspects of both the story and the name Israel, see Geller.
The Gemara comments: And Rabbi Yoḥanan also holds that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagree with regard to the principle: Since carrying out is permitted on a Festival for the purpose of food preparation, it was also permitted not for this purpose, as the tanna teaches a baraita before Rabbi Yoḥanan: One who cooks the sciatic nerve in milk on a Festival and eats it is flogged for violating five distinct prohibitions.
According to this answer, the language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: Rabbi Yehuda said: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? This indicates that the basis of Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is the fact that the sciatic nerve was forbidden to the children of Jacob, who had the status of descendants of Noah.
MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then.
Rava said in response: Actually Rabbi Shimon holds that sciatic nerves do not impart flavor, and therefore they are not subject to the prohibition of eating non-kosher meat. And the reason the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerves does not apply to non-kosher animals is that it is different there, because the verse states: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33). This teaches that the prohibition applies only to a species whose sciatic nerve is forbidden but whose meat is permitted, and excludes this case of a non-kosher animal, whose sciatic nerve would be forbidden and whose meat would also be forbidden.
§ The mishna teaches: Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now.
It is taught in a baraita that the Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: But is it stated in the verse: Therefore the children of Jacob do not eat the sciatic nerve? Isn’t it true that it is stated only that: “Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sciatic nerve?” And the Jewish people were not called “the children of Israel” until they received the Torah at Mount Sinai. Rather, this terminology indicates that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve was stated to the Jewish people at Sinai, but was written in its place, after the incident of Jacob wrestling with the angel, to allow the Jewish people to know the reason the sciatic nerve was forbidden to them. Since the prohibition came into effect only at Sinai, there is no proof that it ever applied with regard to non-kosher animals.
The Gemara asks: What is the biblical derivation for this, i.e., how is it understood from the definite article that the verse is referring to the right foreleg? The Gemara responds: It is derived like that which Rava said with regard to the verse: “Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sciatic nerve which is upon the hollow of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33). The definite article indicates that this is referring to the most important thigh. Here too, the definite article in the term “the foreleg” indicates that the verse is referring to the most important foreleg, i.e., the right foreleg.
The Gemara cites the source of the opinions of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda: As we learned in a baraita: The prohibition of the sciatic nerve applies to the fetus that had already completed its gestational term when its mother was slaughtered, and likewise its fat is forbidden; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says that the prohibition of the sciatic nerve does not apply to the fetus, and its fat is permitted. Evidently, according to all opinions, both the prohibitions of forbidden fat and blood and the prohibition of a limb that leaves its boundary cannot apply to the same animal.
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution from a mishna with regard to the prohibition against eating from the sciatic nerve (96a): If one ate an olive-bulk from this sciatic nerve in the right leg of an animal, and an olive-bulk from that sciatic nerve in the left leg of the same animal, he incurs eighty lashes. Rabbi Yehuda says: He incurs only forty lashes. The Gemara analyzes the mishna: What are the circumstances? If we say that he ate them one after the other and with two separate forewarnings, what is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda? According to Rabbi Yehuda, it is an uncertain forewarning, as Rabbi Yehuda is uncertain whether the prohibition against eating from the sciatic nerve applies to the sciatic nerve of the right thigh or that of the left thigh (see 90b). And we have heard that Rabbi Yehuda says: An uncertain forewarning is not considered a forewarning.
MISHNA: The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of, i.e., the time of, the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. And it applies to domesticated animals and to undomesticated animals, to the thigh of the right leg and to the thigh of the left leg. But it does not apply to a bird, due to the fact that the verse makes reference to the sciatic nerve as being “upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh.
The Gemara answers: Even though the prohibition of eating sacrificial animals precedes the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve, the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve comes and takes effect upon the offspring of consecrated animals, because the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve adds an extra stringency in that it applies also to descendants of Noah. The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve was in effect from the time Jacob wrestled with the angel (see Genesis 32:25–33), before the Torah was given. At that time, Jacob and his sons had the status of descendants of Noah, i.e., gentiles. Therefore, the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve is broader than the prohibition of eating meat of sacrificial animals, which took effect only when the Torah was given.
§ The Gemara cites another discussion with regard to the sciatic nerve of a burnt offering. Rav Huna says: The sciatic nerve of a burnt offering is not placed upon the altar with the rest of the animal. Rather, one removes it and places it on the circular mound of ashes in the center of the altar. Rav Ḥisda said: Master of this [mari dikhi] ruling! Is it written in the Torah: Therefore the altar does not consume the sciatic nerve? This would indicate that it is prohibited to sacrifice the sciatic nerve on the altar. Rather, it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33).
The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that Rabbi Yehuda holds that only the sciatic nerve of the right thigh is forbidden by Torah law? Rava said that it is because the verse states: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve that is upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33). The definite article indicates that this is referring to the most important thigh.
§ The mishna teaches (89b) that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve does not apply to a bird due to the fact that the verse is referring to the sciatic nerve as being “upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh. The Gemara challenges: But we see that it does have a protrusion of flesh on its thigh. The Gemara answers: It has a protrusion, but that protrusion is not rounded.
§ The mishna teaches: One who eats an olive-bulk of the sciatic nerve incurs forty lashes. Shmuel says: The Torah prohibits only the part of the sciatic nerve that is on the rounded protrusion of flesh shaped like a spoon that is near the end of the femur. This is as it is stated in the verse: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve that is upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33).
The Gemara asks: From where is this inferred? The Gemara answers: It is as Rava said with regard to the term “the thigh” in the verse: “The sciatic nerve that is on the hollow of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33); the reference is to the stronger of the thighs. Here too, where the verse states: “The anointed,” the reference is to the most distinguished of those anointed, i.e., the High Priest.
But is it not written (Lev. 7:23. This paragraph discusses verses which present difficulties for R. Eleazar.) : Any fat of cattle, sheep, or goats you shall not eat? Do you not have to understand the prohibition of usufruct from the prohibition of eating? There is a difference, for it is written (Lev. 7:23. In the opinion of the Babli 23a, the verse is needed to permit any use of profane fat since otherwise one would argue that since fat is forbidden for humans but required for the altar, fat of animals unfit for the altar should be permitted for use in the Temple but forbidden for profane use. In the Sifra Ṣaw (Parasha 10), the argument of the Babli is attributed to R. Yose the Galilean; R. Aqiba concludes that fat of domesticated animals is not food nor subject to the impurity of food. In the opinion of the Yerushalmi, since some fat is permitted for unrestricted use, no fat can be forbidden for usufruct in the absence of an explicit verse. For Ḥizqiah, this is a third verse that could be used for R. Eleazar’s argument; nobody will contest that three parallel verses invalidate the argument. In the second version of Ḥizqiah’s position (below, after Note 49), he needs the verse to permit use of fat for work on Temple property.) : But fat of a carcass and fat of a torn animal may be used for any work, only it may not be eaten. But is it not written (Deut. 12:16.) : Only the blood you may not eat? Do you not have to understand the prohibition of usufruct from the prohibition of eating? There is a difference, for it is written: You shall pour it on the ground like water (The Babli 22b deduces from here that animal blood is a fluid which prepares for impurity only if it is spilled on the ground (cf. Demay 2:3, Note 136). The argument of the Yerushalmi, and an argument that animal blood prepares for impurity in all cases, is in Sifry Deut. 73 and later here, in the second version of Ḥizqiah. (Preparation for impurity is explained in Demay 2:3, Notes 136–141.)) . Since water is permitted for use, so blood shall be permitted for use. But is it not written (Gen. 32:33.) : Therefore, the Children of Israel do not eat the sinew of the sciatic nerve? Rebbi Abbahu said, I explained it by the sinew of a carcass (The argument is more explicit in the Babli 22a. R. Abbahu holds that when carcass and tom meat was permitted for the sojourner (Note 53) and the pagan, the entire animal was permitted, including the fat. Then the last paragraph of Note 24 establishes that the schiatic sinew cannot be forbidden for usufruct.) . But is it not written (Lev. 23:14.) : Bread, parched or fresh grains you shall not eat until this very day? Rebbi Abba Mari, the brother of Rebbi Yose, said there is a difference since the verse fixed a time for it. But is it not written (Lev. 11:42.) : Do not eat them for they are abominations? Rebbi [Mana] (Added from Orlah, missing here.) said, that excludes their prohibition of usufruct (Latin splenium, Greek σπληνίον, τό, “pad, wound dressing.”) .
The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that the sciatic nerve of a koy is prohibited? The Gemara answers that the Merciful One rendered the prohibition of the sciatic nerve dependent on the presence of the spoon of the thigh, as it is stated: “Therefore the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve which is upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), and this koy has a spoon [kaf ] of the thigh, i.e., a round protrusion of flesh in its thigh that is shaped like a spoon.
The Master said above: “The awl,” this serves to include the large awl for piercing. The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this expression is referring to a large awl? The Gemara answers that this is as Rava said with regard to the verse: “The sinew of the thigh vein which is upon the hollow of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), that this is referring to the most important [meyummenet] part of the thigh. The definite article indicates something clear and obvious. Here too, the term “the awl” is referring to a special awl.
Abaye raised an objection to the opinion of Rava: And is there no division of labors on a Festival? But didn’t we learn in a baraita: One who cooks a sciatic nerve in milk on a Festival and eats it is flogged with five sets of lashes. How so? He is flogged for violating the prohibition of eating a sciatic nerve (see Genesis 32:33); and he is flogged for violating the prohibition of cooking on a Festival not for the purpose of the Festival, as he is prohibited from eating it; and he is flogged for violating the prohibition of cooking a sciatic nerve, which is meat, in milk; and he is flogged for violating the prohibition of eating meat cooked in milk; and he is flogged
Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa raised an objection: And yet there is still the prohibition of the sciatic nerve, as the Merciful One says: “Therefore the children of Israel may not eat the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), and we learned in a mishna: A person may send the thigh of an animal to a gentile as a gift with the sciatic nerve inside it, he is not required to remove it. This is due to the fact that its place is clear, and it is obvious that this nerve has not been removed. Therefore, there is no concern that another Jew will assume that the first Jew removed this portion of the animal, which might cause him to accidentally eat the sciatic nerve. Apparently, one may benefit from this prohibited portion of the animal even though the verse says that one may not eat it.
Granted, if you say they are meat, due to that they require burning; but if you say they are not meat, why do they require burning? One should simply discard them like other waste. Rav Ḥisda said: The mishna’s mention of sinews is necessary only for the sciatic nerve, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.
BARAITHA. A man should not send to his fellow a cask of water (Instead of water it would be better to read ‘wine’ as in Ḥul. 94a (Sonc. ed., p. 528). There the story is related of a tragedy which followed as the consequence of such an act of deception.) as oil. GEMARA. What is the reason? It is forbidden to do anything which may give him offence; as it is written, Nor put a stumbling-block before the blind. (Lev. 19, 14.) The question was asked: May one send to a Gentile a thigh which has been cooked with the sinew? (Contrary to the Law of Gen. 32, 33.) It is obvious that [one may not send to a Gentile] a limb cut from a living animal, for the master said: (Sanh. 56a (Sonc. ed., pp. 381f.). This is one of the seven Noachian laws.) The sons of Noah (i.e. non-Jews.) were forbidden to eat a limb cut from a living animal; therefore [one who sent a Gentile meat with the sinew of the thigh would commit an offence] because of Nor put a stumbling-block before the blind. But here [with the sinew of the thigh] they were not [forbidden and a violation of the law would not arise]; or perhaps there is a difference between the two cases! Come and hear: ((54a) Ḥul. 93b (Sonc. ed., p. 525).) A man may send to a Gentile a thigh wherein is the sinew.
Therefore, the children of Israel must not eat the displaced tendon [nerve] which is on the [girth of the] hip joint to this very day; because he struck [the girth of] Yaakov’s hip joint on the displaced tendon.
Therefore the sons of Israel eat not the sinew which shrank, which is in the hollow of the thigh of cattle and of wild animals, until this day; because the Angel touched and laid hold of the hollow of the right thigh of Jakob, in the place of the sinew which shrank.
The [prohibition against eating] the sciatic nerve applies to mixed-breeds, [and] applies to two thighs -- the left thigh and the right thigh. Rabbi Yehuda says, it only applies to one, and logic dictates that it is the right [thigh]. This is the general rule: Whatever has a "spoon of the thigh" (Gen. 32:33), [the prohibition against eating] the sciatic nerve apply to it. Whatever does not have a "spoon of the thigh," [the prohibition against eating] the sciatic nerve does not apply to it. It applies to a fetus, and its fats are forbidden, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says, it does not apply to a fetus. And its fats are permitted, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Sages say, they are trusted with respect to it * (i.e., butchers are trusted to have removed the sciatic nerve (see Hul. 7:1)) and with respect to [having removed the forbidden] fats. One who sends a cut-up thigh to his friend is required to remove the sciatic nerve [before sending it]. [One who sends a] whole [thigh] does not need to remove the sciatic nerve from it. One who buys a cut-up thigh from the butcher does not need to remove the sciatic nerve from it [since the butcher is trusted to have already removed it], but [one who buys] a whole [thigh] needs to remove the sciatic nerve from it. One who sells a cut-up thigh to an idolater does not need to remove the sciatic nerve from it, as long he does not sell it in front of another Jew, because he (i.e., the other Jew) may come back and buy it from him (i.e., from the idolater, in the belief that the sciatic nerve had been removed). And on account of two things, they said, "We do not sell carrion or tereifah meat to an idolater": (1) because he may return and feed it to a Jew; [and] (2) another thing, is that we are not permitted to cause someone to be mistaken about what he is eating (i.e., the idolater would assume that Jews do not sell carrion or tereifahs and would come to be deceived, cf. Hul. 94a:5). And on account of two things, they said, "A Jew may not say to an idolater, 'Buy meat for me'": On account of [the idolater potentially being sold] carrion-flesh or tereifah. And one other thing: On account of force* (i.e., the idolater taking the meat by force rather than paying for it (see Hul. 94a:20-94b:1)) .
[The laws of the sciatic nerve] apply to [ritually] pure [animals] but do not apply to [ritually] impure [animals]. Rabbi Yehuda says, even to impure [animals], because [the sciatic nerve] was forbidden even before the giving of the Torah [and thus predated the laws of purity and impurity]. They said to Rabbi Yehuda, it does not say, "Therefore the Children of Jacob -- Reuven and Simon [etc.] -- do not eat the sciatic nerve," but rather, "the Children of Israel [do not eat the sciatic nerve]" (Gen. 32:33). Those are the ones who stood before Mount Sinai. Rather, why is it written there (i.e., in Genesis, before the Torah was given)? To make it known why it is forbidden. [The laws forbidding eating the] limb of a live animal apply to impure animals as well as pure animals because it was forbidden to both the Sons of Noah (i.e., Gentiles, who are not liable in laws of purity and impurity) as well as to [the Children of] Israel. And [one who eats the sciatic nerve] may be held liable both on account of it being a limb from a live animal and on account of it being from an impure animal [in the event that it was indeed taken from a live and/or impure animal], the words of Rabbi Yehuda. And Rabbi Eliezer and the Sages say, one cannot be held liable except on account of it being a limb from a live animal, as it is said (Deut. 12:23), "You shall not eat the life with the flesh," and thus it is forbidden [to eat the sciatic nerve of a live animal]. On account of "You shall not eat the life with the flesh" they render him liable. This comes to exclude an impure animal, as to which all of it [and not just the sciatic nerve] is prohibited. One who eats the limb of a live animal transgresses a negative commandment. [Relatedly, with respect to one who eats] the fats (as opposed to the flesh) of a live animal, he is liable for transgressing two negative commandments, (1) on account of its [forbidden] fats and (2) on account of it [being from a] live animal. [With respect to] the blood of a live animal, he is liable for transgressing two negative commandments, (1) on account of [the prohibition against eating] blood (Deut. 12:23), and (2) on account of it [being from a] live animal. [The prohibition against eating a] "limb of a live animal" may render one liable on account of [the animal being] carrion. [One who eats the] blood of consecrated animals is liable on account of two negative commandments, (1) on account of [the prohibition against eating] blood, and (2) on account of [the prohibition against a non-priest eating] consecrated animals, the words of Rabbi Yehuda. And the Sages say, he is only liable for transgressing one negative commandment. [One who eats] the fat-tail of consecrated animals (see Lev. 9:18-20) is liable on account of two negative commandments, (1) on account of [eating the] fat-tail, and (2) on account of [eating from] consecrated animals. Rabbi Yehuda renders him liable for transgressing three [negative commandments]: (1) on account of [eating forbidden] fats, (2) on account of consecrated animals, and (3) on account of the fats of consecrated animals.
| וַיִּשָּׂ֨א יַעֲקֹ֜ב עֵינָ֗יו וַיַּרְא֙ וְהִנֵּ֣ה עֵשָׂ֣ו בָּ֔א וְעִמּ֕וֹ אַרְבַּ֥ע מֵא֖וֹת אִ֑ישׁ וַיַּ֣חַץ אֶת־הַיְלָדִ֗ים עַל־לֵאָה֙ וְעַל־רָחֵ֔ל וְעַ֖ל שְׁתֵּ֥י הַשְּׁפָחֽוֹת׃ | 1 E | Looking up, Jacob saw Esau coming, with a retinue (retinue See note at 32.7.) of four hundred. He divided the children (children Heb. yeladim, referring here only to Jacob’s sons (see 32.23) in anticipation of their becoming the progenitors of Israel’s tribes; and so through v. 14.) among Leah, Rachel, and the two maids, |
וישא יעקב...ויחץ, he divided them between their respective mothers. Each mother would naturally have stronger concern for her own children and if it came to interceding for her own children would do so with more heart-rending pleas than she would for the children of someone else.
Er sah Esau nicht durch die Geschenke entwaffnet, er hatte seine Kriegsleute nicht entlassen, da teilte er usw. Wie die Weisen diese ganze Geschichte als Programm für unser Verhalten Esau und den anderen Mächten gegenüber betrachten, so lernen wir auch hier, wenn uns auch die Zuversicht zu Gott und seinen Verheißungen erfüllt, doch immer das Unsrige zu tun, אין סומכין על הנס.
ועמו ארבע מרות איש. To tell us that he had not been appeased even by the substantial gift Yaakov had sent him.
Jacob had fought with a mysterious man until dawn. After sunrise, when people began to move about the camp, Jacob lifted his eyes and saw, and behold, Esau came, and with him four hundred men. Opposed to Jacob’s relatively small family camp, which included slaves, maidservants, and possessions, he saw a large military procession. He divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two maidservants. Jacob arranged his camp so that each mother could watch over her own children.
The seventh precept is to perform circumcision on the eighth day of life and remove the defilement of the foreskin. Because that living creature is the eighth grade, compared to the other grades. And that soul that flies away and emerges from it must appear before it on the eighth day, as it in itself is the eighth grade.
“Jacob lifted his eyes and saw, and behold, Esau came, and with him four hundred men. He divided the children among Leah, and Rachel, and the two maidservants” (Genesis 33:1). “Jacob lifted his eyes and saw…” Rabbi Levi said: A lion was angry at the animals and beasts. They said: Who will go and placate it? This fox said to them: ‘Come here, as I know three hundred parables, and I will placate him.’ They said to it: ‘Let us go.’ It walked a bit and stopped. They said: ‘What is this?’ It said to them: ‘I forgot one hundred.’ They said to it: ‘We will suffice even with two hundred.’ It walked a bit and stopped. They said: ‘What is this?’ It said to them: ‘I forgot one hundred more.’ They said to it: ‘We will suffice even with one hundred.’ When they reached there, it said: ‘I forgot them all. Instead, let each and every one placate for itself.’ So, Jacob our patriarch; Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [Initially Jacob said] I have the ability to pray. Rabbi Levi said: [Initially Jacob said] I have the ability to organize a war. But when he arrived: “He divided the children…” – he said: Let the merit of each and every person stand on his behalf.
It is written (in Is. 2:2): AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS THAT IN THE LATTER DAYS THE MOUNTAIN OF THE HOUSE OF THE LORD SHALL BE ESTABLISHED …. This text is related (to Job 8:7): THOUGH YOUR BEGINNING WAS TRIFLING (rt.: Ts'R), . to teach you that everyone who is troubled (rt.: Ts'R) from his beginning has rest at his end. You have no one who was more troubled (rt.: Ts'R) than Abraham, who was cast into a fiery furnace and went into exile from his ancestral home. Moreover, sixteen kings oppressed him. He also stood the test of ten trials and buried Sarah. Yet in the end he had rest. (Gen. 24:1) NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD, ADVANCED IN YEARS, AND THE LORD BLESSED ABRAHAM . Isaac was troubled (rt.: Ts'R) in his youth, for the Philistines were jealous of him, [as stated] (in Gen. 26:16): AND ABIMELECH SAID UNTO ISAAC: GO AWAY FROM US, FOR YOU HAVE BECOME HAVE BECOME TOO POWERFUL FOR US. In the end they begged him for mercy, [as stated] (in vs. 27): AND ISAAC SAID UNTO THEM: WHY HAVE YOU COME UNTO ME…. Jacob also was troubled (rt.: Ts'R) in his youth, as stated (in Ps. 129:1): THEY HAVE HARASSED ME GREATLY FROM MY YOUTH, LET ISRAEL NOW SAY. While he was in his mothers belly, Esau wanted to kill him, as stated (in Gen. 25:22): BUT THE CHILDREN STRUGGLED WITHIN HER…. [Moreover, when he received the blessings, (according to Gen. 27:41:) THEN ESAU HATED JACOB …, AND ESAU SAID IN HIS HEART: . So he fled to Laban and was troubled (rt.: Ts'R) over his daughter, and after that Laban wanted to kill him, as stated (in Deut. 26:5): AN ARAMEAN WOULD HAVE DESTROYED MY ANCESTOR. (This is required sense by the midrash. A more usual translation would read: A WANDERING ARAMEAN WAS MY ANCESTOR.) He went away from him and encountered Esau, as stated (in Gen. 33:1): NOW JACOB RAISED HIS EYES AND SAW ESAU COMING…. There came upon him the trouble over Dinah and the trouble over Joseph. Yet in the end he had rest, [as stated] (in Gen. 47:12): AND JOSEPH SUSTAINED HIS FATHER …. Ergo (in Job 8:7): THOUGH YOUR BEGINNING WAS TRIFLING (rt.: Ts'R), .
(Deut. 7:12:) “And it shall come to pass if you heed [these statutes].” What is written above the matter (in Deut. 7:7)? “It is not because you are the most numerous of all the peoples [that the Lord desired you and chose you. Rather you are the least of all the peoples].” It is not because you are the most numerous of all the nations,” and it was not because you fulfilled more commandments than they; for the nations do more commandments that they were not commanded than you, and they magnify My name more than you. Thus it is stated (in Mal. 1:11-12), “For from the rising of the sun until its setting My name is great among the nations, [and in every place incense is offered to My name, even a pure oblation; for My name is great among the nations]…. But you desecrate it when you say the table of the Lord is defiled, and its special food is treated with scorn [like ordinary] food.” (Deut. 7:7:) “Rather you were the least of all the peoples.” Rather, because you diminish yourselves for Me, therefore I love you.’ And so it says (in Mal. 1:2-3), “’I have loved you,’ says the Lord …. ‘But I have hated Esau….’” It also says (in Hos. 14:5), “I will heal their veering and love them voluntarily….” My soul has volunteered to love them, even though they were not worthy; and so it says (in Deut. 7:8), “Because the Lord loves you […].” It is written (in Is. 2:2), “And it shall come to pass that in the latter days the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains….” This text is related (to Job 8:7), “Though your beginning was trifling (rt.: ts'r), [your end shall greatly flourish].” [This verse is here] to teach you that everyone who is troubled (rt.: ts'r) from his beginning will have it well at his end. You have no one who was more troubled (rt.: ts'r) than Abraham, who was cast into a fiery furnace and went into exile from his ancestral home. Moreover, sixteen kings pursued him. He also stood the test of ten trials and buried Sarah. Yet in the end he had rest, as stated (Gen. 24:1), “Now Abraham was old, advanced in years, and the Lord blessed [Abraham in all things].” So too was Isaac troubled (rt.: ts'r) in his youth, for the Philistines were jealous of him, [as stated] (in Gen. 26:16), “And Abimelech said unto Isaac, ‘Go away from us, [for you have become have become too powerful for us].’” But in the end they begged him [for mercy], as stated (in vs. 27-28), “And Isaac said unto them, ‘Why have you come unto me…?’ And they said, ‘We have clearly seen….’” Jacob also was troubled (rt.: ts'r) in his youth, as stated (in Ps. 129:1), “’They have harassed me greatly from my youth,’ let Israel now say.” While he was in his mother’s belly, Esau sought to kill him, as stated (in Gen. 25:22), “But the children struggled [within her].” [Moreover,] when he received the blessings (according to Gen. 27:41), “Then Esau hated Jacob …, and Esau said in his heart, ‘Let the days of mourning for my father come, [and I will kill my brother Jacob]’.” So he fled to Laban and was troubled (rt.: ts'r) over his daughters, and after that Laban sought to kill him, as stated (in Deut. 26:5), “An Aramean would have destroyed my ancestor.” (This is required sense by the midrash. A more usual translation would read: A WANDERING ARAMEAN WAS MY ANCESTOR.) He went away from him and encountered Esau, as stated (in Gen. 33:1), “Now Jacob raised his eyes and saw Esau coming….” There came upon him the trouble over Dinah, the trouble over Rachel and the trouble over Joseph. But in the end he had rest, [as stated] (in Gen. 47:12), “And Joseph sustained his father [and his brothers]….” Ergo (in Job 8:7), “Though your beginning was trifling (rt.: ts'r), your end shall greatly flourish.” Another interpretation (of Is. 2:2), “the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains… and Mount Tabor shall become very tall.” A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the palace (Palterin. Gk.: praitorion; Lat. praetorium.) children of a king. They went down from the city and killed lions, tigers, and bears in the forest. Then they brought them and hung them opposite the city gate, so that all the people in the city were amazed from those lions. The Holy One, blessed be he, did so with Sisera. [When] Sisera came against Israel on Mount Tabor; (according to Jud. 5:20), “The stars fought from the heavens; from their courses they fought with Sisera.” (Cf. Pes. 118b, according to which the stars descended and heated the iron implements in Sisera’s army.) All began to be amazed, for there had never been an event like this, when the stars came down from the heavens to make war with flesh and blood. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “In this world the stars have fought on your behalf, but in the world to come (according to Zech. 14:3-4), ‘Then the Lord will come forth and fight with those nations [as when He fights in the day of battle]. And His feet shall stand in that day [upon the Mount of Olives]….’ And [so on through] all that section (of Zechariah).” Then everyone will see and point Him out with the finger, as stated (in Is. 25:9), “In that day they shall say, ‘See, this is our God; [we waited for Him, and He delivered us. This is the Lord; we waited for Him. Let us rejoice and be glad in His salvation].’”
His master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph (Gen. 38:7). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not; and make their loins continually to totter (Ps. 69:24). You find that the righteous are exalted through their eyes, as it is said: And Abraham lifted his eyes and saw the place (Gen. 22:4); Abraham lifted his eyes and he saw, and behold, it was a ram (ibid., v. 13): and also: Abraham lifted his eyes, and looked, and lo, three men stood over against him (ibid. 18:2); Isaac lifted up his eyes, as is said: And Isaac went out to meditate in the field at eventide; and he lifted up his eyes (ibid. 24:63); and with regard to Jacob it likewise says: Jacob lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, Esau came (ibid. 33:1). Wicked men, however, are degraded through their eyes, as it is said: And Lot lifted up his eyes and beheld all the plain of the Jordan (ibid. 13:10). This refers to Sodom, which had been previously selected by Abraham, but to which Lot went, and where he behaved as they did. That is why his name was Lot. For Lot means accursed (lut), and that is what happened to him. And Balak the son of Zippor saw (Num. 22:2), and he was also degraded through his eyes. You may explain every instance in which a wicked man saw in the same way.
Amalek himself notwithstanding, it is almost expected that a descendent of Esav would be in conflict with the descendants of Ya’akov. For even if there was an apparently peaceful reconciliation between Ya’akov and Esav back in Bereshit 33:1–17, the story is nuanced enough to leave several rabbinic voices wondering whether Esav’s descendants can be trusted. Likewise, we continue to wonder whether there would have been continued resentment with regard to the blessing and birthright that Esav lost to Ya’akov and his descendants. (See Sifrei Bamidbar 69.)
That same night he arose, and taking his two wives, his two maidservants, and his eleven sons, (sons NJPS “children”; Heb. yeladim. Given the specified number, the reference cannot include Jacob’s daughter(s). English idiom warrants the greater gender specificity.) he crossed the ford of the Jabbok.
Yaakov raised his eyes and saw that Eisov was coming, and with him there were four hundred men. He then divided the children among Leah, Rochel and the two handmaids [concubines].
And Jakob lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, Esau came, and with him four hundred men of war. And he divided the children unto Leah, and to Rahel, and to the two concubines,
| וַיָּ֧שֶׂם אֶת־הַשְּׁפָח֛וֹת וְאֶת־יַלְדֵיהֶ֖ן רִֽאשֹׁנָ֑ה וְאֶת־לֵאָ֤ה וִֽילָדֶ֙יהָ֙ אַחֲרֹנִ֔ים וְאֶת־רָחֵ֥ל וְאֶת־יוֹסֵ֖ף אַחֲרֹנִֽים׃ | 2 E | putting the maids and their children first, Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last. |
"And He called him E-l” (Genesis 33:2). The Gemara (Megillah 18a) explains that Hashem called Yaakov “E-l.” The term ויקרא (to call) signifies endearment, understanding, and connection, as seen in "Hashem called the light Day," meaning He endowed light with control over the day. Similarly, this divine connection was granted to Yaakov, symbolizing his ability to draw out G-dly energy in this physical world. This was part of Yitzhak’s blessing to Yaakov: “And He shall give you” His G-dliness, ensuring that Yaakov's actions would always be connected to divine sources. Yaakov merited this more than any other tzadik because he represented all of Israel, upon whom Hashem places His name, as in “our G-d” in prayer. This fulfilled Yaakov’s request, “And Hashem will be an Elokim to me.” The subsequent story of Dina highlights that Yaakov was punished for not fulfilling his vow immediately, as he should have once Hashem’s promise was realized.
[AND RACHEL AND JOSEPH HINDERMOST.] He placed Rachel and Joseph last so that they might possibly escape. Jacob did this because of his great love for them.
וישם, the most beloved he placed last, hoping that Esau’s anger had been blunted by the time he met them.
ואת לאה וילדיה אחרנים AND LEAH AND HER CHILDREN AFTER — The more behind — the more beloved (Genesis Rabbah 78:8).
Es ist möglich, daß bei dieser Anordnung das Gefühl und die größere Anhänglichkeit maßgebend gewesen; allein notwendig ist es nicht; wir werden in V. 6 und 7 sofort andere und wahrscheinlichere Motive angedeutet finden.
He placed the maidservants and their children first, Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last. Since Jacob was worried about Esau’s possibly hostile behavior, he positioned his family in the opposite order of their importance in his eyes. He placed the maidservants and their children in front, behind them Leah and her children, followed lastly by his most beloved wife, Rachel, and her son.
“Rachel and Joseph last” [33:2]. Jacob placed Bilhah and her children and Zilpah and her children in front of Esau and then Leah with her children and Rachel with Joseph walking last. Jacob loved Rachel very much. That is why Rachel went last. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:2.)
Because Jacob saw through the Holy Spirit the oppression of the last exile, in the end of days, it is said of him, "Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed" (Beresheet 32:8). As a result, he divided the holy nation in exile into three parts, as it is written: "And he put the handmaids and their children foremost" (Beresheet 33:2). At first in the exile of Edom, "and Leah and her children after, and Rachel and Joseph last of all." Because he saw their eventual poverty and suffering, (he prayed for them): "So that I come back to my father's house in peace" (Beresheet 28:21). (He prayed): "And will give me bread to eat, and clothing to wear" (Ibid.)
“He placed the maidservants and their children first, and Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last” (Genesis 33:2). “He placed the maidservants and their children first” – this is to say: The farther back one is, the more he is beloved. “He passed before them and prostrated himself earthward seven times, until he reached his brother” (Genesis 33:3). “He passed before them” – that is what is written: “As a father has mercy upon his son” (Psalms 103:13). Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: Like the most merciful of the patriarchs. Which is the most merciful of the patriarchs? Rabbi Yehuda said: This is Abraham. Abraham said: “Far be it from You to do a thing like this” (Genesis 18:25). (Abraham prayed to avert the destruction of Sodom.) Rabbi Levi said: Jacob – “he passed before them.” He said: It is preferable that he harm me and not them. “And prostrated himself earthward seven times” – why seven? It is based on: “The righteous man falls seven times and rises” (Proverbs 24:16). Another matter: Why seven? He [Jacob] said to him [Esau]: ‘May you consider yourself as though you are situated behind seven partitions and sitting and judging, and I am being judged before you, and you are filled with mercy upon me.’ Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: He did not cease prostrating and progressing, prostrating and progressing, until he introduced the attribute of justice into the attribute of mercy. (So that the attribute of justice would be subjected to the attribute of mercy. )
“Wisdom is better than instruments of battle, and one sinner destroys much good” (Ecclesiastes 9:18). “Wisdom is better than instruments of battle” – this is the wisdom of Jacob; “than instruments of battle” – of Esau the wicked. Rabbi Levi said: He armed them (Jacob armed his sons and the other members of his camp.) with weapons on the inside and dressed them in white garments on the outside, and he prepared himself for three matters: for prayer, for a gift, and for war. For prayer, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “Please rescue me from the hand of my brother” (Genesis 32:12). For a gift, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “You shall say: From your servant Jacob, it is a gift sent” (Genesis 32:19). For war, from where is it derived? As it is stated: “He placed the maidservants [and their children first, and Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last.] He passed before them and prostrated himself earthward” (Genesis 33:2–3). He said: It is preferable that he harm me and not my children. (Thus, Jacob was prepared for the fact that Esau might act violently upon their encounter.) “Esau returned on that day on his way to Se’ir” (Genesis 33:16). Why to Se’ir? Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani, Rabbi Elazar said: It was due to a promissory note. (The descendants of Isaac were to receiv the Land of Israel and were to be enslaved in Egypt. Esau preferred to forgo the Land of Israel and forgo the enslavement in Egypt. The midrash refers to the coming enslavement as though it were a debt set forth in a promissory note.) Rabbi Shmuel said: It was due to shame. (He was ashamed for having sold his birthright.) “And one sinner destroys much good” – this is Esau who lost all the goodness and the gifts of the World to Come.
And he gave unto Moses when he had made an end of speaking (Exod. 31:18). Scripture states with reference to this verse: A man’s gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men (Prov. 18:16). The gift a man gives out of his own possessions resounds to his advantage, as is told about Abun Ramaah, (See Deut. R. chapter 4, sect. 8, where he is called Abin the deceiver, not deceitful, simply cunning in giving charity.) who resided in Bozrah. (An Idumean town in which a number of scholars lived.) Our rabbis went there to obtain a contribution from him. However, he refused to contribute anything at all until all the men of the community had made their contributions. Then he contributed an amount equal to all the others. That is why he was called Abun, the deceiver. What did our rabbis do after that? They sat him amongst themselves to fulfill what is written: A man’s gift maketh room for him. Another explanation of And He gave unto Moses is contained in the verse: Thou hast also given me Thy shield of salvation, and Thy right hand hath holden me up; and Thy condescension hath made me great (Ps. 18:26). Thou hast given me Thy shield of salvation refers to the Israelites, who trust in the Holy One, blessed be He; Thy right hand hath holden me up alludes to the Torah, as it says: At His right hand a fiery law unto them (Deut. 33:2); And Thy condescension hath made me great relates to the condescension of the Holy One, blessed be He.
You may be assured that the ark is beloved (by God), for just as the Throne of Glory is beloved, so too is the ark beloved, for the Torah was placed within it. Because the Torah was located at the right hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is said: At His right hand was a fiery law unto them (Deut. 33:2), therefore the ark was precious because the Torah was placed within it. As it is said: The tables were the work of God (Exod. 32:16).
You find that when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave the Torah, it was entirely of fire, as it is said: At His right hand was a fiery law unto them (Deut. 33:2). Our sages stated: The law was of fire, the parchment was of fire, its writings were of fire, the thread was of fire, as it is said: At His right hand was a fiery law. The face of the agent (Moses) became fiery, as is said: And they were afraid to come nigh him (Exod. 34:30). The angels who descended with it were of fire, as it is said: Who makes winds Thy messengers (Ps. 104:4). The mountain burned with fire (Deut. 4:11), and it was given within a fire consuming fire, as it is said: For the Lord thy God is a devouring fire (ibid. 4:24). And upon the earth He made thee to see His great fire (ibid., v. 36). The Divine Word also came forth from the midst of fire. When they beheld the lightning and the burning letters, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Do not imagine that they have much power, and He began to recite the words I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other gods (Exod. 20:2). (The Ten Commandments. Cf. above, “In the Beginning,” n.) Why were they described as gods? R. Yosé said: He did so in order not to give the people of the world the opportunity to say that they were not called by His name because if He had done so, it would have acknowledged that they had power. But they were called by His name, and yet have no power. When were they first called by His name? In the days of Enoch the son of Seth, as it is said: Then began man to call in the name of the Lord (Gen. 4:25). It was then that the Mediterranean Sea rose and inundated a third of the world, and the Holy One, blessed be He, said: Ye have done a new thing in calling yourself by My name, and so I will do something new and call Myself by My name. Therefore Scripture says: That calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth, the Lord is His name (Amos 5:8).
AND THE LAD WAS WITH THE SONS OF BILHAH. His actions were those of youth: he would touch up his eyes and dress his hair. With the sons of Bilhah, that is to say, he associated with the sons of Bilhah because his brothers slighted them as being the sons of handmaids, and he therefore befriended them. Their evil report — he told his father about every wrong which he discerned in his brothers, the sons of Leah. This is the language of Rashi. But if this be so, why did the children of the handmaids not save him later on, inasmuch as he loved and befriended them, and told his father about his brothers’ slighting them. And if we say that they feared their brothers, they were four, (Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.) and Reuben was with them, (As expressly stated further on in Verses 21-22.) and, with Joseph himself, [they made a total of six]. Surely they would have prevailed against them especially when considering that the remaining five sons of Leah would not wage war against them. Moreover, it appears from Scripture that all (“All,” except Reuben, the eldest, and Benjamin, the youngest, (Rabbeinu Bachya, p. 306, in my edition.)) of the brothers concurred in the sale of Joseph. However, according to our Rabbis in Bereshith Rabbah, (84:7.) he uttered slander against all of them. (And not, as Rashi has it, that the evil report concerned only the sons of Leah.) In my opinion the correct interpretation is that this verse returns to explain that which it mentioned above, and its purport [is as if the phrases in the verse were transposed as follows]: Joseph being a lad of seventeen years, was feeding the flock together with his brothers, the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives. A similar case requiring transposition of phrases is found in this Seder: (Sedrah or Parsha (section).) And they dreamed a dream both of them in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were bound in the prison. (40:5.) The verse returns to explain the word shneihem (both of them) which it had mentioned at the outset. Its purport, [after the phrases have been suitably transposed, is as follows]: And both of them dreamed a dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were bound in the prison, each man according to the interpretation of his dream. There are many similar verses. It may be that the word v’hu (and he was) requires another similar word, as if it were written: “and he was a lad, and he was with the sons of Bilhah and with the sons of Zilpah, who were his father’s wives.” The verse thus states that because he was a lad he was constantly with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives, never being separated from them on account of his youth, for their father had commanded them to watch over him and serve him, not the sons of the mistresses, and he brought an evil report concerning them (The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah.) to their father. It was for this reason that these four brothers (Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.) hated Joseph. Following that, the verse says that his father loved him. Now when the other brothers (The sons of Leah.) saw that their father loved him more than all, they became jealous of him and they hated him. Thus Joseph is found to be hated by all: the sons of the mistresses were jealous of him because Jacob loved him more than them although they were also sons of a mistress as he was, and the sons of the handmaids, who would otherwise not have been jealous of his superior position over them, hated him because he brought their evil report to their father. The purpose of the redundant expression, dibatham ra’ah (their evil report), is to magnify, (I.e., to indicate that the report was of an exceedingly evil nature.) for dibah itself connotes evil. (Otherwise, why does Scripture add the word ra’ah (evil)? It does so in order to magnify the evil nature of the report.) Now according to the opinion of Rashi it is possible for dibah to be a good report. Thus when Scripture uses the expression, “he brings dibah“, it means that he tells what he sees, (He reports the truth.) but when it uses the term, he bringeth forth ‘dibah,’ it refers to the fool who speaks falsehood. (This opinion that dibah connotes evil only when used in conjunction with the word motzi (bring forth) is borne out by Numbers 13:32.) In line with the literal meaning of Scripture, the fact that it calls one a na’ar (lad) when he was seventeen years of age (Ramban’s intent is to disagree with Rashi’s interpretation of na’ar, which is that his actions were those of a youth.) presents no difficulty for since he was the youngest among them, it calls him by that name, indicating that he was not as sturdy as his brothers and therefore needed to be with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah on account of his youth. Now of Rehoboam, Solomon’s son, it is written, And Rehoboam was young and faint-hearted and could not withstand them, (II Chronicles 13:7.) yet he was forty-one years old when he began to reign. (Ibid., 12:13.) Similarly the verse: Is it well with the lad Absalom? (II Samuel 18:32. Now although Scripture does not state how old Absalom was at the time of his death, it would appear certain that he was about thirty years old since he was born to David in Hebron (ibid., 3:3-5), and David ruled thirty-three years in Jerusalem. The rebellion of Absalom occurred three years before David’s death (see Seder Hadoroth, year 2921). Hence Absalom, at his death, was at least thirty years old, yet David calls him na’ar.) And Benjamin, upon going down to Egypt, was older than Joseph was now, (For Joseph was separated from his father for twenty-two years. Therefore Benjamin must have been at least thirty years old at the time he went down to Egypt.) and yet Scripture frequently refers to him as na’ar. (Further, 44:31 and 33.) Now Onkelos translated v’hu na’ar as “he grew up with the sons of Bilhah.” Thus the verse states that from the time he was a lad he was in their company. They raised him as a father would, and they served him. This interpretation is also correct according to the literal interpretation of Scripture, which I offered as an explanation, namely that Scripture relates that he brought evil report concerning [the sons of the handmaids, who, according to Onkelos, raised him. This is why they hated him, whereas] the sons of the mistresses hated him because of their jealousy, as explained above. (Ramban thus indicates that the authoritative interpretation of Onkelos is here consistent with his own.) The meaning of the expression, His father’s wives, is that they were his “wives” for he took them as such. Scripture calls them “handmaids” only when they are mentioned together with Rachel and Leah, who were their mistresses. Similarly, And he put the handmaids and their children foremost, (Above, 33:2.) as if to say that because they were handmaids of Rachel and Leah, Jacob placed them before them in a more exposed position. Similarly, And he lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine. (Above, 35:22.) [The word “concubine” is used to indicate] that if she were a mistress it would not have occurred. It is possible that during the lifetime of Rachel and Leah, Scripture calls them “handmaids” and “concubines,” but now that they had died [Jacob] took them as wives.
He placed the handmaids [concubines] and their children foremost, Leah and her sons behind them, and Rochel and Yoseif in the rear.
and placed the concubines and their sons foremost; for he said, If Esau come to destroy the children and abuse the women, he will do it with them, and meantime we will arise and encounter him in fight; and Leah and her children after, and Rahel and Joseph after them.
| וְה֖וּא עָבַ֣ר לִפְנֵיהֶ֑ם וַיִּשְׁתַּ֤חוּ אַ֙רְצָה֙ שֶׁ֣בַע פְּעָמִ֔ים עַד־גִּשְׁתּ֖וֹ עַד־אָחִֽיו׃ | 3 E | He himself went on ahead and bowed low to the ground seven times until he was near his brother. |
וישתחו ארצה שבע פעמים “he bowed earthwards seven times.” The Torah could have written “three times,” as we find in connection with David and Yonathan (Samuel I 20,41) where we are told: ויפול לאפיו ארצה וישתחו שלש פעמים, that David bowed his face to the ground and prostrated himself three times before Yonathan (the crown prince). The reason the Torah here mentions the number seven is to remind us that when a righteous person falls down even seven times, he will rise again and regain his composure (compare Proverbs 24,16).
והוא עבר לפניהם, as a father who has compassion on his children. He offered himself as the butt of Esau’s anger hoping thereby to save the lives of his children. Either Esau would agree not to harm the children or he would engage Esau in battle to try and save his children if Esau refused his offer of reconciliation.
שבע פעמים. According to Bereshit Rabbah 78,8 the reason why he prostrated himself 7 times before Esau is based on Proverbs 24,16 שבע יפול צדיק, that the righteous fall down seven times before remaining upright after getting up.
עבר לפניהם [AND HE HIMSELF] PASSED BEFORE THEM — He thought: if that wicked man comes to fight let him fight me first (Genesis Rabbah 78:8).
And he, Jacob, passed before them, his family members, and prostrated himself earthward seven times, which is a symbolic number, until his approach to his brother. This manner of approaching, by stopping for several prostrations, was an expression of honor and submission toward Esau, even before a word had passed between them.
“He himself went on ahead” [33:3]. However, Jacob himself went ahead in front of his household. He thought, let Esau struggle with me first. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:3.)
IN its primary signification the Hebrew ‘abar, “to pass,” refers to the motion of a body in space, and is chiefly applied to living creatures moving at some distance in a straight line, e.g., “And He passed over (‘abar) before them” (Gen. 33:3); “Pass (‘abor) before the people” (Exod. 17:5). Instances of this kind are numerous. The verb was next applied to the passage of sound through air, as “And they caused a sound to pass (va-ya‘abiru) through out the camp” (Exod. 36:6); “That I hear the Lord’s people spreading the report” (ma‘abirim) (1 Sam. 2:24).
“He placed the maidservants and their children first, and Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last” (Genesis 33:2). “He placed the maidservants and their children first” – this is to say: The farther back one is, the more he is beloved. “He passed before them and prostrated himself earthward seven times, until he reached his brother” (Genesis 33:3). “He passed before them” – that is what is written: “As a father has mercy upon his son” (Psalms 103:13). Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: Like the most merciful of the patriarchs. Which is the most merciful of the patriarchs? Rabbi Yehuda said: This is Abraham. Abraham said: “Far be it from You to do a thing like this” (Genesis 18:25). (Abraham prayed to avert the destruction of Sodom.) Rabbi Levi said: Jacob – “he passed before them.” He said: It is preferable that he harm me and not them. “And prostrated himself earthward seven times” – why seven? It is based on: “The righteous man falls seven times and rises” (Proverbs 24:16). Another matter: Why seven? He [Jacob] said to him [Esau]: ‘May you consider yourself as though you are situated behind seven partitions and sitting and judging, and I am being judged before you, and you are filled with mercy upon me.’ Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: He did not cease prostrating and progressing, prostrating and progressing, until he introduced the attribute of justice into the attribute of mercy. (So that the attribute of justice would be subjected to the attribute of mercy. )
"As a father has compassion for his children, so the Lord has compassion for those who fear Him." Rabbi Chiyah said, "Like a merciful father." Who is this? Rabbi Yehuda, son of Simon, said, "This is Abraham," as it says, "Will You sweep away the innocent along with the guilty?" (Genesis 18:23). Rabbi Berachya said, "Like our father Jacob," as it says, "And he passed over before them" (Genesis 33:3). He said, "It is better for me that He should inflict harm upon me rather than upon my children. Be compassionate like a father on his children."
Let me proceed to explain the nature of Benjamin's sanctity. Benjamin was on a loftier spiritual plane than his other brothers because he never bowed down to Esau who represented the סטרא דשמאלא, the left side of the diagram of emanations, the home of Samael. (At the time of the fateful encounter between Jacob and Esau he had not yet been born). The fact that his father Jacob bowed down to Esau cannot be held against Benjamin. The Zohar, commenting on the relevant verse in Genesis 33,3 (Sullam edition page 35), in which Jacob is described as prostrating himself before Esau seven times, writes as follows: "Rabbi Eliezer asked how Jacob, the choicest of the patriarchs, could contravene the injunction of the Torah in Exodus 34,14: 'do not prostrate yourself before any other deity for the Lord is a jealous G–d?' The answer given is that far from bowing down to the anti-G–d part that Esau represented, Jacob in fact prostrated himself before the שכינה, for we find at the beginning of the same verse: והוא עבר לפניהם, "It proceeded ahead of them." This excuse can be used only for Jacob, but not for his sons. The "11 stars," i.e. the other tribes bowed to Esau, not to the שכינה. The knees which bent to Esau, representative of Samael, were the cause that Samael succeeded in inflicting an injury on Jacob's thigh joint. That injury represented judgment מדה כנגד מדה, tit for tat, because Esau's thigh joint bore the imprint of the original serpent. We have pointed out that the Targum of יודע ציד, hunter, (Esau's profession) is נחשירכן. The Tziyoni reads this as two words נחש ירכן, seeing that the serpent's image [snake shaped birthmark? Ed.] was tattooed on Esau's thigh joint. We dealt with this in our commentary on Toldot. Because of this additional dimension of sanctity possessed by Benjamin even before his birth, G–d had prophesied to Jacob in 35, 11, ומלכים מחלציך יצאו, "Kings will emerge from your loins." People bending their knees to the kings from the tribe of Benjamin, will be the fitting contrast to the other tribes who had bent their knees to Esau instead. This stands out particularly in view of the list of kings descended from Esau that are listed in פרשת וישלח. I have mentioned that righteous Jewish kings represent the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth.
אעבדך שבע שנים, "I shall serve you for seven years, etc." This צדיק had a habit of humbling himself by using the number seven. When he bowed down to Esau later on he is also reported as having done so seven times (Genesis 33,3). This is the mystical connection with Proverbs 24,16: "the righteous will rise even if he falls seven times." Perhaps he wanted to demonstrate that he considered Rachel worth more than the maximum servitude that a Hebrew servant serves with his master (Exodus 21,2).
ואפו עשר נשים, “and ten women will bake (in one oven).” This number is not to be understood literally, but is an example of an unusually large number, not appropriate for the subject under discussion. We find an example of this in Job 19,3 where he said: “you humiliate me ten times.” It means that Job complained about being humiliated time and again. The reason the number “ten” is used to illustrate such concepts of something occurring frequently is because this number is the conclusion of a number of digits which are all included in it. The number “seven” has similar properties as it includes all the days of the week, a recurring phenomenon. When Solomon writes in Proverbs 24,16 that a righteous person can fall seven times and recover, this does not mean that he cannot recover an eighth time, but that he can recover after having fallen many times. The Torah describes Yaakov as prostrating himself before his brother Esau “seven times” in Genesis 33,3. The number “seven” need not be understood literally but is a metaphor for “many times.” The reason that that number has become the symbol of “many times” may be that the only sequential combination of letters in the aleph bet which produces the number seven are the letters ג and ד, a combination of these two numbers as letters yields the word דג, fish, a species whose rate of multiplying is described as ישרצו, in Genesis 1,20 as “the waters shall teem with fish.” Yaakov applied this to human beings also when he blessed Joseph’s children wishing וידגו לרב בקרב הארץ, “may they increase abundantly as fish,” in Genesis 48,16. We may therefore view both the number seven and the number ten as metaphors for large numbers of something.
AND THE ETERNAL SAID UNTO MOSES: PASS ON BEFORE THE PEOPLE. This is similar in usage to the following expressions: he [Joseph] caused them to pass into cities; (Genesis 47:21.) and I will make thee to pass with thine enemies into a land which thou knowest not. (Jeremiah 15:14.) Thus the meaning thereof here is: “go away from them to another place,” [as will be explained further]. Perhaps this is similar to the expressions: and he [Ahimaaz] overran the Cushite; (II Samuel 18:23.) and he [Jacob] himself passed over before them, (Genesis 33:3.) meaning that he [Jacob] went in the forefront of them. The purport of this verse is that the people were in Rephidim, and the rock from which the waters were to come was in Horeb, (Verse 6: Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb.) this being Mount Sinai, according to the opinion of the former ones, (I.e., the Rabbis of the Talmud. See Shabbath 89 a: “Mount Sinai bears five names: the wilderness of Zin, Horeb, etc.”) or in my opinion, some city near the mountain, as I will yet explain. (At the beginning of Seder Yithro (18:1).) Moses therefore had to go first before the people, to pass on from Rephidim to Horeb — a distance of one more parsah [a Persian mile] or more — from the camp before them. It was for this reason that G-d said to him, Pass on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel… and go. That is to say, “Go until you will see Me stand before you upon the rock in Horeb.” Now Moses hit the rock, and water came out of it. Scripture however does not relate that the congregation and their cattle drank, as it does in the second incident [at the waters of Meribah], (Numbers 20:11. This took place in Kadesh. See also above, Note 414.) for it is self-understood that they did so. It is clear that the people did not go to Horeb to drink, since they did not arrive in front of Mount Sinai until afterwards in the third month. (Further, 19:1.) Instead, they sent their young men and their cattle there to draw water and bring it to them, as is customary in camps. It appears likely to me that the waters — cold flowing waters (Jeremiah 18:14.) — came out from the rock in Horeb and flowed to Rephidim, and there the people drank them. This is Scripture’s intent in saying, He brought streams out of the rock, and caused waters to run down like rivers, (Psalms 78:16.) and it is further written, He opened the rock, and waters gushed out; they ran, a river in the dry places. (Ibid., 105:41.) The verse stating, Behold, He smote the rock, that waters gushed out, and streams overflowed, (Ibid., 78:20.) also applies to the rock in Horeb, in line with the plain meaning of Scripture. (According to the Midrash, however, this verse (Psalms 78:20) was said with reference to Moses’ smiting the rock in Kadesh, or, as they are called, the waters of Meribah (Bamidbar Rabbah 19:8).) The second rock in Kadesh, (Numbers 20:1.) [instead of gushing forth water], became cleft with a sort of spring welling forth waters, and therefore Scripture states, That is ‘the well’ whereof the Eternal said unto Moses, etc., (Ibid., 21:16.) and Israel said in the Song, ‘The well,’ which the princes digged, (Ibid., Verse 18.) for it was like a well that was dug. It is for this reason that Scripture says there, and the congregation drank, and their cattle, (Ibid., 20:11.) which means that there they drank from it at that place immediately, but here [in Horeb], overflowing rivers came from it and they drank of it in their homes at their will. Now although according to the tradition of our Rabbis, it was all Miriam’s Well, (“That is to say, the rock which was in Rephidim (Horeb) is the same as the one in Kadesh, this being ‘Miriam’s Well,’ which accompanied the Israelites on all their marches during the forty years’ wandering” (Rabbeinu Bachya, Vol. II, p. 153 in my edition). The tradition is mentioned in Bamidbar Rabbah 20:2. This miracle was wrought for the merits of the prophetess Miriam. Ramban’s intent is thus clear: If it was all Miriam’s Well, how can you explain its different forms of activity, for in Horeb it was like a gushing stream, and in Kadesh it was like a well?) it is possible that on the first occasion [in Horeb] and during all their forty years’ wandering, the waters came gushing out from the rock like overflowing rivers. The second time, [in Kadesh], as a punishment for that which took place there, it became [only] like a dug well that was full of fresh water [not a gushing spring].
ויוסף מלאך ה' עובר AND THE ANGEL OF THE LORD WENT FURTHER — went further in front of him — it went on so as to be before him in another spot. It is similar to, (Genesis 33:3) “And he passed in front of them”. — And there is a Midrashic explanation in Tanchuma: What reason had he to stand in three places? He (the Angel) showed him (Balaam) symbols referring to the three patriarchs (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 8).
The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the word over is the language of precedence? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that the verse states: “And Ahimaaz ran by the way of the plain, and overran [vaya’avor] the Cushite” (II Samuel 18:23), i.e., Ahimaaz overtook the Cushite. Abaye said: It is derived from here: “And he passed [avar] before them” (Genesis 33:3). And if you wish, say instead that the proof is from here: “And their king passed [vaya’avor] before them and the Lord at their head” (Micah 2:13).
The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the word over is a formulation of priority? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that the verse states: “And Ahimaaz ran by the way of the plain, and overran [vayya’avor] the Cushite” (II Samuel 18:23), i.e., Ahimaaz overtook the Cushite. Abaye said: It is derived from here: “And he passed [avar] before them” (Genesis 33:3). And if you wish, say instead that the proof is from here: “And their king passed [vayya’avor] before them and the Lord at their head” (Micah 2:13).
The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the word over is a formulation that means before an action is performed? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that this is as it is written: “And Ahimaaz ran by way of the square and he passed [vaya’avor] the Kushite” (II Samuel 18:23), i.e., Ahimaaz overtook the Kushite. Abaye said that it is derived from here: “And he passed [avar] before them” (Genesis 33:3). Some say that the proof is from here: “And their king shall pass on [vaya’avor] before them, and God at their head” (Micah 2:13).
The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the word over is the language of priority? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that the verse said: “And Ahimaaz ran by the way of the plain, and overran [vaya’avor] the Cushite” (II Samuel 18:23), i.e., Ahimaaz overtook the Cushite. Abaye said: It is derived from here: “And he passed [avar] before them” (Genesis 33:3). And if you wish, say instead that the proof is from here: “And their king passed [vaya’avor] before them and God at their head” (Micah 2:13).
§ The mishna continues: In a place where the custom is to recite a blessing when reciting hallel, he should recite a blessing. Abaye said: The Sages taught that the obligation to recite a blessing is dependent on custom only with regard to the blessing recited after hallel. However, before hallel, there is a mitzva to recite a blessing, as Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: With regard to all the mitzvot, one recites a blessing over them prior to [over] their performance. The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the word over is the language of priority? It is as Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that it is written: “And Ahimaaz ran by the way of the plain and overtook [vaya’avor] the Cushite” (II Samuel 18:23). Abaye said: It is derived from here: “And he passed [avar] before them” (Genesis 33:3). And if you wish, say instead that the proof is from here: “And their king passed [vaya’avor] before them and the Lord at their head” (Micah 2:13).
He went ahead of them, and he prostrated himself to the earth seven times, until he approached his brother.
And he himself went over before them, praying and asking mercy before the Lord; and he bowed upon the earth seven times, until he met with his brother.
| וַיָּ֨רׇץ עֵשָׂ֤ו לִקְרָאתוֹ֙ וַֽיְחַבְּקֵ֔הוּ וַיִּפֹּ֥ל עַל־צַוָּארָ֖ו וַׄיִּׄשָּׁׄקֵ֑ׄהׄוּׄ וַיִּבְכּֽוּ׃ | 4 E | Esau ran to greet him. He embraced him and, falling on his neck, he kissed him; and they wept. |
ויפול על צוארו, “he (Esau) embraced his neck”; the letter י in the word צואריו, is missing here.
וישקהו, “he kissed him;” this word has dots above the letters.
They wept. At that moment love for Eisov awakened in Yaakov as well. Similarly, whenever Eisov’s descendants genuinely acknowledge Yisrael’s greatness, Yisrael reciprocates with feelings of brotherhood.
[AND KISSED HIM.] The Midrashic interpretation concerning the dots on ve-yishakehu (Va-yishakehu has dots over it According to a Midrashic opinion this indicates that Esau did not kiss Jacob wholeheartedly. Cf. Yalkut Shimoni on this verse.) (and kissed him) is good for them that are drawn from the breasts. (That is, children. The term used by I.E. is taken from Is. 28:9.) It is obvious from the plain meaning of the text that Esau did not intend to harm Jacob, the proof being and they wept, as Joseph did with his brethren. (He kissed them and cried (Gen. 45:15). An alternate interpretation is, as Joseph did with his brother Benjamin (Ibid. v. 14).)
וישקהו, “and he kissed him.” The word is written with dots on top of the letters. We know that whenever the sages of the massorah have seen fit to place these dots on top of a word or a letter they did so in order to attract our attention. Here the reason they placed these dots was to let us know that this kiss was not whole-hearted. It was a kiss which originated in anger. We find a similarly motivated kiss in Proverbs 27,6 ונעתרות נשיקות שונא, “the kisses of an enemy are profuse.” Amos 1,11 explains the matter when he writes: ויטרוף לעד אפו ועברתו שמרה נצח, “because his anger raged unavailing, and his fury stormed forever. “
וירץ, when Esau saw that Yaakov had humbled himself so much before him, he forgave what he had done to him and his sense of compassion was stirred.
וישקהו, the word has a dot on each of the letters. In Bereshit Rabbah 78,9 Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says that everywhere where you find the dots do not cover each letter of the word underneath we give preference to the meaning of the text as is, without the dots. When there are more dots than letters, we give emphasis in our interpretation to the dots. In this instance, there are as many dots as there are letters in the word וישקהו, so that we understand that Esau kissed Esau sincerely with all his heart. To this Rabbi Yannai countered by asking that if this is indeed so, why bother to put any dots on the word if they do not affect the meaning? We therefore must interpret that originally Esau had intended to bite Yaakov’s neck feigning an embrace. G’d made his teeth as soft as wax and Yaakov’s neck as hard as ivory. ויבכו, one on account of his neck, the other on account of his teeth.
ויחבקהו AND EMBRACED HIM — His pity was aroused when he saw him prostrating himself so many times (Genesis Rabbah 78:8).
וישקהו AND HE KISSED HIM — Dots are placed above the letters of this word, and a difference of opinion is expressed in the Baraitha of Sifré (בהעלותך) as to what these dots are intended to suggest: some explain the dotting as meaning that he did not kiss him with his whole heart, whereas R Simeon the son of Johai said: Is it not well-known that Esau hated Jacob? But at that moment his pity was really aroused and he kissed him with his whole heart. (Sifrei Bamidbar 69.2)
daß hier in der Tat ein reines menschliches Gefühl in Esau zum Ausbruch gekommen, dafür bürgt das Wörtchen ויבכו, sie weinten. Einen Kuss kann man heucheln, Tränen, die in solchen Augenblicken ausbrechen, nicht. (בכה verwandt mit פקח ,בקע, ausbrechen, Tränen sind Tropfen aus dem Innersten der menschlichen Seele.( Dieser Kuss und diese Tränen lassen uns auch in Esau den Nachkommen Abrahams erkennen. In Esau kann nicht bloß der wilde Jäger gelegen haben, wie wäre er sonst fähig geworden, ein Beherrscher der ganzen Entwicklung der Menschheit zu werden. Das bloße Schwert, die bloße rohe Gewalt befähigt nicht dazu. Aber auch Esau legt nach und nach, und immer mehr und mehr das Schwert aus der Hand, gibt immer mehr und mehr der Humanität Raum, und zwar ist es gerade Jakob, an dem Esau zumeist Gelegenheit hat zu zeigen, daß und wie das Prinzip der Humanität bei ihm zum Durchbruch zu kommen anfängt. Wenn der Starke das Recht des Starken achtet, so mag es Klugheit sein. Erst wenn der Starke, wie hier Esau, dem Schwachen um den Hals fällt und das Schwert der Gewalt weithin von sich wirft, erst dann zeigt sich, daß Recht und Menschlichkeit in ihm zum Siege kommen.
וירץ עשו, his attitude changed suddenly when he realised to what extent Yaakov had humbled himself before him. It is of great concern to us seeing that we live among the descendants of Esau, people who are arrogant, consider themselves invincible. Yaakov’s conduct vis a vis Esau teaches that the only way to escape the sword of Esau is through self degradation and gifts. This corresponds to what our sages taught us (Taanit 20) that the curses of the prophet Achiyah Hashiloni were more beneficial to the Jewish people than the blessing showered upon them by Bileam. Achiyah had cursed the Jewish people describing them as a reed which bends in all directions, a reference to someone demeaning himself rather than facing up to adversaries. (Kings I 14,15) If the Jewish people during the period of the second Temple had taken his advice to heart, the Temple would not have been destroyed. Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai testified to this when he said “if not for the militant extremists the Romans would not have destroyed the Temple.”
The truth is that most of the time, "falling one another's neck" only is mentioned when there is a kiss, and therefore the text could have mentioned this, along with the weeping, without explicitly mentioning that they kissed; the kiss would have been understood implicitly like Ya'akov and Yosef in Gen. 46:29 ("And Yosef...went up to meet his father...and fell on his neck and wept on his neck a good while"). In the latter case, Yosef clearly kissed him without it having to be mentioned in the text. It's also possible that in a state of great emotional excitement one would be too wonderstruck and stunned to kiss the other person; perhaps this was the case with Yosef and Ya'akov. However, regarding Ya'akov and Esav there's no doubt that there was no great affection between them, certainly not the type of excitement that would lead to being wonderstruck and stunned.
There are those who explained these dots as saying that he did not kiss him wholeheartedly. Meaning: וישקהו has dots on all letters except the ש. Thus it is as if it is written ויקהו, as in הקהה את שיניו (blunt his teeth — Pesach Haggadah). This is because he intended to bite him.
Esau ran to meet him, embraced him, fell upon his neck, and kissed him; and they wept together.
“Esau ran to greet him” [33:4]. Esau ran toward Jacob and embraced him, kissed him, and they cried.
[2] Another explanation According to our father Jacob, he exclaimed and said, "Greatly have I been afflicted from my youth, let Israel now say" (Psalms 129:1). The Holy One, blessed be He, responded and said, "But in every trouble that entered upon you, was I not with you and saved you? I redeemed you from death in famine (Job 5:20), when Jacob saw that there was grain in Egypt and said, 'Why do you just keep looking at each other?' (Genesis 42:1), and in war from the hand of the sword (Job 5:20), when Esau came with four hundred men, "You will hide from the sword of the tongue" (Job 5:21). When did Jacob hear the words of Laban's sons, etc.? (Genesis 31:1), and "Do not be afraid of sudden terror, nor of trouble from the wicked when it comes" (Proverbs 3:25). When did the people of Shechem come and depart and a terror from God fell upon them? (Genesis 35:5), "You shall laugh at destruction and famine" (Job 5:22). When did he leave his father's house and Esau took his blessings from him? (It seems to be different opinions regarding the interpretation of the beginning of Parshat Vayetze) Nevertheless, the Holy One, blessed be He, did not abandon him, as it is written, "With my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps" (Genesis 32:11), "Do not be afraid of the beasts of the earth" (Job 5:22), for as long as he was a shepherd, not one of the animals touched the flock, as it is written, "I did not bring you animals torn by wild beasts" (Genesis 31:39). "For you have made a covenant with the stones of the field" (Job 5:23). When did he take stones from the place and set them up as a pillar? (Genesis 28:18). "And the wild beast of the field shall be at peace with thee" (Job 5:23), "And Esau ran to meet him" (Genesis 33:4), which is called a "Chayah" (wild animal), as it says, "Shout down the beast of the reeds" [(Yishmael, who is like a swine living among the reeds)] (Psalms 68:31). "And you will know that your tent is in peace" (Job 5:24), "When was it that Israel settled?" (Genesis 33:22), and what is written after that? "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (Genesis 35:22). "And you will lie down, and none shall make you afraid" (Job 11:19), "And Israel shall dwell in safety, alone" (Deuteronomy 33:28), "Many faces have been humbled before you" (Job 40:14), "And many nations shall come" (Isaiah 2:3). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob: "After all these things that I have done for you, you will call me your adversary" (Hosea 12:14). Jacob also said, "Many have been my afflictions from my youth" (Psalms 129:1), and also said, "They have not prevailed against me" (Psalms 129:2). David said to him, "For all these things, I will give you praise," as it says, "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him from them all" (Psalms 34:19).
“All those counted of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron counted by the directive of the Lord, by their families, all males from one month old and above, were twenty-two thousand” (Numbers 3:39). “All those counted of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron [ve’aharon] counted” – the vav in ve’aharon is dotted because Aaron was not part of the census. (He was not counted, nor did he participate with Moses in the census.) Similarly, “may the Lord judge between me and you [uveinekha]” (Genesis 16:5) – as she said it only regarding Hagar alone. (There is a dot over the yod in uveinekha, indicating that Sarah did not demand that God punish Abraham.) Some say, it was regarding those who introduce discord between him and her. (While this interpretation also maintains that Sarah was referring to Hagar, it is not based on the dot over the yod, but rather on understanding “between me and you” as referring to one who introduces discord between them.) Similarly, “They said to him [elav]: Where is Sarah?” (Genesis 18:9) – the alef in elav is dotted, as they knew where she was but made inquiries about her. Similarly, “He did not know when she lay down and when she arose [uvkuma]” (Genesis 19:33) – the vav in the middle of uvkuma regarding the elder daughter is dotted; he did not know when she lay down, but he knew when she arose. Similarly, “he kissed him [vayishakehu] (Genesis 33:4) (Esau kissed Jacob.) – it is dotted, because he did not kiss him with all his heart. Similarly, “his brothers went to herd et” (Genesis 37:12) – why is it dotted over et? It teaches that they did not go to herd, but rather to eat, drink, and be seduced. Similarly, “or on a distant [reḥoka] journey” (Numbers 9:10) – the ḥet of reḥoka is dotted. (While the midrash here states that there is a dot on the ḥet, the Mishna (Pesaḥim 93b) and other sources state that the dot is on the heh. In our Torah scrolls the dot is on the heh.) It teaches that even if it was not a distant journey, but just outside the threshold of the courtyard of the Temple. Some say, even if it was a near journey, but it (The path which he has to take to reach the Temple (Etz Yosef).) is impure, he would not perform the rite of the paschal offering with them. Similarly, “we laid waste until Nofaḥ that [asher]” (Numbers 21:30) – the reish in asher is dotted, as it was so even beyond there. Some say: It teaches that they did not destroy the entire country, but rather the large cities. Similarly, “You shall offer one-tenth [isaron isaron] for each” (Numbers 29:15) – the first isaron of the first day of the festival is dotted. It teaches that there was only one one-tenth alone. (Namely, there was only a one-tenth measure, and for sacrifices which require two-tenths or three-tenths, each tenth would be measured separately.) Similarly, “The concealed are for the Lord our God, but the revealed are for us and for our children [lanu ulvaneinu] forever [ad olam]” (Deuteronomy 29:28) – why is it dotted over lanu ulvaneinu and the ayin of ad? He said to them: ‘If you perform the revealed, I will inform you of the concealed.’ Some say: Why is it dotted? Rather, this is what Ezra said: If Elijah will come and say: Why did you write them? (I.e., you should not have written them.) I will say to him: I dotted above them. If he will say: You wrote them well, I will erase the dots from above them.
“Esau ran to meet him, embraced him, fell upon his neck, and kissed him, and they wept” (Genesis 33:4). “Esau ran to meet him…and kissed him [vayishakehu]” – it is dotted above it. (Above the word vayishakehu.) Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Every place you find the script more numerous than the dots, you expound the script; the dots more numerous than the script, you expound the dots. Here, neither is the script more numerous than the dots, nor are the dots more numerous than the script. Rather, it teaches that at that moment he was overcome with mercy and he kissed him with all his heart. Rabbi Yannai said to him: If so, why is it dotted over it? Rather, it teaches that he did not come to kiss him, but rather to bite him, and Jacob’s neck was transformed into marble and the teeth of that wicked one were blunted. Why does the verse state: “And they wept”? It is, rather, that this one wept over his neck, and that one wept over his teeth. Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan derives it from here: “Your neck is like the ivory tower…” (Song of Songs 7:5).
When Jacob passed to come into the land of Canaan, Esau came to him from Mount Seir in violent anger, contriving to slay him, as it is said, "The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnasheth upon him with his teeth" (Ps. 37:12). Esau said: I will not slay Jacob with bow and arrows, but with my mouth and with my teeth will I slay him, and suck his blood, as it is said, "And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed him; and they wept" (Gen. 33:4). Do not read vayishakêhu (and he kissed him), but (read) vayishkêhu (and he bit him). But Jacob's neck became like ivory, and concerning him the Scripture says, "Thy neck is like the tower of ivory" (Cant. 7:5). The wicked (Esau's) teeth became blunt, and when the wicked one saw that the desire of his heart was not realized he began to be angry, and to gnash with his teeth, as it is said, "The wicked shall see it, and be grieved; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away" (Ps. 112:10).
“Your neck is like an ivory tower; your eyes are pools in Ḥeshbon, by the gate of Bat Rabim; your nose is like the tower of Lebanon overlooking Damascus” (Song of Songs 7:5). “Your neck is like an ivory tower.” It is written: “Esau ran to meet him, embraced him, fell upon his neck, and kissed him [vayishakehu] [and they wept]” (Genesis 33:4). The entire word (The word vayishakehu is written in the Torah scroll with a dot over each of the letters.) is dotted. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Everywhere that you find the script more numerous than the dots, adopt the script and ignore the dots. If the dots are more numerous than the script, adopt the dots and ignore the script. However, here, neither is the script more numerous than the dots, nor are the dots more numerous than the script, but rather it is dotted above vayishakehu in its entirety. This teaches that he did not come to kiss him, but rather to bite him. Jacob’s neck became as hard as marble and the teeth of that wicked one became dull and melted like wax. Why does the verse state: “And they wept”? This one was crying over his neck, and that one was crying over his teeth. Rabbi Abahu in the name of Rabbi Elazar cites it from this: “Your neck is like an ivory tower.” It is written: “Pharaoh heard this matter and he sought to kill Moses. Moses fled” (Exodus 2:15). Is there a person who is able to flee from the king? Rather, it teaches that he was standing and was sentenced on that same day, and they condemned him to beheading. Rabbi Evyatar said: The sword glanced off the neck of Moses and sliced the neck of the wicked executioner. That is what is written: “For the God of my father was my help, and He delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh” (Exodus 18:4). He delivered me, but did not deliver the executioner. Rabbi Bon would apply to him the verse: “The righteous is extricated from trouble, and the wicked comes in his place” (Proverbs 11:8). Rabbi Berekhya said: “The wicked is ransom for the righteous” (Proverbs 21:18). Bar Kappara said: It teaches that an angel descended in the guise of Moses, and they apprehended the angel and left Moses, and he fled. Rabbi Abba son of Rav Pappi and Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin [said] in the name of Rabbi Levi: At that moment all of Pharaoh’s advisors, some of them became mute, some of them deaf, some of them blind, and some of them disabled. They said to the mutes: Where is Moses? But they could not speak. To the blind, but they could not see. To the deaf, but they could not hear. To the disabled, but they could not walk, as it is stated: “The Lord said to him: Who gives a mouth to a person, or who renders one mute or deaf, or sighted or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?” (Exodus 4:11). Is it not I who did all these? “Now go and I will send you to Pharaoh” (Exodus 3:10).
וישקהו ויבכו . Rashi quotes different opinions regarding the significance of the dots on the word וישקהו. Some sages in the Sifri believed that these dots are to alert us to the insincerity of the kiss by Esau, whereas Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said (despite the fact that we have an ironclad rule that Esau hated and continues to hate Jacob), in this instance Esau's human emotions were stirred, and he kissed his brother Jacob wholeheartedly. I believe that both views are completely compatible with one another. We must view Esau here on earth as merely the counterpart of Samael in the Heavenly Regions.
Only in rabbinic literature do we find statements that seem to suggest that Israel is hated. Most famous is the statement of R. Shimon b. Yoḥai, “Halakha: it is well known that Esau hates Jacob.” (Sifrei, Behaalotekha, 89; Rashi to Gen. 33:4; see Kreti to Yoreh De’ah ch. 88 for the halakhic implications of this statement.) R. Shimon b. Yoḥai was known for his distrust of the Romans, whom the rabbis identified with Esau/Edom. It was for this reason, says the Talmud, that he had to go into hiding for thirteen years (Shabbat 33b). His view was not shared by his contemporaries.
Those who quote this passage do so only partially and selectively. It refers to the moment at which Jacob and Esau meet after their long estrangement. Jacob feared that Esau would try to kill him. After taking elaborate precautions and wrestling with an angel, the next morning he sees Esau. The verse then says: “Esau ran to meet them. He hugged [Jacob], and throwing himself on his shoulders, kissed him. They [both] wept” (Gen. 33:4). Over the letters of the word “kissed” as it appears in a sefer Torah, there are dots, signalling some special meaning. It was in this context that R. Shimon b. Yoḥai said: “Even though it is well known that Esau hates Jacob, at that moment he was overcome with compassion and kissed him with a full heart” (Rashi ad loc.). In other words, precisely the text cited to show that anti-Semitism is inevitable proves the opposite: that at the crucial encounter, Esau did not feel hate towards Jacob. They met, embraced, and went their separate ways without ill will.
‘VAYEI’AVEIK’ A MAN WITH HIM, A man covered himself with dust. So Menachem ben Saruk explained it, being derived from the word avak (dust); by their movements, they were raising dust with their feet. I, however, am of the opinion that it means “and he attached himself to,” and that it is an Aramaic word, as in, “After they have joined (aviku) it;” (Sanhedrin 63b.) “And they twined the Fringes with loops.” (Menachoth 42a.) This is all the language of Rashi.In the language of the Sages, avikah is often used to convey the sense of chavikah (loop), as in: “There are avkso (loops) in the punishing scourge;” (Makkoth 23a.) , “A couch is called dargesh when it is set up and taken apart by means of loops, through which the cords are fastened.” (Nedarim 56b.) Similarly the word avukah (a torch) is so called in the language of the Sages because it is made up of small pieces of wood which are tied and bound together. This is because the letter cheth is difficult to pronounce in their language and so they used the easier aleph. Many times the cheth disappears completely as in tuteich (Chullin 7 b: metutei (from beneath her feet).) (underneath) in place of techuteich; mesuta (Kiddushin 33a.) (a bath) in place of maschuta; asita (Shabbath 77b.) (a mortar) in place of chasita. And it is possible that the word vayei’aveik is actually vayeichaveik, as vayechabkeihu (and he embraced him), (Genesis 33:4.) for perhaps it is the way of the Hebrew language to interchange the aleph and cheth. Thus we find: And in the fourth chariot grizzled ‘amutzim’ horses, (Zechariah 6:3.) which is the same as chamitzim, derived from the expression, ‘chamutz’ (crimsoned) garments. (Isaiah 63:1.) Commentators (R’dak in his Book of Roots, under the root erez.) have said that ‘va’aruzim’ for thy merchandise (Ezekiel 27:24.) is like vecharuzim, derived from the expression, thy neck ‘bacharuzim’ (with beads). (Song of Songs 1:10.) So too did they say concerning the word vate’altzeihu (Judges 16:16.) that it is like vatechaltzeihu (and she pressed him), this being an inverted form of vatilchatzeihu, [the root of which is lachatz (oppression)]. Perhaps this is the opinion of Onkelos who said, in translation of the word vayei’aveik, ve’ishtadeil, and so also he translated the expression, And if a man ‘yephateh’ (Exodus 22:15.) “as if yeshadeil,” if he embraces and kisses which is the manner of seduction. It may be that Onkelos found no word comparable to vayei’aveik, and so he considered it a matter of cunning, for all effort implies cunning and a clarification of circumstances. In Bereshith Rabbah (77:3.) the Sages said: “Who became filled with dust? The man that was with him.” This agrees with the words of Menachem [ben Saruk, who said that vayei’aveik means “he covered himself with dust] “, and this is the correct interpretation.
Similarly, the comparative lack of pathos when Moshe and Aharon reunite after many years of separation (Shemot 4:27) (Shemot 4:27.) reveals a calm and unambivalent relationship. Absent is the falling on the neck and crying that marks the reunion of brothers and of fathers and sons in the book of Bereshit.Bereshit 33:4; Bereshit 45:14 and Bereshit 46:29 (Bereshit 33:4, 45:14 and 46:29.) The crying and the carrying on that appear in the other stories are a response to feelings of loss and regret at what could have been. In all of those cases, mistakes had been made and opportunities had been missed. And, as is the way of such situations, the feelings of loss could be fully recognized only after the changes that had taken place in the other person had been observed. This, of course, could occur only at the point of reunion. Unlike the stories in Bereshit, the separation of Moshe and Aharon appears to have been preceded by harmony and a lack of complexity. Thus, whatever missed opportunities elapsed on account of their separation resulted from events outside their control. The outcome of all this was Moshe and Aharon’s emotionally uncomplicated reunion. (The lack of complexity revealed in Moshe and Aharon’s reunion could also be due to the lack of previous exposure to each other, Moshe having grown up largely out of his home. At the same time, that doesn’t negate the fact that their reunion also reflects a lack of earlier conflict in comparison to the other stories.)
In fact, a nuanced reading of the rabbinic literature concerning Esav allows us to distinguish between the potential Esav and the actual Esav. Indeed, some rabbinic sources point explicitly in such a direction. (See Bereshit Rabba 76:9, which blames Yaakov for not bringing out this potential, and Midrash Shir haShirim Zuta 1:13, which equates Esav’s potential to that of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov.) In a larger context, the rabbis who certainly had good reason to look with disgust at the corrupted ways and beliefs of their neighbors realized that these neighbors had the potential to be otherwise. They saw that dichotomy between the Divinely implanted potential and the corrupted reality personified by the Biblical Esav. The analysis presented in this chapter is largely based on such a reading of rabbinic sources. If it is a correct reading, we certainly cannot take it for granted that the spiritual descendants of Esav will never move toward reaching their potential. (Indeed, Rabbi S.R. Hirsch, in his commentary on Bereshit 33:4, asserts that we should expect that over time Esav will in fact come closer to such a potential.) On the contrary, we must be prepared that their potential can be actualized.
Indeed, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch seems to view the reunion of the two brothers as foreshadowing the positive developments of his own time. (See his commentary on Bereshit 33:4, 10–11.) His Eastern European contemporary, Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin (Netziv), also strikes an optimistic tone regarding the Jewish people’s willingness to seek brotherhood with the spiritual descendants of Esav given the proper circumstances (Haamek Davar on Bereshit 33:4) Both of these commentators present modern insights, and both concentrate on what Esav has to do to bring about rapprochement. In this chapter, we will analyze the flip side of this modern rapprochement – that which is incumbent upon Yaakov.
Why is Daniel consulted last? We believe that his being asked last and the only one, like Yosef, able to help the non-Jewish emperor, reflect many facets of Jewish life in Galut. Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai teaches a most uncomfortable lesson (cited in Rashi to Breishit 33:4 s.v. Vayishakeihu) that “Halacha Hi B’Yadu’a She’Eisav Soneh L’Yaakov”, that it is an unyielding fact that Eisav hates Yaakov. How tragic, but how prescient, is Rashbi’s sobering prediction.
There are dots over ואהרן. Meaning that only Moshe was involved in the counting of the Levites. (The dots imply that the word should not really be there, as if it were erased. See Bereishis, 33:4.) However, since both of them were involved in the count of the Israelites it is the manner of the Torah to write like this. Even though he did not take part in the count of the Levites he was still mentioned along with the count. There are those who explain Rashi’s words “he was not included in the counting of the Levites” to mean that he was not one of those who was counted. This is also implied in Tractate Bechoros 4a. However this raises a difficulty because the verse refers to those who did the counting — “whom Moshe and Aharon counted” — and not to those who were counted (Re’m). It appears to me that the correct explanation is as follows: The dots above Aharon’s name imply that he was not included in those who did the counting nor in those who were counted, because if not so why would the Torah mention Aharon and then place dots over his name. Therefore, so that you do not [mistakenly] say that he was not included in doing the counting, but he was one of those who were counted, there are dots over his name to teach that he was absent from everything, even those who were counted. This explanation is somewhat similar to the explanation that I gave for the words את צאן (Bereishis 37:12) where there are dots over את. Even though this explanation is somewhat forced, it helps to resolve a difficulty so that Rashi’s explanation in Chumash will not contradict his explanation in Tractate Bechoros where he explicitly says that Aharon was not included in the count. Similarly one can understand the statement of Bamidbar Rabbah: “The number of all the Levites whom Moshe and Aharon counted” — there are dots over his name because Aharon was not included in the count. The statement implies that he was not included in those who were counted.
Ten words in the Torah are marked with dots. They are as follows: 1. “The Eternal will judge between me and you” (Genesis 16:5). There is a dot above the letter yod in the term, “and you.” This teaches that Sarah did not say this to Abraham, but to Hagar. Some say that it means she was speaking about those who caused the fighting “between me and you.” 2. “They said to him, Where is Sarah?” (Genesis 18:9). There are dots above the letters aleph, yod, and vav in the term, “to him,” to indicate that they already knew where she was, but they nevertheless inquired about her. 3. (There is a dot on the verse,) “When she lay down and when she arose” (Genesis 19:33). There is a dot above the letter vav in the term, “When she arose” the first time it is used [with regard to Lot’s older daughter]. This teaches that he was not aware of what happened until the (younger daughter) arose. 4. “And Esau ran to greet him, and he hugged him, fell on his neck, and kissed him” (Genesis 33:4). The term for, “and kissed him,” has dots above every letter, to teach that he did not kiss him sincerely. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would say: It means that this kiss was sincere, but every other one he gave Jacob was not. 5. “His brothers went to shepherd their father’s flocks in Shechem” (Genesis 37:12). There are dots on the word just before “flocks.” This teaches that they did not actually go to shepherd the flocks, but to eat and drink (and indulge their temptations). 6. “All the Levites who were recorded, whom Moses and Aaron recorded” (Numbers 3:39). There are dots above Aaron’s name. Why? To teach that Aaron himself was not counted in this record. 7. “On a long journey” (Numbers 9:10). There is a dot above the letter hei in the word “long.” This teaches that this does not really mean a long journey, but any exiting the boundaries of the outer court of the Temple. 8. “We caused destruction all the way up to Nophach, which reaches into Medeba” (Numbers 21:30). There is a dot above the letter reish in the word “which.” Why? To teach that they destroyed the idolaters but not the countries themselves (whereas the practice of idolaters was to destroy entire countries). 9. “A tenth, a tenth for each” (Numbers 29:15). [This verse delineates the meal offering that accompanies the burnt offering] on the first day of the Sukkot festival. There is a dot above the letter vav in the [first occurrence of the] word “tenth.” Why? To teach that there is only one-tenth [measure] for each. 10. “The hidden things are for the Eternal our God, and the revealed things are for us and our children forever” (Deuteronomy 29:30). There are dots above the words “for us and our children,” and above the letter ayin in the word “forever.” Why? For this is what Ezra said: If Elijah comes and says to me: Why did you write it this way? I will say to him: I have already put dots above these words [to indicate I was not certain it was correct]. But if he says to me: You wrote it correctly, then I will remove the dots. There are eleven instances in the Torah where the Hebrew word for “she,” היא, is written as הוא (which means “he” or “it”) but vocalized to mean “she.” The first is: “The King of Bela, he is [i.e., “she is”] Tzur” (Genesis 14:1). The second: “He himself said to me, ‘She is my sister,’ and SHE also said, ‘He is my brother’” (Genesis 20:5). The third: “As she was being brought out, SHE sent a message to her father-in-law, saying” (Genesis 38:25). The fourth: “If one of your animals of which it is [i.e., “she is”] used for food dies” (Leviticus 11:39). The fifth: “And it [i.e., “and she”] has turned the hair white” (Leviticus 13:10). The sixth: “If the priest sees it…and it [i.e., “and she”] has faded” (Leviticus 13:21). [The seventh: “It (i.e., “she”) shall be a Sabbath of complete rest for you” (Leviticus 16:31). The eighth: “And SHE sees his nakedness” (Leviticus 20:17). The ninth: “SHE has disgraced her father” (Leviticus 21:9). The tenth: “And SHE has kept secret, and defiled herself (and she was not caught)” (Numbers 5:13). The eleventh: “A spirit of jealousy has passed over him, and he is jealous of his wife…but SHE has not defiled herself” (Numbers 5:14).
BARAITHA. Subordinate your will to the will of Heaven; for so we find that Jacob did not kiss Joseph. GEMARA. Why did he not kiss him? He thought that, since he was away from home, women may have led him astray because of his beauty; as it is written, And he presented himself unto him, and fell on his neck. (Gen. 46, 29, which does not mention Jacob kissing his son.) [Joseph] wanted to kiss him but he would not let him do so, as it is written, And he wept on his neck a good while. (ibid., a good while is explained that Joseph kept on weeping but Jacob still did not kiss him.) That is to say, he [only] kissed him when he died, as it is written, And wept upon him, and kissed him. (ibid. L, 1.) Joseph said, ‘Thirty-nine years have [passed] before him (i.e. it was thirty-nine years since Joseph left home. As Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years (ibid. XLVII, 28), Joseph must have been separated from his father twenty-two years.) and I have not kissed my father’s mouth, and now shall I bury him without kissing him?’ That is the meaning of what is written, And Israel beheld Joseph’s sons and said: Who are these? (ibid. XLVIII, 8.) Did he not know until then who they were? But [Jacob] inquired of him whether they had been born in wedlock, (lit. ‘with a kethubah’, i.e. according to the Hebrew marriage law.) and when he showed him the kethubah his mind became at rest and he kissed them for the sake of Joseph. Raba said: Infer from this that [Joseph] was aroused sexually by her; (viz. Potiphar’s wife (ibid. XXXIX, 7ff), otherwise Jacob would not have doubted Joseph’s moral purity.) for should you say that he was not aroused by her, it has been taught: (B.M. 83b (Sonc. ed., pp. 478f.). The reference is to the story of R. Eleazar b. Simeon, who had a man arrested because of his insolence towards him and subsequently hanged. R. Eleazar regretted his action, but was assured by his disciples that the man must have been guilty of a capital crime. On hearing this, he felt relieved and reassured that his own body would not decompose after his death.) He laid his hand upon his heart (lit. ‘his inwards’, and similarly in the continuation.) and exclaimed, ‘Rejoice my heart, rejoice my heart! If matters about which you are doubtful are so, (i.e. seem to be just. He was doubtful whether the man deserved hanging.) how much more those about which you are certain! I am confident that neither worms nor decay will have power over you’. He applied to himself the verse, My flesh also dwelleth in safety. (Ps. 16, 9.) Now he (viz. R. Eleazar; and yet he felt assured that the worms would have no power over his body.) is not mentioned among those [over whom the worms have no dominion], (Cf. B.B. 17a (Sonc. ed., p. 86): ‘There are seven over whom the worms had no dominion, viz. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses, Aaron and Miriam, and Benjamin, son of Jacob’.) how much more so Jacob who is mentioned! (How could Jacob then doubt the innocence of Joseph, seeing that the sin of suspecting the innocent would have lost him that privilege?) Therefore [we must say] that Jacob held back from kissing Joseph because of what he saw by means of the Holy Spirit. (He was inspired by God to do so in order that Joseph should not communicate her moral impurity to him.) And where is this (Joseph’s moral impurity.) alluded to? As it is written, But his (i.e. Joseph’s.) bow abode firm; (Gen. 49, 24. The word bow is found in both the passages cited. On the exegetical rule of Gezerah Shawah, inference from analogous phraseology, what applies to one applies also to the other. In Hab. the bow is described as being bare, ‘eryah, which is equated with ‘erwah, ‘forbidden intercourse’. Consequently the use of bow in connection with Joseph indicates that there was an occasion when he was aroused sinfully.) and it is written there, Thy bow is made quite bare. (Hab. 3, 9. The Heb. maṭṭeh can mean ‘rod’ or ‘tribe’. The Rabbinic interpretation is that God swore to Jacob that the tribes descended from him would be pure.) What caused him to be saved? Sworn are the rods of the word. Selah. What is the meaning of Selah? (The word. Selah is by a process of analogy equated with the words the God of Jacob … Selah; that is to say, the word sworn by the God of Jacob to him.) It is to be taken in the sense of The God of Jacob … Selah. (Ps. 46, 12.) It was quoted in refutation, And it came to pass, when Laban heard the tidings of Jacob his sister’s son, that he ran to meet him, and embraced him, and kissed him (Gen. 29, 13.) —is not this a case where an inference from minor to major is to be drawn? If of Laban who kissed idols and harlots it is so written, (That he kissed Jacob.) Joseph who did not kiss these [yet did not kiss Jacob]! Perhaps the verse should not have written this, but it points to Jacob’s merit. [It indicates,] And he [Laban] ran to meet him, i.e. he wanted to kiss him but [Jacob] would not permit him; he then embraced him again to kiss him, whereupon he struck [Laban] on his cheek. This may be proved from the fact that it is written wayyenashsheḳ (There are two Heb. roots with the same letters, one meaning ‘to kiss’ and the other ‘to be equipped with weapons’, and the verb in the verse is given the second sense, i.e. he attacked him.) and not wayyishshaḳ. Hence it is proved; here it is written, And he kissed them (Gen. 48, 10, where the verb is wayyishshaḳ and denotes an expression of love.) and [continues], And embraced them. What is the difference between wayyishshaḳ and wayyenashsheḳ? The latter (Which is an intensive form of the verb.) indicates [kissing] with the whole body, the former [only] with the mouth. Whence do we know that this is so? For it is written, He kisses [yishshaḳ] the lips that giveth a right answer. (Prov. 24, 26.) Wherever wayyishshaḳ occurs it denotes a [light] impress to be added to the count. (A single gesture which may form part of a further display of affection subsequently.) Come and hear: [It is stated,] And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck and kissed him. (Gen. 33, 4, the verb being wayyishshaḳ.) Is not this [act of kissing] similar to what Laban did? The reply is: Go and see how many teeth were dug into him. (In the Heb. text the word has dots over the letters, which are taken by the Midrash to indicate that Esau’s real intention was to bite Jacob. [Cf. ARN, p. 165.]) And why? Because he [really] wanted to bite him, but at the time his teeth became as [soft as] wax and he knocked his jaws against Jacob’s neck and became weak. To that episode David alluded when he said, Arise, O Lord; save me, O my God; for Thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek, Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked. (Ps. 3, 8.)
Ten [letters or groups of letters] in the Torah are marked by dots: (The dots are placed above the letters. Cf. above, ARN XXXIV, p. 165 where the Rabbinical explanations are given.) In the Lord judge between me and thee (Gen. 16, 5.) there is a dot on the beth (So GRA. V and H ‘the yod’.) of ubeneka (and between thee). In and they said unto him, (ibid. XVIII, 9.) there are dots on alef-yod-waw of ’elaw (unto him). In and he knew not when she lay down, nor when she arose, (ibid. XIX, 33.) the [second] waw in ubekumah (nor when she arose) is marked with a dot. In and kissed him, (ibid. XXXIII, 4.) the entire word wayyishshaḳehu is marked by dots. In and his brethren went to feed their father’s flock, (ibid. XXXVII, 12.) the letters of ’eth (the mark of the defined accusative) are dotted. In whom Moses and Aaron numbered (Num. 3, 39.) the word Aaron is marked with dots. In or be in a journey afar off, (ibid. IX, 10.) the he in reḥoḳah (afar off) has a dot. In and we have laid waste even unto Nopha, which (ibid. XXI, 30.) the resh in ’asher (which) has a dot. In and a several tenth part, (ibid. XXIX, 15.) in the section dealing with the first day of the festival of Tabernacles, the second waw in we’issaron (and a tenth part) has a dot. In the secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, (Deut. 29, 28. [H more correctly, ‘unto us and to our children and the ‘ayin in עד’. Cf. Sanh. 43b (Sonc. ed., p. 285, n. 4) and ARN above, p. 166.]) the ‘ayin in ‘ad (for) has a dot.
Joseph flung himself upon his father’s face and wept over him and kissed him.
Eisov ran to meet him. He hugged him and fell on his neck and kissed him. They [both] wept.
And Esau ran to meet him, and hugged him, and fell upon his neck and kissed him. Esau wept for the crushing of his teeth, and Jakob wept for the tenderness of his neck.
And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell upon his neck and kissed him, and they wept. Esau wept on account of the pain of his teeth which were shaken; but Jakob wept because of the pain of his neck.
| וַיִּשָּׂ֣א אֶת־עֵינָ֗יו וַיַּ֤רְא אֶת־הַנָּשִׁים֙ וְאֶת־הַיְלָדִ֔ים וַיֹּ֖אמֶר מִי־אֵ֣לֶּה לָּ֑ךְ וַיֹּאמַ֕ר הַיְלָדִ֕ים אֲשֶׁר־חָנַ֥ן אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶת־עַבְדֶּֽךָ׃ | 5 E | Looking about, he saw the women and the children. “Who,” he asked, “are these with you?” He answered, “The children with whom God has favored your servant.” |
“And Yaakov departed ….” (Bereshit, 28:10) Why did Yaakov Avinu not pray for his journey immediately upon leaving Beer Sheva, but waited until here (Beit El, north of Jerusalem) for his prayer, “if God will be with me and guard me …” for this was the prayer for his journey? This matter may be understood based on what is written in the Gemara (Bechorot, 56a), “Rav Asi said, Rabbi Yochanan said, if one acquires ten embryos in ten pregnant cows [and the animals were born after he had already owned them], all are brought into a pen and tithed.” The Gemara asks, “are we not taught, if one buys from a friend, or receives as a gift, he is exempt from having to tithe [for he must tithe only those animals born while in his possession]? Rabbi Elazar said, I say that Reb Yochanan appeared in my dream and solved it favorably. [He must tithe the unborn animals, even if they were received as embryos in animals that did not need to be tithed], for it is written, ‘so you shall do,’ [“Give Me the firstborn of your sons, so you shall do to your cattle …” Shemot 22] meaning at the time they are being ‘done’ [or fit to be offered in the Temple].” This means that if he acquired them at a time when he was obligated to tithe, then he is exempt from tithing except for the unborn animals he acquired. It is similar here with Yaakov Avinu. The solution of Rabbi Elazar only came to him after he saw Rabbi Yochanan in a dream, meaning that the only one who would understand this is the one to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, shows His attribute of mercy. Rabbi Yochanan represents this quality of God’s mercy, as it says in the Gemara (Berachot, 57a), “whoever sees Yochanan in his dream, the miracle of miracles will be done for him.” Therefore Yaakov Avinu could not pray first. In his prophetic spirit he saw all that would happen to him on his journey, and he also knew that his prayer would finish with “all that you give me I will give a tenth thereof,” so he then asked the same question as mentioned earlier in the Gemara, that one who acquires something is exempt from tithing. Therefore he could not offer this prayer, for with Yaakov it was said (Bereshit, 31:41), “I have worked six years with your sheep,” and if so, he was one who had acquired. It was only after God had appeared to him in a dream, and with Yaakov Avinu God was addressed with the title “the merciful,” as it is said (Bereshit, 33:5), “the children which God has been merciful in giving His servant.” This is akin to what is said in the Gemara, “I saw Reb Yochanan (the attribute of mercy) in a dream.” Therefore Yaakov knew that something new would be done for him, as it is written, “at the time of doing,” and Yaakov bought the sheep from Lavan in their mother’s wombs, before “the time of doing,” or birth, as his conditions with Lavan concerned the sheep that would be born from now on, and the blessing of God came upon them in their mother’s wombs. Thus they were required to be tithed. Once he understood this reason he could well pray, “if God will be with me … I will give a tenth … ”
?מי אלה לך, “how are these related to you?” Esau wanted to know if these people were Yaakov’s children or members of his household not biologically related to him, or if they were his slaves.
WHO ARE THESE WITH THEE. Mi eleh lakh can be interpreted as meaning who are these with thee, or who are these who are yours. (That is, who are these who are obviously yours. I.E. points out that lakh can be interpreted as meaning immekha (with you) or shellekha (yours). Esau knew that these women and children belonged to Jacob. What he wanted to know was their relationship to him; were they servants or children (Cherez).)
GRACIOUSLY GIVEN. Chanan means gave graciously. (Chanan usually means to show favor to, to be gracious to. Hence I.E. explains that here chanan means gave graciously.) Grant them graciously (channunu) unto us (Jud. 21:22) is similar. (Here, too, chanan has the meaning of to graciously give.) The word chinnam (This is the reading of Vat. Ebr. 38. Most of the printed texts have chanan. This reading is impossible to interpret. I.E.’s point is that chinnam comes from the root chet, nun, nun and means something gotten gratis (Filwarg, Weiser).) (gratuitously) comes from the same root. (Chanan and chinnam both come from the root chet, nun, nun. See note 7.)
וישא...מי אלה לך, these women and children whom I see, as well as all the numerous servants, who are they? Yaakov answered him concerning the children, and Esau deduced that the women next to them were their mothers.
WHO ARE THESE WITH THEE? Esau inquired about the women and children, and Jacob modestly answered, The children whom G-d hath graciously given thy servant, as he did not want to say that they were his wives. Esau thereby understood that they were the mothers of the children.
מי אלה לך WHO ARE THESE WITH THEE? (literally, to thee)? — Who are these that they should be yours (are they your children or your servants)?
Jakob spricht in seiner Erwiderung nur von den Kindern, und indem er diese Antwort auch als Auskunft für die Frauen gelten lässt, deutet er mit großer Feinheit an, wie er diesen seinen Reichtum nächst der göttlichen Gnade in leiblicher und geistiger Hinsicht seinen Frauen verdanke. Seine Frauen sind die Mütter seiner Kinder.
Who are these to you. Are they your children or your servants?.
Who are these that they should be yours? Rashi is answering the question: “Who are these” implies that Eisov did not know to whom they belonged. Why did he then say, “To you”? Thus Rashi explains, “That they should be yours.” I.e., are they your sons, servants or hirelings?
He, Esau, lifted his eyes, saw the women and the children, walking behind Jacob, and said: Who are these to you? Although his brother could have guessed, he, Jacob, said: The children with whom God has graced your servant. These are my children. Jacob repeatedly referred to himself as Esau’s servant. He opted to flatter Esau in order to preserve their cordial relationship.
מי אלה לך?, “what relations are these of yours? His question concerned all the women and children.
הילדים אשר חנן אלוקים את עבדך, “the children whom G’d has granted your servant.” Yaakov was conveying a lesson in good manners, not referring to his wives directly, letting Esau surmise that the women concerned were the mothers of these children.
Moses prayed to God to grant him knowledge of His attributes, and also pardon for His people; when the latter had been granted, he continued to pray for the knowledge of God’s essence in the words, “Show me thy glory” (ib. 18), and then received, respecting his first request, “Show me thy way,” the following favourable reply, “I will make all my goodness to pass before thee” (ib. 19); as regards the second request, however, he was told, “Thou canst not see my face” (ib. 20). The words “all my goodness” imply that God promised to show him the whole creation, concerning which it has been stated, “And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Gen. 1:31); when I say “to show him the whole creation,” I mean to imply that God promised to make him comprehend the nature of all things, their relation to each other, and the way they are governed by God both in reference to the universe as a whole and to each creature in particular. This knowledge is referred to when we are told of Moses,” he is firmly established in all mine house” (Num. 12:7); that is, “his knowledge of all the creatures in My universe is correct and firmly established”; for false opinions are not firmly established. Consequently the knowledge of the works of God is the knowledge of His attributes, by which He can be known. The fact that God promised Moses to give him a knowledge of His works, may be inferred from the circumstance that God taught him such attributes as refer exclusively to His works, viz., “merciful and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in goodness,” etc., (Exod. 34:6). It is therefore clear that the ways which Moses wished to know, and which God taught him, are the actions emanating from God. Our Sages call them middot (qualities), and speak of the thirteen middoth of God (Talm. B. Rosh ha-shanah, p. 17b); they used the term also in reference to man; comp. “there are four different middoth (characters) among those who go to the house of learning”; “There are four different middoth (characters) among those who give charity” (Mishnah Abot, 5:13, 14). They do not mean to say that God really possesses middot (qualities), but that He performs actions similar to such of our actions as originate in certain qualities, i.e., in certain psychical dispositions not that God has really such dispositions.
Whenever any one of His actions is perceived by us, we ascribe to God that emotion which is the source of the act when performed by ourselves, and call Him by an epithet which is formed from the verb expressing that emotion. We see, e.g., how well He provides for the life of the embryo of living beings; how He endows with certain faculties both the embryo itself and those who have to rear it after its birth, in order that it may be protected from death and destruction, guarded against all harm, and assisted in the performance of all that is required [for its development]. Similar acts, when performed by us, are due to a certain emotion and tenderness called mercy and pity. God is, therefore, said to be merciful: e.g., “Like as a father is merciful to his children, so the Lord is merciful to them that fear Him” (Ps. 103:13); “And I will spare them, as a man spareth (yaḥamol) his own son that serveth him” (Mal. 3:17). Such instances do not imply that God is influenced by a feeling of mercy, but that acts similar to those which a father performs for his son, out of pity, mercy and real affection, emanate from God solely for the benefit of His pious men, and are by no means the result of any impression or change—[produced in God].—When we give something to a person who has no claim upon us, we perform an act of grace; e.g., “Grant them graciously unto us” (Judges 21:22). [The same term is used in reference to God, e.g.] “which God hath graciously given” (Gen. 33:5); “Because God hath dealt graciously with me” (ib. 11). Instances of this kind are numerous. God creates and guides beings who have no claim upon Him to be created and guided by Him; He is therefore called gracious (ḥannun)—His actions towards mankind also include great calamities, which overtake individuals and bring death to them, or affect whole families and even entire regions, spread death, destroy generation after generation, and spare nothing whatsoever. Hence there occur inundations, earthquakes, destructive storms, expeditions of one nation against the other for the sake of destroying it with the sword and blotting out its memory, and many other evils of the same kind. Whenever such evils are caused by us to any person, they originate in great anger, violent jealousy, or a desire for revenge. God is therefore called, because of these acts, “jealous,” “revengeful,” “wrathful,” and “keeping anger” (Nah. 1:2) that is to say, He performs acts similar to those which, when performed by us, originate in certain psychical dispositions, in jealousy, desire for retaliation, revenge, or anger: they are in accordance with the guilt of those who are to be punished, and not the result of any emotion: for He is above all defect! The same is the case with all divine acts: though resembling those acts which emanate from our passions and psychical dispositions, they are not due to anything superadded to His essence.
“May the Lord shine His countenance to you, and be gracious to you” (Numbers 6:25). “May the Lord shine [yaer] His countenance to you” – may He grant you brightness [meor] of the eyes. Alternatively, “may the Lord shine…” – may He look upon you with a bright countenance and not with an angered countenance. Another matter: “May…shine [yaer]” – this is the light of Torah; He will enlighten your eyes and your heart in the Torah, and grant you sons who are devoted to Torah, just as it says: “For mitzva is a lamp, and Torah is light [or].” (Proverbs 6:23). “May the Lord shine [yaer] His countenance” – may He produce from you priests who kindle the altar, just as it says: “So you will not kindle [ta’iru] My altar in vain” (Malachi 1:10). And it says: “The fire on the altar shall be kept burning on it; it shall not be extinguished” (Leviticus 6:5). “And be gracious to you” – they are blessed and protected, and the Divine Presence is in their midst, from where is it derived that they are graced with knowledge and understanding? The verse states: “And be gracious to you” – just as we pray: You grace man with knowledge and teach a person understanding. Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – He will instill knowledge in you so that you will be gracious to one another and have mercy upon one another, like the matter that is stated: “And He will give you mercy…” (Deuteronomy 13:18). Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – He will grace you with children, just as it says: “The children with whom God has graced your servant” (Genesis 33:5), and it says: “God be gracious to you, my son” (Genesis 43:29). (The second verse from Genesis refers to Benjamin, whereas the first verse from Genesis refers to all the other tribes, as at that point Benjamin had not yet been born.) Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – just as it says: “May God be gracious to us and bless us; may He shine His countenance upon us, Selah” (Psalms 67:2). Another matter: “And be gracious to you [viḥuneka]” – he will grant you [yoḥnekha] your wishes. Likewise it says: “He will show grace to you [yoḥnekha] at the sound of your outcry; upon His hearing, He will answer you” (Isaiah 30:19). Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – Rabbi Ḥiyya the Great taught: The Lord will encamp [yaḥaneh] in your midst. Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – He will produce prophets from you, just as it says: “I will pour a spirit of grace and supplication upon the house of David [and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem]” (Zechariah 12:10). Another matter: “And be gracious to you [viḥuneka]” – He will place His grace upon you everywhere that you go, just as it says: “He placed his favor [ḥino] in the eyes of [the prison warden]” (Genesis 39:21), “Esther found favor [ḥen] [in the eyes of everyone who saw her]” (Esther 2:15), “God granted Daniel kindness (The term in the verse is ḥesed, which the midrash considers synonymous with ḥen.) and compassion [before the chief of the chamberlains]” (Daniel 1:9), “and you will find grace and approbation [in the eyes of God and man]” (Proverbs 3:4). Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – regarding Torah study. Likewise it says: “It will give your head an adornment of grace…” (Proverbs 4:9), “for they will be a graceful adornment for your head…” (Proverbs 1:9). Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – with gratuitous gifts; likewise it says: “Be gracious to us, Lord; be gracious to us…” (Psalms 123:3), “so our eyes are to the Lord our God until He will be gracious to us” (Psalms 123:2). Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – to take you from subjugation to the kingdoms, just as it says: “Be gracious to us, Lord; be gracious to us, for we are sated with scorn” (Psalms 123:3). Another matter: “And be gracious to you” – to redeem you, just as it says: “Lord, be gracious to us; [we have longed] for You. [Be…our salvation in a time of suffering]” (Isaiah 33:2).
“He lifted his eyes, saw the women and the children, and said: Who are these to you? He said: The children with whom God has graced your servant” (Genesis 33:5). “He lifted his eyes” – Rabbi Binyamin bar Levi said: Because we heard grace regarding eleven tribes, but we did not hear regarding Benjamin; (He was not yet born when Jacob said: “The children with whom God has graced your servant.”) where did we hear? It was elsewhere: “He said: God be gracious to you, my son” (Genesis 43:29). (Joseph said it to Benjamin.) “The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:6). “Leah too, and her children, approached, and prostrated themselves; and then Joseph and Rachel approached, and prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:7). “The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves. Leah too, and her children, approached…” Regarding Joseph it is written: “And then Joseph and Rachel approached, and prostrated themselves.” Joseph said: This wicked one has a covetous eye. Let him not direct his eyes and look at my mother. He stood tall and obscured her. That is what is written: “Joseph is a fruitful tree [ben porat], a fruitful tree alongside a spring [alei ayin]” (Genesis 49:22) – Joseph, you grew like a fruitful tree to block an eye [alei ayin]. (To obscure Rachel from Esau’s eye.) Joseph, you grew due to cows [ben parot]. (The reference is to the cows in Pharaoh’s dream.) “A fruitful tree alongside a spring [alei ayin]” – you grew due to produce [ben perot]. (The reference is to the sheaves in Pharaoh’s dream.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Simon: It is incumbent upon me to repay you due to that eye. (Due to the eye that you blocked from seeing Rachel. “To repay [lifro’a]” is expounded from the word porat.)
“He asked them regarding their wellbeing, and he said: Is all well with your father? Is the elder whom you mentioned still alive?” (Genesis 43:27). “They said: All is well with your servant, with our father, he is still alive; they bowed, and they prostrated themselves” (Genesis 43:28). “He asked them regarding their wellbeing…They said: All is well…” – Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba saw a certain Babylonian: He said to him: ‘How is Father?’ (Rabbi Ḥiyya lived in the land of Israel and his father lived in Babylonia. ) He said to him: ‘Your mother inquired after you.’ He said to him: ‘I said this to you and you said that to me?’ He said to him: ‘One asks about the living, and one does not ask about the dead.’ So, “is all well with your father?” – this is Jacob; “the elder that you mentioned” – this is Isaac. “They said: All is well with your servant, with our father.” (They answered about Jacob, who was alive, but not about Isaac, who was not.) “He lifted his eyes and saw his brother Benjamin, his mother's son, and he said: Is this your youngest brother whom you mentioned to me? He said: God be gracious to you, my son” (Genesis 43:29). “He lifted his eyes, and saw…” – Rabbi Binyamin said: Because we have heard grace [mentioned] regarding the eleven tribes, (Jacob said of them: “The children with whom God has graced your servant” (Genesis 33:5). Binyamin had not yet been born at that time. ) but did not hear grace regarding the tribe of Benjamin. Where did we hear it? We heard it here: “God be gracious to you, my son.” “Joseph hurried, because his mercy was aroused toward his brother and he sought to weep; he entered the chamber, and wept there” (Genesis 43:30). “They sat before him, the firstborn according to his seniority, and the younger according to his youth, and the men wondered to one another” (Genesis 43:33). “Joseph hurried…They sat before him…” – he took the goblet and created the false impression that he was smelling the goblet. He said: ‘Judah, who is king, sits at the head. Reuben who is the firstborn, will sit alongside him,’ and likewise regarding them all. He said: ‘I have no mother and Benjamin has no mother, when his mother bore him, she died. Therefore, let him come and place his head alongside mine.’ That is why, “the men wondered…” “He gave gifts from before him, and Benjamin's gift was five times greater than the gifts of all of them. They drank, and became inebriated with him” (Genesis 43:34). “He gave gifts from before him…” – Joseph gave him, Asenat gave him, Manasseh gave him, Ephraim gave him, and [he received] his portion with his brothers. That is what is written: “Benjamin's gift was five times greater than the gifts of all of them.” “They drank, and became inebriated with him” – with him, they drank, but other than with him, they did not drink, as Rabbi Levi said: All twenty-two years that he did not see them, he did not taste the taste of wine. They, too, did not taste the taste of wine until they saw him. That is what is written: “They drank, and became inebriated with him” – with him, they drank, but other than with him, they did not drink.
(Numb. 11:16:) “Then the Lord said unto Moses, ‘Gather Me seventy men from the elders of Israel….” Let our master instruct us: Within how many cubits is one obligated to stand up in the presence of an elder when he sees him? (Numb. R. 15:17.) Thus have our masters taught: Within four cubits one is obligated to stand up in the presence of an elder. (Qid 33b; cf also yBik. 3:3 (65c).) Thus it is stated (in Lev. 19:32), “You shall rise in the presence of (To be in one’s presence is to be within four cubits.) a gray head [...].” One also bows down before him and asks after his welfare [when] within four cubits. And about which honor did the Torah say (ibid. cont.), “you shall honor the presence of an elder?” That one should not stand in his place or contradict his words. Also when one asks [about] a law (halakhah), one should ask with reverence and not rush to respond or interrupt his words. Whoever does not behave toward his teacher (rav) according to all these rules is labeled a wicked person before the Omnipresent, his learning is forgotten, his years are shortened, and in the end he comes to poverty, as stated (in Eccl. 8:13), “It shall not go well with the wicked one, nor shall he prolong his days; [they are] like a shadow, because he is not in fear before God.” In regard to this fear I do not know [exactly] what it is; [but] when it says (in Lev. 19:32), “You shall rise in the presence of a gray head, [you shall honor the presence of an elder,] and you shall fear your God,” note that it is [really] saying, this is the fear of [students toward] sages. (Since GRAY HEAD and ELDER are understood to refer to the sages.) [But I might say that this is a fear of] usury and of [false] weights, as fear is stated about them [also]. (In Lev. 25:36; 19:36. So why say that it refers to a sage?) It is simply that R. Eleazar has said, “It is stated here, ‘[you shall honor] the presence (pny) of the elder, and you shall fear your God’; while it is stated in the other passage (in Eccl. 8:13), ‘he is not in fear before (pny) God.’” Hence, one is obligated to greet him before everyone when entering and leaving and to treat him with fear and honor. It is so stated (in Deut. 6:13), “You shall fear (et) (This word generally denotes that what follows is a direct object but at times the word means “along with.” In this latter sense the et implies that one should honor someone along with the Lord your God. For an example of et indicating further inclusions, see Tanh. (Buber) Gen. 1:8.) the Lord your God.” And we have learned, “[The et must refer] to [fear of] the master scholars of Torah since you have no other trait like it.” And so it says (in Deut. 1:15), “[So I took the heads of your tribes, wise and well-known people,] and appointed them heads over [you].” From here you learn that you should treat him in a princely manner, [i.e.,] stand in his presence, and give him precedence in every matter of dignity. R. Abba bar Pappa the Priest said, “When I would see a certain group of people, I would walk by another route so as not to be a bother for them, lest they see me and stand for me. [However] when I told of the matter to R. Jose bar Zevida, he said to me, ‘You must pass before them, so that they will see you and stand in your presence. Then you will bring them to the point of fearing Heaven, as stated (in Lev. 19:32), “You shall rise in the presence of a gray head, [you shall honor the presence of an elder,] and you shall fear your God.”’” Why? Because the rise of the righteous is a rise in which there is no decline. But the rise of Esau (Esau stands for any Roman.) the wicked is a rise which is wholly decline. Today he is a governor; (Gk.: eparchos.) tomorrow an assistant [governor]; the next day a captain. (Gk.: stratiotes (“citizen soldier”).) And thus it is with all their great ones. So also the prophet says (in Obad. 1:4), “Though you make your abode as high as the eagle, and though [your nest is set] among the stars, I will bring you down from there.” The rise of Jacob, however, is a rise which has no decline, and their holiness is never desecrated. And so you find that the elders are one of thirteen things which are written down [as belonging] to the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. These [thirteen] are the following: (1) The silver and gold, (2) the priests, (3) the Levites, (4) Israel, (5) the first-born, (6) the altar, (7) the priestly share, (8) the oil for anointing, (9) the tent of meeting, (10) the Davidic dynasty, (11) the offerings, (12) the Land of Israel, and (13) the elders. Where is it shown in reference to silver and gold? As stated (in Hag. 2:8), “The silver is Mine, and the gold is Mine.” (See above Exod. 8:9.) Where is it shown in reference to the priests? As stated (in Exod. 29:1), “to sanctify them for serving Me as priests.” Where is it shown in reference to the Levites? As stated (in Numb. 3:12), “and the Levites shall be Mine.” Where is it shown in reference to Israel? As stated (in Lev. 25:55), “For to Me the Children of Israel [are servants].” Where is it shown in reference to the first-born? As stated (in Numb. 3:13 = 8:17), “For all the first-born are Mine.” Where is it shown in reference to the altar? As stated (in Exod. 20:21), “An altar of earth you shall make for Me.” Where is it shown in reference to the priestly share? As stated (in Exod. 25:2), “And let them take for Me a priestly share.” Where is it shown in reference to the oil for anointing? As stated (in Exod. 30:31), “This oil for anointing shall be holy to Me.” Where is it shown in reference to the tent of meeting? As stated (in Exod. 25:8), “And let them make Me a sanctuary.” Where is it shown in reference to offerings? As stated (in Numb. 28:2), “My offering, My bread for My fire offering.” (Note that this reference to offerings and the following reference to the Davidic dynasty are reversed in order from the list given above.) Where is it shown in reference to the Davidic dynasty? As stated (in I Sam. 16:1), “for I have chosen a king for Myself among his (i.e. Jesse's) sons.” Where is it shown in reference to the Land [of Israel]? As stated (in Lev. 25:23), “for the land belongs to Me.” Where is it shown in reference to the elders? As stated (in Numb. 11:16), “Gather Me seventy men [from the elders of Israel].” Another interpretation (of Numb. 11:16), “Gather Me seventy men.” This text is related (to Amos. 9:6), “Who builds His upper chambers in the heavens and founds His celestial vault (aguddah) upon earth.” To what is the matter comparable? (Numb. R. 15:18; Sifre to Deut. 33:5 (346).) To a palace (Lat.: palatium.) that was built upon boat[s]. For as long a time that the boats are connected, the palace that is upon them will stand. Hence, it is stated (in Amos 9:6), “Who builds His upper chambers in the heavens.” When is His throne, as it were, established (Cf. the Gk. noun basis which means “ground” or “pedestal.”) above? (See M. Sam. 5.) When Israel becomes one society (aguddah). It is therefore stated (ibid.), “Who builds His upper chambers in the heavens.” When? When (ibid. cont.) “He founds His celestial vault (aguddah, which also means society) upon earth.” (Men. 27a.) And so it says (in Deut. 33:5), “Then He became King in Jeshurun [when the heads of the people assembled, the tribes of Israel together].” Therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses (in Numb. 11:16), “Gather Me seventy men.” Why? Because a gathering of righteous people is enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world, but a gathering of wicked people is an offense to them and an offense to the world.
Everyone who occupies himself with the Torah will become a leader and a king, as it is said: By Me kings reign and princes decree justice (Prov. 8:15). Hence Moses, who occupied himself with the Torah, became a leader and a king, as is said: And there was a king in Jeshurun (Deut. 33:5). How do we know that he was greatly occupied with the Torah? It is said: And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread nor drink wine (Exod. 34:28). During the day the Holy One, blessed be He, taught him the Written Law, and at night He instructed him in the Oral Law. Finally He gave him the tablets, and he descended only to discover that they had made the calf. Whereupon he broke the tablets and halted their revelry. He then sought mercy upon them. Moses did not fail to prostrate himself in a single corner while pleading in their behalf, until the Holy One, blessed be He, became reconciled with them. Then he said: Master of the Universe, give them a second tablet. He replied: I made the first tablets and you broke them; now you must replace them, as it is said: Hew these two tablets.
AND THESE ARE THE KINGS. Some say that this chapter records a prophecy. (Our verse reads, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel. Saul was Israel’s first king. Thus our chapter appears to deal with the post Mosaic period. These commentaries explain that Moses wrote our chapter as prophecy.) However, Yitzchaki (Some identify him with Isaac ben Solomon Israeli (c. 850-950). He was a philosopher, Biblical commentator and court physician to the caliphs in Egypt and Kairouan.) claims in his book that this chapter was composed during the reign of King Jehoshaphat. (A ninth-century king of Judah. Jehoshaphat was the eighth Hebrew king to reign starting from Saul. In his days the Edomites no longer had kings for they were subject to Judah. This is the reason that once the eighth Hebrew king ascended the throne it was written that the Edomites, too, had eight kings.) He explained the generations as he saw fit. Was he not rightly named Yitzchak? (A play on Gen. 27:36.) Everyone that heareth his interpretation will laugh at him. (A play on Gen. 21:6.) For he identified Hadar (v. 39) with Hadad the Edomite (I Kings 11:14) (A contemporary of King Solomon.) and also said that Mehetabel (v. 39) is to be identified with the sister of Tahpenes the queen of Egypt. (Pharaoh gave his wife Tahpenes’ sister to Hadad in marriage.) Far be it for one to believe that our chapter was written in the days of Jehoshaphat as Yitzchaki maintains. Indeed his book is fit to be burned. Why did Yitzchaki maintain that it is impossible for eight Edomite kings to have reigned before Moses (Yitchaki claimed that there were too few years between the establishment of the Edomite kingdom and Moses for eight Edomite kings to reign, for from Esau’s death, when the Edomite kingdom was established, until the Revelation at Sinai, when Moses reigned, only 193 years passed. The computation of the 193 years is as follows: The Israelites spent 210 years in Egypt, starting with Jacob’s descent to Egypt. Jacob lived there 17 years before he died. Esau died on the very day that Jacob did (Sotah 13a). We thus subtract 17 from 210 and we get 193 (Cherez).) when we find double the number of kings in Israel in about the same number of years? (The kingdom of Israel lasted for 241 years during which time Israel had 19 kings (Krinsky). I.E. says that Israel had double the number of kings of the Edomites. Either he uses a round number or does not count Zimri (I Kings 16:15) who reigned seven days; Zechariah (II Kings 15:8) who reigned six months; and Shallum who reigned a month (Ibid., v. 13). Thus Israel had 16 kings in 241 years. Why, then, is it so hard to believe that eight Edomite kings reigned in 193 years (Krinsky)? Cherez explains that the first 16 kings of Israel reigned 210 years. Thus Israel had 16 kings in 210 years.) Furthermore, there were also proportionally many more kings of Judah in the same time period than the eight Edomite kings who reigned till the age of Moses. (Judah had 21 kings in 500 years (Krinsky). Hence why couldn’t the Edomites have eight kings in 193 years.) The truth is that king, in before there reigned any king over the children of Israel, refers to Moses who was king over Israel, and so it is written, And there was a king in Jeshurun (Deut. 33:5).
Therefore the Lord himself etc. Though you do not ask a sign, He will give it you. It is to me a matter of surprise that there are those who say the prophet here refers to Jesus, since the sign was given to Ahaz, and Jesus was born many years afterwards; besides, the prophet says, For before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land shall be forsaken; but the countries of Ephraim and Syria were wasted in the sixth year of Hezekiah, and (The following is added to show that The land shall be forsaken, can only refer to Syria and Israel; both kingdoms were successively conquered by Assyria in the time of Ahaz and Hezekiah.) it is distinctly said of whose two kings, etc. Many make the mistake of identifying Immanuel with Hezekiah; they cannot be the same, granting even this prophecy to have been uttered at the beginning of the reign of Ahaz; he reigned only sixteen years, and Hezekiah was at the death of Ahaz twenty-five years old. According to others, Immanuel is another son of Ahaz, and others again take the names (Immanuel, Maher Shalal and Shear Yashub) as symbolical of the kingdom; but if so, what meaning would be in the child’s knowing good and evil and in Maher Shalal calling father and mother? (8:4). I think that Immanuel is the son of Isaiah, as well as Maher Shalal; the latter is proved by And I went unto the prophetess, etc. (8:3). Shear Yashub is similarly related to the prophet (ver. 3); each of the three sons received a name that contained some hint at future events; Immanuel implied that God would help them and be with them during the troubles caused by the two kings; Maher Shalal, that the time for the exile of Samaria had arrived; and Shear Yashub, that the remnant of Israel would repent; this explanation is well borne out by the words, Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me, are for signs and for wonders. Comp. The children which the Lord hath graciously given to thy servant (Gen. 33:5). (This quotation is to prove that the words, the children which the Lord has given me refer to the true children of the prophet, not to pupils, and that they are not used in any other figurative sense.) Those that in the former passage regard children as equivalent to pupils must produce us some analogy from Scripture. (It is hardly necessary to refer to the great many instances, where the listener or reader is addressed as My son, but Ibn Ezra speaks of the whole phrase, children whom the Lord hath given me, and to take that in a figurative sense is not possible without some analogous examples.) Isaiah himself was a sign and an example concerning Egypt (20:3).—The Gaon says that the sign consisted in the child being a male child; (This was foretold by the prophet (ver. 14).) but in my opinion the sign was that the child was to eat butter and honey; for it is not usual that children eat these things immediately after their birth. (If this be the right explanation, the most important point in the sign is omitted from the text, namely, that the child will eat those things immediately after its birth.)
For unto us, etc. All this has come to pass through the merit of the child that is born unto us. We know that at the time of the invasion of Sennacherib, Hezekiah was thirty-nine years old; (Hezekiah was twenty-five years old when he commenced to reign; he was king for twenty-nine years (2 Kings 18:2); fifteen years before his death he fell ill (20:6), and this seems to have happened immediately after the destruction of the Assyrian army. According to I. E. on 8:5, Hezekiah was at the time of this prophecy twenty-nine years old. As to the application of the word ילד to adults comp. Gen. 33:5, 37:30, 44:20.) at the time of this prophecy he is, therefore, called child (ילד). פלא יועץ אל גבור אבי עד. According to some, these expressions are names of God, and the following שר שלום, the name of the child. I think that all these words are names of the child; he is called פלא wonder, (A. V., Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father.) (A. V., Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father.) (A. V., Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father.) (A. V., Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father.) because God did wonders in his days; יועץ counselling; this is distinctly said of Hezekiah (comp. 2 Chr. 30:2); אל גבור Mighty chief; for Hezekiah was powerful; אבי עד The father of perpetuity, because the reign of the house of David was prolonged through his merits: עַד has here the same meaning as in 58:15. שר שלום Prince of peace because peace was established in his days; comp. 2 Chron. 32:22
[AND BE GRACIOUS TO THEE.] If you make a request of God in a time of trouble, may He be gracious to you. Ve-yechunekka (and be gracious to thee) is similar to channuni (have pity) in have pity upon me, O ye (Job. 19:21) and chanan (graciously given) in The children whom God hath graciously given (Gen. 33:5). (According to I.E. this should be rendered, The children whom God out His pity hath given.) Ve-yechunekka comes from the same root as chanan. (Which I.E. renders, to have pity. See I.E. on Ex. 22:26 (Vol. 2, p. 490).)
אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, "whom G'd has granted me here." Righteous people do not let an opportunity go by without acknowledging that anything they have received was a gift of G'd. We find an example of Jacob having done the same in Genesis 33,5.
אלו-הים יחנך בני, “may G’d be gracious to you my son.” The expression is similar to the one used by Yaakov when he referred to his children as the ones whom חנן אלו-הים “G’d was gracious enough to grant him.” (Genesis 33,5). Binyamin had not yet been born at the time so Joseph used the expression here to include him in that blessing.
אלהים יחנך בני GOD BE GRACIOUS UNTO THEE, MY SON — With regard of the other sons of Jacob we have heard the expression “grace” used — viz., (33:5) “[The children] whom God hath graciously given (חנן) to thy servant”. But Benjamin had not then been born and therefore was not included amongst the children of whom Jacob used this term; on this account Joseph used the term “grace” in blessing him (Genesis Rabbah 92:5).
[38] Also in the votaries of practice Thou hast implanted a zeal to sow and beget the children of the soul, and when they are thus endowed they have cried out in their pleasure, ‘The children, wherewith Thou hast shewn mercy to Thy servant’ (Gen. 33:5). Of such children innocence is the nurse and fostermother; their souls are virgin and tender and rich in nature’s gifts, ready to receive the glorious and divine impressions of virtue’s graving.
[Eisov] raised his eyes and saw the women and children. He said, Who are these to you? He [Yaakov] said, These are the children whom God has graciously [compassionately] granted your servant.
And he lifted up his eyes and saw the wives and the children, and said, Who are these with thee? And he said, They are the souls which have been given to me through mercy from before the Lord upon thy servant.
| וַתִּגַּ֧שְׁןָ הַשְּׁפָח֛וֹת הֵ֥נָּה וְיַלְדֵיהֶ֖ן וַתִּֽשְׁתַּחֲוֶֽיןָ׃ | 6 E | Then the maids, with their children, came forward and bowed low; |
השפחות, הנה וילדיהן ותשתחוין, “the servant maids, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves; but their children did not prostrate themselves, seeing that they were only children of servants, Esau would not insist on their making an obeisance to him. An alternate exegesis: the children only approached Esau as a sign of courtesy together with their respective mothers. They were not willing to prostrate themselves together with their mothers. Their reasoning was that their mothers being servants themselves naturally had to make an obeisance; however they, who were sons of Yaakov, were not prepared to make any obeisance to anyone. When the sons of Leah and Rachel saw that their mothers made an obeisance they decided to do the same. This is why the Torah in verse 7 writes twice: וישתחוו, “they prostrated themselves,” in the masculine mode.
ותגשן השפחות....ותשתחון, “the servant maids drew near and prostrated themselves (before Esau);” the emphasis in this verse is on the servant maids, to tell us that their children did not prostrate themselves. They considered their respective mothers as socially inferior to themselves. On the other hand, when the children of Leah observed that their mother prostrated herself they followed their mother’s example and did likewise.
(6-7) ותגשן וגו׳ ותשתחוין ותגש וגו׳ וישתחוו ואחר וגו׳ וישתחוו. Die gewöhnliche Regel, die bei einem auf männliche und weibliche Subjekte zugleich sich beziehenden Prädikate dem männlichen den Vorzug gibt, reicht hier nicht aus, weil ja gleich im ersten Satze das Prädikat in Feminalform steht. Es scheinen vielmehr bei genauerem Zusehen edle interessante Züge, insbesondere das ganze edle, mutige Selbstbewusstsein jüdischer Frauen sich zu verraten, die selbst in äußerster Gefahr aufrecht bleiben, wo das sich das stärkere nennende Geschlecht den Kopf verliert. Wie viel mögen die Frauen und die Kinder in der letzten Zeit von dem bösen Onkel gehört haben, und wie sehr mag ihnen eingeprägt worden sein, mit äußerster Demut dem Gefürchteten entgegenzutreten! Nun, die שפחות, sie und ihre Kinder traten hin und bückten sich. Das sonst ganz überflüssige הנה hebt dies ja noch ganz besonders hervor, darum ותשתחוין, die Mütter mit inbegriffen und zuerst. Waren sie ja, ihrer ganzen Vergangenheit nach, gewöhnt, sich vor noch viel weniger Gefürchteten zu beugen. Darauf trat Lea hin, das edle, stolze, selbstbewusste Weib, die eigentliche Mutter und Trägerin des Hauses, eine Lea beugt sich vor einem Esau — nicht, die Kinder taten es: ושתחוו! Nun hätte Rahel vortreten sollen, da trat Josef als Ritter schützend vor die Mutter und Rahel, ängstlich, Esau möchte zürnen, beugt, um ihn zu entwaffnen, sich rasch, damit sich Josef auch beuge, וישתחוו und so beugten sie sich beide. Darin dürfte denn auch das Motiv zu der oben gegebenen Anordnung zu suchen sein. Er ließ die Mägde voran hintreten, weil er von diesen das demütigste Benehmen erwarten durfte, Rahel und Josef zuletzt, weil er es von diesen am wenigsten erwartete.
The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves, following Jacob’s lead.
ותגשן השפחות הנה וילדיהן ותשתחוין, “the maid-servants with their children approached and prostrated themselves.” In this instance no mention is made of the children prostrating themselves, as opposed to the verse describing both Rachel and Joseph as prostrating themselves. Other commentators say that originally, the sons of the maidservants did not prostrate themselves, saying that their mothers whose social status was inferior, prostrated themselves caused them to prostrate themselves, whereas they, being sons of Yaakov, would not do so. When they observed that the sons of both Leah and Rachel did prostrate themselves, the sons of the maid-servants felt that they could do no less.
“Then the maids, with their children, came forward and bowed low” [33:6]. Bilhah and Zilpah came with their children. Bilhah and Zilpah bowed down, but their children did not bow down. Hizkuni asks a question. Why did the children of Bilhah and Zilpah not bow down and the children of Rachel and Leah did bow down? The explanation is that the children of Bilhah and Zilpah thought to themselves, are we subservient that we should bow to Esau because we are the children of the maidservants? (Hizkuni, Genesis, 33:6.)
Let the deaf hear (Isa. 42:18) and the lame run and not get tired. Let the blind see (Isa. 42:18) the teeming visions (Exod. 38:8) which are gleaned and reaped by the heads of the tribes (Num. 30:2), they and their children (Gen. 33:6), commoner and priest alike, as is acknowledged properly. “All is foreseen, and permission is given” (Avot 3:16). Let the men go (Exod. 10:11) to the chief cornerstone (Ps. 118:22) to make books (Eccles. 12:12) which speak of the honor of God to the house of Israel. For all the congregation (Num. 16:3), the suckling with the venerable man (Deut. 32:25), and the mixed multitude fell a lusting (Num. 11:4) for Torah and testimony (Isa. 8:20), and the weaned child shall put his hand (Isa. 11:8).
“He lifted his eyes, saw the women and the children, and said: Who are these to you? He said: The children with whom God has graced your servant” (Genesis 33:5). “He lifted his eyes” – Rabbi Binyamin bar Levi said: Because we heard grace regarding eleven tribes, but we did not hear regarding Benjamin; (He was not yet born when Jacob said: “The children with whom God has graced your servant.”) where did we hear? It was elsewhere: “He said: God be gracious to you, my son” (Genesis 43:29). (Joseph said it to Benjamin.) “The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:6). “Leah too, and her children, approached, and prostrated themselves; and then Joseph and Rachel approached, and prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:7). “The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves. Leah too, and her children, approached…” Regarding Joseph it is written: “And then Joseph and Rachel approached, and prostrated themselves.” Joseph said: This wicked one has a covetous eye. Let him not direct his eyes and look at my mother. He stood tall and obscured her. That is what is written: “Joseph is a fruitful tree [ben porat], a fruitful tree alongside a spring [alei ayin]” (Genesis 49:22) – Joseph, you grew like a fruitful tree to block an eye [alei ayin]. (To obscure Rachel from Esau’s eye.) Joseph, you grew due to cows [ben parot]. (The reference is to the cows in Pharaoh’s dream.) “A fruitful tree alongside a spring [alei ayin]” – you grew due to produce [ben perot]. (The reference is to the sheaves in Pharaoh’s dream.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Simon: It is incumbent upon me to repay you due to that eye. (Due to the eye that you blocked from seeing Rachel. “To repay [lifro’a]” is expounded from the word porat.)
“Pharaoh called Joseph's name Tzafenat Paane’aḥ and he gave him Asenat, daughter of Potifera, priest of On, as a wife. Joseph went out over the land of Egypt” (Genesis 41:45). “Pharaoh called Joseph's name Tzafenat Paane’aḥ” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He reveals hidden matters [tzefunot] and it is easy [noḥot] for him to state them. Rabbi Ḥizkiya said: With knowledge, he reveals hidden matters [tzefunot], and assuages [meniaḥ] the spirit of people with them. The Rabbis say: Tzadi – seer [tzofeh]; peh – redeemer [podeh]; nun – prophet [navi]; tav – supporter [tomekh]; Peh – interpreter [poter]; ayin – clever [arum]; nun – understanding [navon]; ḥet – prognosticator [ḥozeh]. (These are the Hebrew letters that spell Tzafenat Paane’aḥ.) “Joseph was thirty years old as he stood before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. Joseph came out from before Pharaoh, and he passed through the entire land of Egypt” (Genesis 41:46). Rabbi Aḥa said: You came to reveal that you are the son of the hidden one. (Rachel was hidden when Jacob and his family confronted Esau, as the midrash will go on to explain. ) Regarding them all, it is written: “The maidservants approached” (Genesis 33:6); “Leah, too, approached…” (Genesis 33:7). But regarding Joseph it is written: “Then Joseph and Rachel approached” (Genesis 33:7). Joseph said: ‘This wicked one has a covetous eye…’ (Joseph did not want Esau to direct his eyes at Rachel, and therefore he stood tall and obscured her (see Bereshit Rabba 78:10).) The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You obscured your mother from sight and stood tall. I will repay you and elevate you’ – “Joseph was thirty years old [as he stood before Pharaoh]” (Genesis 41:46).
“Joseph is a fruitful tree, a fruitful tree alongside a spring; branches run over the wall” (Genesis 49:22). “Joseph is a fruitful [porat] tree ” – a son who broke faith [shehefer] with his brothers; a son whose brothers broke faith with him; (Joseph brought his father evil reports about his brothers (Genesis 37:2); they later sold him into slavery (Genesis 37:28). ) a son who defied [shehefer] his master’s wife; a son whose master’s wife turned against [shehefera] him. Rabbi Avin said: The son who achieved greatness through cows [parot]. (Joseph rose to prominence after interpreting Pharaoh’s dream, which featured cows.) Joseph is the son who achieved greatness through produce [perot]. “Joseph is a fruitful tree” – Joseph achieved greatness. Regarding them all it is written: “The maidservants approached…” (Genesis 33:6) (See Bereshit Rabba 90:4.) – this is what he said to him: I must repay you for that eye. (Jacob wanted to compensate Joseph for having obscured Rachel from Esau’s eye.) “Branches [banot] run [tzaada] over the wall…” – you find that when Joseph emerged to rule over Egypt, the daughters [banot] of kings would peer through the slits and would cast upon him bracelets, pendants, nose rings, and rings so he would lift his eyes and look at them. Nevertheless, he did not look at them. The Holy One blessed be He said: You did not lift your eyes and look at them; as you live, you will cause your daughters (The daughters of Tzelofḥad.) to have a foothold [tze’ida] in the Torah. What is a foothold? A Torah portion. (A passage regarding the laws of inheritance (Numbers 27:1–11) was stated as a response to the request of the daughters of Tzelofḥad. )
What did Mordekhai say to someone who would say to him: “Why are you violating the king’s command?” (Esther 3:3) Rabbi Levi said: Mordekhai would say: ‘Moses our master cautioned us in the Torah: “Cursed is the man who will craft an idol or a cast figure” (Deuteronomy 27:15), and this wicked one is rendering himself an idol. And Isaiah the prophet cautioned us: “Desist from man, who has breath in his nostrils, as what is he considered?” (Isaiah 2:22). Moreover, I am of the nobility of the Holy One blessed be He, as all the other tribes were born outside the Land of Israel and my ancestor was born in the Land of Israel.’ (Benjamin was born in Canaan, but all his older brothers were born in Padan Aram when Jacob and his wives were still dwelling with Laban.) They said to him: ‘We will tell him.’ Immediately, “they told Haman…” (Esther 3:4). Haman said to them: ‘Tell him: Didn’t his ancestor prostrate himself before my ancestor; that is what is written: “The maidservants approached…and prostrated themselves, and afterward Joseph and Rachel approached and prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:6–7). He responded: ‘But Benjamin had not yet been born.’ They told him; that is what is written: “They told Haman.”
[TO ALL CATTLE.] Le-khol (to all) also governs two words, (See above, note 29. According to I.E. le-khol (to all), which is prefaced to cattle, also governs fowl.) for the meaning of our verse is: And the man gave names to all cattle, and to all the fowl of the air. (J.P.S. translates, And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air.) In that his men become few (Deut. 33:6) (It should be read as if written, In that his men not become few. In other words, the word ve-al in the first part of the verse also governs yehi (let).) and And I have not learned wisdom (Prov. 30:3) (The verse literally concludes, And I have knowledge of the Holy One. The not of the first part also applies to the second part. Thus the above should read: And I do not have knowledge of the Holy One. Thus not governs two words.) are similar. There are many other such instances.
FEW IN NUMBER. Mete (few) means men. Anything that can be numbered is deemed a few. (I.E. renders mete mispar (few in number) as men of number, i.e., few men.) Hence Rabbi Aaron Ha-Kohen, dean of the Yeshiva, (Head of the academy in Pumpeditha. Hai Gaon was among his students (Weiser).) errs in rendering literally vi-yehi metav mispar (in that his men became few) (Deut. 33:6). (Rabbi Aaron renders Deut. 33:6, and let his men be numbered. I.E. renders this verse: and let his men not be men who can be numbered.)
(Num. 16:33.) They and everything that belonged to them descended alive into the pit. Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Rebbi Ḥelbo, even their names flew away from their papyrus rolls (Greek τόμος, “piece, roll of papyrus, volume”.) . Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, even one of their needles that was in the hand of an Israel as a loan was swallowed up with them, for it is written: They and everything that belonged to them descended alive into the pit. Who prayed for them? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, Moses prayed for them, Reuben shall live and not die (Deut. 33:6, this refers to Datan and Abiram from the tribe of Reuben.) . (Midrash Shemuel ed. Buber 5(12).) Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Hannah prayed for them. This is Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s opinion, as Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said in the name of Rebbi Yose: Koraḥ’s (opinion) [band] was continuously sinking until Hannah stood up and said, the Eternal kills and brings to life, He sends down into the pit and lifts (1S. 2:6. She was married to a descendant of Korah’s (2 Chr. 6:18–23).) .
The handmaids [concubines] [then] approached, they, and their children, and prostrated themselves.
And the concubines came near, they and their children, and bowed themselves;
| וַתִּגַּ֧שׁ גַּם־לֵאָ֛ה וִילָדֶ֖יהָ וַיִּֽשְׁתַּחֲו֑וּ וְאַחַ֗ר נִגַּ֥שׁ יוֹסֵ֛ף וְרָחֵ֖ל וַיִּֽשְׁתַּחֲוֽוּ׃ | 7 E | next Leah, with her children, came forward and bowed low; and last, Joseph and Rachel came forward and bowed low. |
נגש יוסף ורחל, Joseph and Rachel approached; it is customary for the Torah when referring to a man and a woman in the same story to mention the name of the man first. Earlier, in verse 2, the Torah had mentioned the women first, even Rachel before Joseph. If you were to ask why Yaakov had not hidden Rachel just as he is supposed to have hidden Dinah? We would have to answer that all of Avraham’s descendants up to that time had strictly refrained from violating a married woman sexually. There was therefore no reason to suspect Esau of doing such a thing. Dinah, was single however, so that Yaakov reasoned that he might violate her. Joseph was not so sure and therefore insisted on walking ahead of his mother. [Seeing that he was at most seven years old at the time, it is difficult to see how he could have protected his mother in such a case. Ed.]
נגש יוסף ורחל. He made Joseph approach Esau before Rachel, seeing that Rachel was so protective of him (her only child) that she made him walk in front of her where she could constantly keep her eye on him, literally keeping him between her hands. There is an aggadic explanation (quoted by Rashi) that Joseph walked in front of his mother on his own initiative because she was so attractive that he wanted to shield her from inquisitive eyes using his tall physique to shield her from such glances. The source of the Midrash cites the wordבן פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין, “Joseph is a noble and prominent son, a noble and prominent son already at the source (well) (Genesis 49,22)
נגש יוסף ורחל, normally, the males are mentioned before the females. The reason why Yaakov changed that routine was so that the mothers could precede their children with the exception of Joseph and Rachel. The only reason why in verse 2 Rachel is mentioned ahead of Joseph, is because Leah was mentioned ahead of her children as were the other mothers of Yaakov’s children.
נגש יוסף ורחל JOSEPH AND RACHEL STEPPED NEAR — In the case of all the others the mothers approached before the children, but in the case of Rachel, Joseph came in front of her. He said: “My mother is a beautiful woman: for fear that this wicked man will set his fancy on her I will stand in front of her and prevent him from gazing at her ” As a reward for this Joseph merited the blessing associated with the words עלי עין "with the eye” (Genesis Rabbah 78:10).
Leah, too, and her children approached, and prostrated themselves; and afterward Joseph and Rachel also approached, and prostrated themselves.
“Joseph and Rachel came forward” [33:7]. Rashi asks a question. Why is Joseph mentioned before his mother, Rachel, and with all the other children, the mother is mentioned before their children? The explanation is that Joseph placed himself in front of his mother since she was very pretty, and so that Esau should not see her and want to take her. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:7.)
“He lifted his eyes, saw the women and the children, and said: Who are these to you? He said: The children with whom God has graced your servant” (Genesis 33:5). “He lifted his eyes” – Rabbi Binyamin bar Levi said: Because we heard grace regarding eleven tribes, but we did not hear regarding Benjamin; (He was not yet born when Jacob said: “The children with whom God has graced your servant.”) where did we hear? It was elsewhere: “He said: God be gracious to you, my son” (Genesis 43:29). (Joseph said it to Benjamin.) “The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:6). “Leah too, and her children, approached, and prostrated themselves; and then Joseph and Rachel approached, and prostrated themselves” (Genesis 33:7). “The maidservants approached, they and their children, and they prostrated themselves. Leah too, and her children, approached…” Regarding Joseph it is written: “And then Joseph and Rachel approached, and prostrated themselves.” Joseph said: This wicked one has a covetous eye. Let him not direct his eyes and look at my mother. He stood tall and obscured her. That is what is written: “Joseph is a fruitful tree [ben porat], a fruitful tree alongside a spring [alei ayin]” (Genesis 49:22) – Joseph, you grew like a fruitful tree to block an eye [alei ayin]. (To obscure Rachel from Esau’s eye.) Joseph, you grew due to cows [ben parot]. (The reference is to the cows in Pharaoh’s dream.) “A fruitful tree alongside a spring [alei ayin]” – you grew due to produce [ben perot]. (The reference is to the sheaves in Pharaoh’s dream.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Simon: It is incumbent upon me to repay you due to that eye. (Due to the eye that you blocked from seeing Rachel. “To repay [lifro’a]” is expounded from the word porat.)
“Pharaoh called Joseph's name Tzafenat Paane’aḥ and he gave him Asenat, daughter of Potifera, priest of On, as a wife. Joseph went out over the land of Egypt” (Genesis 41:45). “Pharaoh called Joseph's name Tzafenat Paane’aḥ” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He reveals hidden matters [tzefunot] and it is easy [noḥot] for him to state them. Rabbi Ḥizkiya said: With knowledge, he reveals hidden matters [tzefunot], and assuages [meniaḥ] the spirit of people with them. The Rabbis say: Tzadi – seer [tzofeh]; peh – redeemer [podeh]; nun – prophet [navi]; tav – supporter [tomekh]; Peh – interpreter [poter]; ayin – clever [arum]; nun – understanding [navon]; ḥet – prognosticator [ḥozeh]. (These are the Hebrew letters that spell Tzafenat Paane’aḥ.) “Joseph was thirty years old as he stood before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. Joseph came out from before Pharaoh, and he passed through the entire land of Egypt” (Genesis 41:46). Rabbi Aḥa said: You came to reveal that you are the son of the hidden one. (Rachel was hidden when Jacob and his family confronted Esau, as the midrash will go on to explain. ) Regarding them all, it is written: “The maidservants approached” (Genesis 33:6); “Leah, too, approached…” (Genesis 33:7). But regarding Joseph it is written: “Then Joseph and Rachel approached” (Genesis 33:7). Joseph said: ‘This wicked one has a covetous eye…’ (Joseph did not want Esau to direct his eyes at Rachel, and therefore he stood tall and obscured her (see Bereshit Rabba 78:10).) The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You obscured your mother from sight and stood tall. I will repay you and elevate you’ – “Joseph was thirty years old [as he stood before Pharaoh]” (Genesis 41:46).
(Deut. 25:18, cont.:) And he cut off (rt.: znb) all who were lagging behind you. He smote them with a blow to the tail (rt.: znb). (The word can also denote the penis. See PR 7:3; 12:10, 13; 13:1.) And this agrees with what R. Hanina bar Shilqa, said, “What did the House of Amalek do to Israel? (Below, section 14.) They cut off their penes and flung them heavenward, as they said, ‘This is what You have chosen, take for Yourself what You have chosen.” As Israel did not know what the nature of spit was, until Amalek came and taught them, as stated (with reference to Ezek. 8:17), “here they were sending the spit in their faces.” From whom did he learn it? From his grandfather Esau, as stated (in Gen. 27:36), “And he said, ‘Is he not (hky) rightly named Jacob?’” (Gen. R. 67:4.) He rubbed (rt.: hkk) his throat and brought out the spit. (Deut. 25:18), “All who were lagging behind you.” R. Judah, R. Nehemiah, and the masters [differed]. R. Judah said, “They said, ‘If He is master over all of out deeds, we will serve Him; but if not, we will revolt against Him.’” R. Nehemiah said, “They said, ‘If He furnishes us with our food like a king who is living in the province, such that the province lacks nothing at all, we will serve Him; but if not, we will revolt against Him.’” And the masters said, “They said, “’If we have a thought in our hearts and He knows what we are thinking, we will serve Him; but if not, we will revolt against Him.’” R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Levi, “In their heart they had a thought, and the Holy One, blessed be He, granted them their request.” And what is the evidence? (Ps. 78:18:) “They tested God in their heart by asking food for themselves.” See what [else] is written there (in vs. 29), “So they ate and were very full.” Another interpretation (of Deut. 25:18), “all who were lagging behind you”: R. Judah, R. Nehemiah and the masters [differ]. (PRK 3:12; PR 12:13, cont.; PRE 44; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Exod. 17:8 and Deut. 25:18.) R. Judah says, “Whoever was overcome was discarded.” R. Nehemiah says, “Whomever the cloud vomited up was discarded.” And the rabbis say, “It was the tribe of Dan that the cloud vomited up, [as] they all served idols, as stated (The reference is to the idol which the Danites took from Micah. See Jud. 17–18.) (Deut. 25:18, cont.), ‘when you were tired and weary, and did not fear God.’” [You were] tired from thirst and weary from the road, and you did not fear God. (Above, Gen. 7:15; 8:5; 12:13; Tanh., Gen. 12:14; Deut. 6:10, cont.; PRK 3:13; PR 13:4; Gen. R. 73:7; cf. BB 123b.) R. Pinhas said in the name of R. Samuel bar Nahman, “It is a transmitted aggada [that] Esau will fall at the hand of the children of Rachel (Joseph and Benjamin), as stated (in Jer. 49:20), ‘Surely the youngest of the flock shall drag them away.’ Why does it call them the youngest of the flock? Because they were the youngest of the tribes.” Hence, Moses said to Joshua (Exod. 17:9), “Choose men for us.” As he was [descended from] Joseph, about whom it is written (Gen. 42:18), “I fear God.” And about Esau, it is written (Deut. 25:18), “and did not fear God.” Youth is written with reference to the one and small is written with reference to the other (i.e., with reference to Esau). Youth is written with reference to the one (in Gen. 37:2), “since he (Joseph) was a youth with the children of Bilhah [and with the children of Zilpah].” And small is written with reference to the other (in Obad. 1:2), “I will surely make you (Edom) smallest among the nations.” The one (Esau) grew up with two who were righteous (i.e., with Isaac and Rebekah) and did not learn from their deeds, while the other grew up with two who were wicked (i.e., Potiphar and Pharaoh) and did not learn from their deeds. The one received the birthright as a result of his good deeds, while the other lost his birthright from his evil deeds. The one supported his brothers, while the other sought to kill his brother. The one fenced himself away from sexual immorality and from the spilling of blood, while the other sullied himself with sexual immorality and the spilling of blood. The one conceded to the revival of the dead, as stated (Gen. 50:24), “God will surely remember you”; while the other denied the revival of the dead, as stated (Gen. 25:32), “Behold, I am going to die.” The one offered his life for his mother’s honor, as stated (Gen. 33:7), “and after, Joseph and Rachel came forward and bowed”; while the other sought to kill his mother, as stated (Amos 1:11), “and he destroyed his uterus.” (This is a homiletical translation of the verse, which would otherwise be translated as, AND HE REPRESSED HIS PITY.) Therefore, the one (Esau) will fall by the hand of the other (Jospeh). And R. Johanan said, “All of the ministering angels sought to battle with the ministering angel of Esau, but he would not fall by their hand, as he would remove each and every one with a response: To Reuben, he says, ‘You were suspected about your father’s concubine.’ To Simeon and Levi, ‘You also killed [the inhabitants of] Shekhem.’ To the other tribes, ‘You sold your brother and sought to kill him.’ To Judah, ‘You were also suspected about your daughter-in-law, Tamar.’ To Benjamin he said, ‘You were suspected about the concubine in Giveah.’ When the ministering angel of [Joseph] came and battled with him, he immediately fell in front of him, as he had no response to answer him. This is what is written (Obad 1:18), “And the House of Jacob shall be fire, and the House of Joseph flame, and the House of Esau shall be straw.”
The Temple was similarly constructed by means of these three attributes, as it is said: He was the son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, and his father was a man of Tyre, and he was filled with wisdom, understanding, and skill (I Kings 7:14). Similarly, the Temple will be rebuilt in the future with these three attributes, as is said: Through wisdom is a house builded, and by understanding it is established; and by knowledge are the chambers filled with all precious and pleasant riches (Prov. 24:3–4). Therefore, And He hath filled him with the spirit of God. Where did all this wisdom come from? From the spirit of God. And He filled him with the spirit of God alludes also to Joshua, who descended from the tribe of Ephraim, as it is written: And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom (Deut. 34:9). And it refers as well to Othniel the son of Kenaz, who came from the tribe of Judah, since it is written about him: And the spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he judged Israel (Judg. 3:10). All this happened because Moses blessed the tribe: And this for Judah, and he said: “Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in unto his people; his hands shall contend for him, and Thou shalt be a help against his adversaries” (Deut. 33:7). When they become involved in difficulties, You shall be a help to them.
ואחר ילדה בת, “and after that she gave birth to a daughter.” After Leah had born six sons she bore a daughter. The meaning of the word ואחר is “finally, her last birth.” The word ואחר occurs in the same context in Genesis 33,7 ואחר נגש יוסף, and at the end, Joseph approached. The six sons Leah bore corresponded to the six emanations and “extremities,” in the celestial regions which are matched by parallel phenomena in the terrestrial regions bearing the seal of G’d’s name. She bore the daughter last as the שכינה is comprised of the six extremities, representing the attribute of Justice. Leah alluded to this when she called her daughter דינה, a clear reference to the attribute of Justice, מדת הדין. The name דינה contains the two middle letters of the name א-ד-נ-י, the “pronoun” of the attribute of Justice combined with two letters of the attribute of Mercy י-ה She was the product בת, of מי זהב a combination of water=חסד and זהב=גבורה. (Rabbi Chavell quotes a book called האזרח בישראל as his source for this insight. Ed.) One may also reason that she did not have any special deep kabbalistic thoughts when she named her daughter. When she had given birth to Zevulun, her sixth son, she did not want to “descend” and bear a son belonging to a “lower” emanation as she was in no need to receive input from those emanations having already succeeded to receive input from the relatively highest emanation תפארת. According to Berachot 60 Leah had been pregnant with a male fetus. She prayed to G’d to let her have a daughter. Our sages felt that Joseph would have been born as a son of Leah if not for Leah’s prayer. She did not now want to give birth to a child under a lower aegis than the one Zevulun had been born under. As a result of Leah’s attitude, her daughter Dinah eventually suffered rape at the hands of Shechem.
Leah and her children also approached and prostrated themselves, and finally Yoseif and Rochel approached and prostrated themselves.
and Leah also approached, and her children, and bowed; and afterward Joseph came near and stood before Rahel, and hid her by his stature, and they bowed.
| וַיֹּ֕אמֶר מִ֥י לְךָ֛ כׇּל־הַמַּחֲנֶ֥ה הַזֶּ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר פָּגָ֑שְׁתִּי וַיֹּ֕אמֶר לִמְצֹא־חֵ֖ן בְּעֵינֵ֥י אֲדֹנִֽי׃ | 8 E | And he asked, “What do you mean by all this company which I have met?” He answered, “To gain my lord’s favor.” |
WHAT MEANEST THOU. The word mi (what) (Mi (what) usually means who.) always refers to a person. The meaning of our clause (Mi le-khah kol ha-machneh ha-zeh literally means: who to thee all this camp? This lends itself to the two interpretations offered by I.E.) is: to whom did you send this gift, or whom were you thinking of when you sent this gift.
?ויאמר מי לך, “to whom belong?” In other words, “to whom did you send this whole camp which is at your disposal, and to who did you send all these sheep and cattle?”
למצוא חן בעיניך אדוני I have sent it to you my lord in the hope that by accepting it you would do me a favour.
WHAT MEANEST THOU BY ALL THIS CAMP WHICH I MET? Now Jacob’s servants did everything he had commanded them, but Esau refused to accept the explanation from them. Perhaps due to his haughtiness and his arrogance he did not speak to them and did not ask them, Whose art thou ? and whither goest thou? (Above, 32:18.) and they were afraid to approach him. And so he now said, What meanest thou by all this camp? for he thought that they belonged to Jacob on the basis of the words of the first messengers [whom Jacob had originally sent to inform Esau of his coming]. It may be that these messengers had so related in Esau’s camp, and it was then conveyed to Esau. Perhaps because there was no other individual on that road that had these things, [he assumed that they belonged to Jacob]. The intent of What meanest thou by all this camp? is: “Who is this person to you that you send him all these?” That is to say, “Who is this superior of yours that you send him all these?” And he answered him, “To find favour in the sight of my lord, for in my eyes, you are the superior and lord.”
?מי לך כל המחנה הזה, a reference to the herds of animals Yaakov had sent.
מי לך כל המחנה WHAT MEANEST THOU BY ALL THIS CAMP? — What is all this camp that I have met which belongs to you — as much as to say: what do you intend by it? Scripture really uses the word המחנה in reference to those who were bringing the present. A Midrashic explanation is: He had met companies of angels who thrust him and his men aside, asking them, “Who are you?” These replied, “We belong to Esau”. Whereupon the angels exclaimed, “Smite, smite!” They (Esau’s men) then said, “Let him alone; he is a son of Isaac”. They took no notice of this. “He is a grandson of Abraham”. Again they took no notice of this. “He is Jacob’s brother". Whereupon they said: if this be so, you are one with us” (Genesis Rabbah 78:11).
Who are these to you. Are they your children or your servants?
Who is this entire camp that I have met... [Rashi says this because] מי לך cannot mean the same as in v. 5, “Who are these to you,” where it meant: “Are they your servants or your sons?” For here, Eisov knew they were the gift-bearers, and surely they were Yaakov’s servants. Furthermore, why would Yaakov reply, “It was to find favor in the eyes of my master”? Perforce, Eisov was asking: “What is its purpose to you?” In other words, “Why did you go to all this trouble?” But Maharshal writes that מי לך means, “Whose are they?” You might object: If so, why did Yaakov reply, “It was to find favor in your eyes”? Should he not have replied first that they were his? The answer is: Eisov was asking, “To whom belongs this entire camp that I should inquire of him, “For what purpose did you send it?” Yaakov replied, “It was to find favor in your eyes,” as Eisov’s main inquiry was about the gift’s purpose.
The Midrashic explanation is: He met up with groups of angels... [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, what does “that whole camp” mean? The gift-bearers were only five servants! [You might ask: According to the Midrash,] why did Yaakov answer, “It was to find favor in the eyes of my master”? Will Yaakov find favor in Eisov’s eyes because the angels hit him? The answer is: When Eisov’s people said, “He is Yaakov’s brother,” the angels paid attention. This demonstrated how important Yaakov was in the angels’ eyes, and Yaakov thereby found favor in Eisov’s eyes. In other words, [the angels were] informing Eisov that Yaakov has many friends and allies, and you, too, should be among them.
He, Esau, said: For whom do you intend this entire camp of flocks of sheep, cattle, camels, and the other animals, that I met? He, Jacob, said: To find favor in the eyes of my lord. I have brought you a gift of reconciliation, which I hope you will accept.
מי לך כל המחנה הזה אשר פגשתי, “to whom belongs all this camp which I have encountered? Esau referred to the servants of Yaakov who had preceded him with the herds which have been described in detail as gifts which Esau had been reluctant to accept. Due to his arrogance, he had not deigned to speak to them, and therefore he had not known who they were. Now that he met Yaakov personally, he assumed that these herds had been sent by him, in view of his having previously met the angels that Yaakov had sent out. The thrust of his question was: “who is related to you who is so important that you have bothered to welcome him with such pomp and ceremony?” Yaakov replied simply that this was all in honour of his brother Esau.
“We asked, what do you mean by all this company which I have met?” [33:8]. Rashi writes. Esau encountered many groups of angels and they jostled and hit Esau’s people. The angels asked Esau’s people, who are you? They responded: we are with Esau. Then the angels hit them even more. They said: we are from Isaac and Abraham, and they hit them even more. Then they said: we are from the brother of Jacob and they made peace with them and did not beat them anymore. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:8.) They said: you are ours.
The whole life story of Abraham reveals that he advanced step by step both morally and spiritually. At the outset he had been a "prophet" among his contemporaries, as defined by them, by virtue of the purity of his lifestyle. This is what the Midrash meant when it referred to Abraham "walking in righteousness." Then he reached the level of being a prophet in the community he lived in, by reason of his superior intelligence (compare Midrash dover meysharim). As such, he instructed the people in wisdom directly, not only by means of his lifestyle. After he had achieved the level of rejecting material wealth acquired through oppression or even gifts from oppressors and had vowed that only G-d Himself should be the One he felt indebted to, he qualified for the first level of prophecy as defined by our standards, and G-d appeared to him in a nocturnal vision (machazeh). As a result of this, Abraham overcame the limitations his belief in astrology had imposed on him. He was raised to a level beyond the "shell of the sky" (see our opening Midrash). For the first time he became privy to visions beyond the realm of the natural. From then on, due to a change in name and his circumcision, he kept advancing so that his conduct secured for his descendants the protection of the heavenly cloud cover, the travelling well, and the supply of bread from the celestial regions. All of this was achieved with the help of the mitzvah of circumcision. The ultimate purpose of Abraham's progress had been described by the Midrash in the words "he was allowed to glimpse the king in his majesty."
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – come and see what is written before this matter: “Jacob said, when he saw them: [This is the camp of God]” (Genesis 32:3). How many were in a camp of God? Two thousand myriads of ministering angels, as it is stated: “The chariots of God are myriad, thousands upon thousands of companies. My Lord is among them, at Sinai, in holiness” (Psalms 68:18). “He called the name of that place Maḥanayim” (Genesis 32:3). Why were there two camps? It teaches that they gave Jacob four thousand myriads of ministering angels and they appeared to him like a king’s armies, some of whom were clad in iron, some of whom were on horseback, and some of whom were sitting in chariots. He [Esau] encountered those clad in iron. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those on horseback. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those in chariots. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob,’ as it is stated: “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” (Genesis 33:8). Jacob, too, would mention to Esau the name of the Holy One blessed be He, to scare him and to frighten him, as it is stated: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). To what is this matter analogous? It is to one who invited another to a meal, and he (The guest.) ascertained that he sought to kill him. He [the guest] said: ‘The taste of this dish is like the taste of a dish that I tasted in the king’s palace.’ He said: ‘He knows the king?’ He was afraid and did not kill him. The same is true of Jacob. When he said to Esau: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” wicked Esau said: ‘The Holy One blessed be He brought him to all this glory? I will no longer be able to overcome him.’
“He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met? He said: To find favor in the eyes of my lord” (Genesis 33:8). “Esau said: I have plenty, my brother. What is yours shall be yours” (Genesis 33:9). “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” – throughout that night the ministering angels arrayed in groups and companies, and were confronting those of Esau and saying to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said: ‘With Esau.’ They said: ‘Strike them, strike them, let them have it.’ ‘With Abraham’s grandson’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ ‘With Isaac’s son’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ When they said: ‘We are with Jacob’s brother,’ they said: ‘Leave them, as they are from ours.’ In the morning he said to him: “For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met…”? He said to him: ‘Did they say anything to you?’ He said to him: ‘I am broken before them.’ “He said: To find favor…” “Esau said: I have plenty…” – of beatings, “my brother, [what is yours] shall be yours.” (There was a failure to communicate. Jacob thought that Esau was referring to the messengers who brought the gift to Esau. Esau thought that Jacob was referring to the groups of ministering angels that attacked him and his people.) Another matter: “Esau said: I have plenty…” – Rabbi Aivu said: It is because the blessings were dubious for him. Where were they reinforced for him? It is here, from what he said to him: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” Rabbi Elazar said: Ratification of a document is only by its signatories. So that you will not say: Had Jacob our patriarch not deceived his father he would not have taken the blessings, the verse states: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” (Esau thereby ratified the transaction of the blessings.)
(Gen. 32:25 [24]:) SO JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE. What is written above of the matter (in vs. 8 [7])? THEN JACOB WAS VERY FRIGHTENED. WHEN THE HOLY ONE SAW HOW JACOB WAS DEPRESSED, < according to what > R. Berekhyah said, he sent four companies of angels to make war with Esau all night. (Tanh., Gen. 8:3; Gen. R. 78:11.) < When > the first company came, < one of the angels > said to them (to Esau's people): To whom do you belong? They said to them: We are children of Isaac, and < the angels > assaulted (The translation “assault,” here and in the next sentence, reads maphgi‘in for maphgishin (“bring together”).) him (Esau). He said to them: (Perhaps to another company of angels.) We are children of Abraham's children; they began assaulting him. When < Esau's people > said: We are brothers of Jacob, they began to leave them alone. Out of respect for Jacob we shall leave you alone. Thus (in Gen. 32:25 [24]): SO JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE. Now Jacob did not know how many miracles the Holy One had done for him. He did nothing; but, when he came in the morning, his brother Esau said to him (in Gen. 33:8): WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY ALL THIS HOST (MHNH) WHICH I HAVE MET? "Which I have seen" is not written here, but WHICH I HAVE MET. Now Jacob did not know that the Holy One had sent angels to him. Rather he was of the opinion that < Esau > had been occupied with the same gift (MNHH) that he had sent to him. He therefore had said to him < that it was meant > (as stated in ibid., cont.): TO FIND FAVOR IN THE EYES OF MY LORD (Esau). Then, when the Holy One saw that he was afraid, he sent Michael to him to engage in strife with him. What did the angel do with him? He appeared to him in the likeness of a shepherd. (Gen. R. 77:2.) It is so stated (in Gen. 32:25-27 [24-26]): AND SOMEONE WRESTLED WITH HIM < UNTIL THE RISING OF THE DAWN >. WHEN HE SAW THAT HE HAD NOT PREVAILED AGAINST HIM, < HE WRENCHED HIS THIGH AT ITS SOCKET >…. THEN HE SAID: SEND ME AWAY < BECAUSE THE DAWN IS RISING >….
After the first group departed, the second attacked him and continued to do what the first group had done. Then the third and fourth groups did likewise. How do we know this? From the fact that Esau said to Jacob: What meanest thou by all this camp which I met? (Gen. 33:8).
AND I HAVE SENT TO TELL MY LORD. I.e., “to announce that I am coming to you. That I may find favour in thy sight for I am at peace with you and seek your friendship.” These are Rashi’s words. Rashi’s intent is that the verse; I have sent to tell my lord, does not refer to the previous verse, I have sojourned with Laban, etc. but, instead, it says, “And I have sent to tell my lord that I have come to find favour in thy sight and to do whatever my lord will command.” But it is more correct to say that it refers to the verse above: “And I have sent to tell my lord that I have wealth, belongings, and precious things, to do with them according to your desire and will.” He thus hinted to him that he would send him a present from them, or that Esau may take from him whatever he desires. And so, when Esau asked Jacob, What meanest thou by all this camp which I met? he [Jacob] said: To find favour in the sight of my lord. (Genesis 33:8.)
המחנה האחת והכהו TO THE ONE CAMP AND SMITE IT — The word מחנה is treated grammatically as masculine or feminine: in (Psalms 27:3) “Though a camp should encamp (תחנה) against me” it is feminine; in (Genesis 33:8) “this (הזה) camp” it is masculine. Similarly there are other words treated grammatically as both masculine and feminine. For example, the word שמש in (Genesis 19:23) “The sun was risen (יצא) upon the earth” and in (Psalms 19:7) “His (the sun’s) going forth (מוצאו) is from the end of the heaven”; here it is masculine, but in (2 Kings 3:22) “and the sun shone (זרחה) upon the water” it is feminine. Similarly with רוח: in (Job 1:19) “and behold there came (באה) a great wind” it is feminine, and in the same verse “and smote (ויגע) the four corners of the house” it is masculine; in (1 Kings 19:11) “and a great (גדולה) and strong (וחזק) wind rent (מפרק) the mountains” it is both masculine and feminine. So also in the case of אש: in (Numbers 16:35) “and fire came forth (יצאה) from the Lord” it is feminine, and in (Psalms 104:4) “The flaming (להט) fire” it is masculine.
He [Eisov] said, What do you have to do with that whole camp that approached me? He [Yaakov] said, It was to find favor in the eyes of my master.
And he said, What to thee is all this troop that I have met? And he said, It is a present I have sent to find mercy in the eyes of my lord.
| וַיֹּ֥אמֶר עֵשָׂ֖ו יֶשׁ־לִ֣י רָ֑ב אָחִ֕י יְהִ֥י לְךָ֖ אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ׃ | 9 E | Esau said, “I have enough, my brother; let what you have remain yours.” |
3. But what of the wicked people “who speak arrogantly, haughtily and contemptuously of the tzaddik” (Psalms 31:19) ? From where do they receive the ruach to fill the lack? But know! there is a RaV of the kelipah (husks). He corresponds to Esav, as is written in connection to Esav (Genesis 33:9), “I have RaV (a lot).” This also corresponds to (Genesis 36:40), “… the alufey (tribal chiefs of) Esav,” which Onkelos renders: “RaVrevay Esav”—who is the RaV of the husks.
Like seeing the face. It is a gift not of appeasement but of love, because seeing your face brings me as much joy as beholding the face of a Godly being.
I have plenty, my brother. For one thing, I have plenty and do not need more; and for another, I am your brother — not your master — so you need not give me tribute.
And Esau said I have much. Meaning much, but not everything, and Jacob said G-d blessed me and I have everything, because the wicked even if they have all the silver and gold in the World, they still feel missing, and they have much, but not all they need ,therefore said Esau I have much, but not everything, because still there is something missing. If he has a hundred in his hand, he desires two hundred. The righteous, on the other hand, even if they have little on their hands, they are satisfied and happy with their share, and it looks to them as if they have everything
ויאמר עשו יש לי רב אחי, Esau said: "I have plenty my brother." Why did Esau have to add the word "my brother" at this point? After all, who else was Esau speaking to? Besides, he should have used the word as an address at the beginning of the sentence, not as an afterthought.
Actually, Esau meant to tell Jacob that if his intention in sending him the gift was to simply let him enjoy the animals, he had plenty himself and was in no need of them. If, on the other hand, Jacob gave him the gift in order to benefit thereby personally as he had already indicated when he said: "in order to find favour in my master's eyes," אחי יהי לך, "keep it my brother." He indicated that if he was favourably disposed towards Jacob it was because he was his brother not because of the gift. His own brotherliness could only be proved if he insisted that Jacob take back the gift. Otherwise his brotherliness would be interpreted by others as self-interest.
אל נא, אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך. "No please; if I have found favour in your eyes, etc." Why did Jacob repeat the word נא, please, in this verse?
The verse should be understood thus. Jacob agreed with Esau that his brotherliness would indeed be recognised better if he did not accept the gift. Such an argument was valid only if it had been made before Esau had already received the gift. Now that Esau had received the gift, it would be most inappropriate to return it; The first אל נא refers to Esau returning the gift. Jacob pleaded with Esau that if he indeed wanted to demonstrate his brotherliness he should do so by keeping the gift. He underlined his argument by saying: ולקחת, "and you have already accepted it." Jacob went on to say כי על כן וג׳, "the nature of this gift is not in order that you should demonstrate brotherliness but rather you should accept what is befitting when one visits high ranking individuals. One does not appear before such individuals empty-handed." Therefore, Jacob said, you can only demonstrate your goodwill towards me by keeping the gift; should you fail to do so you would shame me.
Should you be concerned that the size of the gift is such that it would impoverish me, rest assured I have all that I need; G'd has endowed me very generously. Jacob may even have hinted that he had not noticed any diminution in the size of his flocks even after he had sent the gift to Esau.
When Jacob used the expression יש לי כל "l have all that I need" in describing his economic status, he may have referred to sanctity which is also described by the word כל. There are several blessings in which Israel is compared to the sand of the sea. The meaning of the hyperbole is that just as the sand closes above any hole you make in it when you remove some of it, so Israel will be blessed by not feeling the removal of something from it as a loss, seeing that no visible void be will be left. Jacob described his economic wealth in similar terms when he explained to Esau that he had "everything." The deeper meaning of this concept is evident in Kings I 17,14 when Elijah the prophet assures the woman in the name of G'd that כד הקמח לא כלתה„ "that the jar of flour will not give out until the day that G'd will again let rain fall in the land of Israel." Examine how I explained 33,18: ויבא יעקב שלם עיר שכם. This blessing is one that all the patriarchs enjoyed in varying degrees; this is why we find the Torah using the expressions בכל, מכל or כל respectively in connection with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (compare Baba Batra 47).
יש לי רב, “I have a great deal.” Esau spoke very haughtily. If you take a close look at the verses you will note that Yaakov is rather long-winded whereas Esau is brief and succinct. This is proof of his arrogance. Moreover, you will note that Yaakov introduces the name of G’d into every aspect of his speech, such as when he says: “the children with whom G’d has graciously endowed me.” He refers to Esau’s accepting his gift being comparable to his being allowed to see the “face of G’d;” (verse 10) or to G’d as having granted him this wealth (verse 11). Esau, on the other hand, did not refer to G’d a single time.
אחי יהי לך אשר לך , “keep what is yours my brother.” Bereshit Rabbah 78,11 comments on these words of Esau that up until that moment Yaakov still entertained doubts whether the blessings were securely his. Now that he heard Esau acknowledge “keep what is yours,” he was visibly relieved concerning the validity of these blessings. He based this on the precise wording of Esau’s comment which contained ten letters. These ten words corresponded to the ten blessings which formed the blessing commencing with the words ויתן לך (Genesis 27,28-29).
ויאמר עשו, “I do not need your gift for יש לי רב, I possess a great deal.” In Bereshit Rabbah 78,11 the words יש לי רב are understood as meaning: “keep what is yours.” Rabbi Eleazar paraphrased that the validity of a decree of divorce can be attested to only by the people who have signed it. You should not say that if our patriarch Yaakov had not fooled his father he would not have received the blessings. [Yaakov wanted to show Esau that none of these blessings had been fulfilled for him, and that his wealth was totally independent of what his father had assured him of instead of Esau. Ed.] After all these years, Esau finally acknowledged that he had not suffered as a result of Yaakov’s being blessed, so that he said “keep what is yours!”
יהי לך אשר לך BE THINE THAT WHICH IS THINE — In these words he admitted his right to the blessings (Genesis Rabbah 78:11).
יש לי רב, I most certainly do not need this gift.
אחי, יהי לך אשר לך. Seeing that you are my brother you certainly do not have to put yourself out so much in order for me to make you welcome.
Here, he conceded the blessings to him. Rashi deduced this from the extra phrase, “Let what you have remain yours.” “I have plenty,” would have sufficed.
Esau said: I have plenty, my brother. I do not need your present. Esau was almost certainly speaking the truth, as he ruled over a small state. That which is yours shall be yours. Keep the gift for yourself.
“Let what you have remain yours” [33:9]. Esau agreed to the blessings. He said to Jacob, keep what you have. Jacob was blessed by his father Isaac, by Esau, and by Esau’s angel. (Bahya, Genesis, 33:9.)
“He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met? He said: To find favor in the eyes of my lord” (Genesis 33:8). “Esau said: I have plenty, my brother. What is yours shall be yours” (Genesis 33:9). “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” – throughout that night the ministering angels arrayed in groups and companies, and were confronting those of Esau and saying to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said: ‘With Esau.’ They said: ‘Strike them, strike them, let them have it.’ ‘With Abraham’s grandson’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ ‘With Isaac’s son’; but they said: ‘Let them have it.’ When they said: ‘We are with Jacob’s brother,’ they said: ‘Leave them, as they are from ours.’ In the morning he said to him: “For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met…”? He said to him: ‘Did they say anything to you?’ He said to him: ‘I am broken before them.’ “He said: To find favor…” “Esau said: I have plenty…” – of beatings, “my brother, [what is yours] shall be yours.” (There was a failure to communicate. Jacob thought that Esau was referring to the messengers who brought the gift to Esau. Esau thought that Jacob was referring to the groups of ministering angels that attacked him and his people.) Another matter: “Esau said: I have plenty…” – Rabbi Aivu said: It is because the blessings were dubious for him. Where were they reinforced for him? It is here, from what he said to him: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” Rabbi Elazar said: Ratification of a document is only by its signatories. So that you will not say: Had Jacob our patriarch not deceived his father he would not have taken the blessings, the verse states: “My brother, what is yours shall be yours.” (Esau thereby ratified the transaction of the blessings.)
Another matter, “you have circled…enough” – that is what the verse said: “Be silent before the Lord, vehitḥolel for Him…” (Psalms 37:7). What is “vehitḥolel for Him”? Place your hope in the Holy One blessed be He, like the matter that is stated: “Why, my soul, are you stooped over? …[Have hope [hoḥili] in God]” (Psalms 42:6). Another matter, “vehitḥolel for Him” – Rabbi Taḥlifa of Caesarea said: What is “vehitḥolel for Him”? If suffering has befallen you, accept it with fear [beḥila]. “Do not contend with one who prospers” (Psalms 37:7) – this is Esau, in whose regard it is written: “Why is the way of the wicked successful?” (Jeremiah 12:1). “The man who is busy with intrigue” (Psalms 37:7) – this is Esau, (The reference is to Rome, who were identified by the Romans as descendants of Edom, and therefore of Esau. ) who judges people deceitfully. How so? The judge of the empire would judge the murderer and say: ‘Why did you kill?’ [The accused] would say: ‘I did not kill him.’ [The judge] would ask him: ‘With what did you kill him, with a sword, a spear, or a dagger?’ (The judge would not accept the claims of the defendant, and would continue to cross examine him as though he were guilty, and the defendant would be confused and say something incriminating even if he was innocent. ) Another matter, “be silent before the Lord, vehitḥolel for Him” – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: When the enemies came to destroy Jerusalem, there were sixty myriads of angels of destruction, and they were standing at the entrance of the Sanctuary in order to strike them. They saw the Divine Presence looking and being silent – from where is this derived? As it is written: “He withdrew His right hand from being before the enemy” (Lamentations 2:3) – so they [the angels] also gave them [the enemies] space [allowing them to destroy Jerusalem]. Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: He saw [Esau] destroying His home and was silent, and you wish to confront him? Even now, the reward for honoring his parents is owed him. “You have circled…enough” – what is “circled the mountain [hahar]”? Rabbi Ḥanina said: Esau circulated around this parent of his [horo], namely his father, who needed him to feed him. From where is this derived? “Isaac loved Esau because of the game in his mouth” (Genesis 25:28). Rabbi Shmuel ben Rabbi Gedalya said: The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘I will pay his reward.’ When Jacob gave a gift to Esau, what did Esau say to him? “I have plenty [rav]” (Genesis 33:9); do not exert yourself. The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘With this expression, he honored [Jacob], with this expression, I will say to [the Israelites]: Turn away from him, “you have circled enough [rav].”’
Another interpretation: He had thought and said: Possessions from outside the land have no blessing in them. He was therefore squandering them. R. Hosha'ya said: A certain old man said to me: < I > am telling you < something in > the form of midrash; so, whenever you expound it, tell it in my name. (Gen. R. 78:12.) Esau is going to restore to Jacob all that he received from Jacob. It is so stated (in Ps. 72:10): THE KINGS OF TARSHISH AND OF THE ISLES SHALL RETURN TRIBUTE. "Shall bring tribute" is not written here, but SHALL RETURN TRIBUTE. I told him: This is a good saying: I will expound it in your name. He said to him: Surely if, what he had knowingly given him and had pressed upon him, that which he did not wish to receive, even as stated (in Gen. 33:9): THEN ESAU SAID: I HAVE ENOUGH—< Surely if > he would return < that >, then how much the more would they (the children of Esau) do so in the case of things which they had taken from Israel by force. In that hour I thanked him.
(Numb. 4:18) “Do not cut off.” This text is related (to Nahum 1:7), “The Lord is good, a shelter in the day of trouble; He knows those who trust in Him.” The nature of the Holy One, blessed be He, is unlike the nature of flesh and blood. (Numb. R. 5:3.) In the case of a king of flesh and blood, when a province rebels against him, he acts against it with an indiscriminate punishment (Gk.: androlempsia or androlepsia (“seizure of foreigners” in reprisal for murder committed abroad).) and kills the good along with the bad. Now the Holy One, blessed be He, is not like that. Rather, when a generation provokes Him, He saves the righteous and destroys the wicked. The generation of Enosh sinned. He destroyed them but rescued Enoch, as stated (in Gen. 5:24), “And Enoch walked with God.” Why? (Nahum 1:7:) “[The Lord is good, a shelter] in the day of trouble; He knows those who trust in Him.” The generation of the flood provoked Him. So He destroyed them, as stated (in Gen. 7:23), “And He blotted out all existence”; but He rescued Noah, as stated (in Gen. 6:8), “And Noah found favor [in the eyes of the Lord].” And similarly with the Sodomites, He destroyed them, as stated (in Gen. 19:24), “Then the Lord rained down upon Sodom”; but He rescued Lot, as stated (in vs. 29), “and sent Lot away.” He brought darkness upon the Egyptians, but (according to Exod. 10:23) “all the Children of Israel had light in their dwellings.” Why? (Nahum 1:7:) “[The Lord is good, a shelter] in the day of trouble; He knows those who trust in Him.” They went forth from Egypt and came to the desert. [There] they committed that deed (i.e., the incident of the golden calf), [all] except for the tribe of Levi. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 32:26), “[So Moses stood up in the gate of the camp and said,] ‘Whoever is for the Lord, to me!’ And all of the sons of Levi gathered to him.” [What is the meaning of “Whoever is for the Lord?”] Whoever (in Exod. 32:3) has not given a ring for the calf, let him come unto me. [To him] the Holy One, blessed be He, said (in Nahum 1:7), “[The Lord is good, a shelter] in the day of trouble; He knows those who trust in Him.” Moshe immediately arose and killed the sinners, as stated (Exodus 32:28), “And the Children of Levi did like the word of Moses.” With reference to the tribe of Levi, however, which gave their lives for the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, He thus said to Moses and Aaron (in Numb. 4:18), “Do not cut off….” And so He says in another place (i.e., in Numb. 3:15), “Enroll the Children of Levi.” But He has also said (in Numb. 1:49), “However, you shall not enroll the tribe of Levi.” Why? In order to exclude them from the decree. As the Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw that Israel was going to provoke Him and said to them (in Numb. 14:29), “In this desert shall your carcasses drop.” Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “The Children of Levi shall not be [part of] this decree, as stated (in Numb. 1:49, cont.), ‘nor shall you take a census of them as part of the Children of Israel.’ Why? Because they are Mine, as stated (Numb. 3:12), ‘and the Levites shall be mine.’” Thus when anyone offers (rt.: qrb) a little of himself, they advance (rt.: qrb) him a lot. Now they had offered (rt.: qrb) themselves, when Moses said (in Exod. 32:26), “Whoever is for the Lord, to me!” And not only that, but the Holy One, blessed be He, said (according to Numb. 1:50) “You shall enroll the Levites to be over the tabernacle of the testimony.” Thus when someone is tested in [one] area and found trustworthy, the Holy One, blessed be He, trusts him forever; for so you find in the case of Joshua. (Numb. R. 1:12.) When he was tested with Amalek, he prevailed against him according to the law and according to the commandment. It is so stated (in Exod. 17:13), “And Joshua defeated Amalek and his people….” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “From your tribe (Ephraim) I am raising up one to exact punishment from Amalek, as stated (in Jud. 5:14), “Out of Ephraim came those whose root is in Amalek….” What is the meaning of out of (mny) Ephraim? He appointed (mnh) Ephraim alone to destroy the seed of Amalek. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (ibid., cont.), “’After you, Benjamin with your peoples,’ [i.e.,] leave him for Saul ben Kish, the Benjamite; he will uproot him.” Another interpretation (of Jud. 5:14), “Out of Ephraim.” Saul was tested and found untrustworthy in his commission. Rather (according to I Sam. 15:9), “But Saul and the people spared Agag.” He put him back after him (i.e., behind Ephraim, the tribe of Joshua and Samuel) and the kingdom was taken from him, as stated (in Jud. 5:14), “after you (i.e., Ephraim), Benjamin with your peoples.” And I have also tested this tribe (of Levi), and they have been found to be preserving My honor; for they have given their life for the sanctification of My name (in Exod. 32:27-28), “Let each one put his sword on his thigh [….] So the Children of Levi acted according to the word of Moses,” and they did not show favoritism. Therefore, Moses blesses them and says to them (in Deut. 33:9), “Who says of his father and mother, ‘I do not consider them […].’” And [so] I am also advancing him and making him My imperial agent. (Lat.: frumentarius (“grain dealer”).) and I am entrusting him with My house and My sanctity, as stated (in Numb. 1:50), “But you shall enroll the Levites to be over the tabernacle of the testimony….” And what was it that I told you (in vs. 49)? “However, you shall not enroll the tribe of Levi.” [This prohibition] was to exempt them from the decree which I was going to pronounce over Israel. It is simply that I am allotting them great honor. When you number them, [number them] by themselves through the Divine utterance (in Numb. 3:15), “Enroll the Children of Levi.” Now if I have honored the Levites, who bear the tabernacle, how much the more so in the case of the Children of Kohath, who bear the ark, [as stated] (in Numb. 3:31), “And their duties included the ark, the table, the lampstand, the altars, [….]” He therefore said to them (in Numb. 4:18), “Do not cut off [the tribe of the Kohathite families from the Levites].” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “And if because the Children of Kohath have feared Me, I have allotted glory to them and to their children; then [I will honor] whoever stands in awe of Me and not cut off his name from the world.” (Numb. R. 5:9.) From whom do you learn this? From the children of Jonadab ben Rechab. Since they did his will, what is stated about them? (Jer. 35:19), “Someone belonging to Jonadab ben Rechab shall not be cut off from standing before Me forever.” And if in the case of those who are proselytes, because they have done My will, I have done likewise for them (i.e., what they want); in the case of Israel, when they are doing My will, how much the more shall they neither be cut off nor have their name be erased from before Me? Rather, they shall live and abide forever and ever and ever, as stated (in Deut. 4:4), “But you who clung to the Lord your God are all alive today.”
Jacob took all the tithe of his possessions and sent it by the hand of his servants, and gave it to Esau, saying to them: Say ye || to him, "Thus saith thy servant Jacob" (Gen. 32:4). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! That which was holy hast thou made profane? He replied to Him: Sovereign of all worlds ! I flatter the wicked, so that he should not slay me. Hence the (wise men) say, we may flatter the wicked in this world for the sake of the ways of peace. Esau said to him: O my brother, I have enough; as it is said, "And Esau said, I have enough" (Gen. 33:9). And because he gave honour to Jacob, therefore the sons of Jacob paid honour to the sons of Esau with the same expression; as it is said, "Ye have compassed this mountain long enough" (Deut. 2:8). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! Is it not enough for thee that thou hast made profane that which is holy? Nay, but I have said, "And the elder shall serve the younger" (Gen. 25:23); and yet thou hast said, "Thy servant Jacob" (Gen. 32:4). By thy life ! it shall be according to thy words; he shall rule over thee in this world, and thou shalt rule over him in the world to come. Therefore Jacob said to him (Esau): "Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servant" (Gen. 33:14). Hence thou mayest learn that the sons of Esau will not fall until a remnant from Jacob shall come, and cut off the feet of the children of Esau from Mount Seir, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will descend. "And there shall not be any remaining to the house of Esau; for the Lord hath spoken it" (Obad. 18).
And Jacob prosecuted his journey toward Haran, and he reached Mount Moriah, and he tarried there over night near the city of Luz. And the Lord appeared there unto Jacob that night, and he said unto him: I am the Lord, the God of Abraham, thy father, and the God of Isaac, the land wherein thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; and behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and I will cause thy enemies to fall down before thee, and when they shall wage war against thee they shall never pre vail over thee; and I will bring thee back unto this land in joy and gladness, with children and with great wealth. And when Jacob awoke from his sleep he was exceedingly joyful at the vision which he had seen, and he called the name of that place Bethel. And Jacob arose from that place much rejoiced, and when he walked his feet felt light to him for gladness, and he went thence to the land of the sons of the East, and he came to Haran and seated himself by the shepherd's well; and he met there several men coming from Haran to feed their sheep, and Jacob inquired of them concerning their home, and they said: We are from Haran; and he said unto them: Know ye Laban, son of Nahor? and they said: We know him, and behold, Rachel, his daughter, cometh with the sheep of her father. And while he yet spake with them Rachel came with her father's sheep, for she was a shepherdess. And Jacob saw Rachel, the daughter of Laban, his mother's brother, and he kissed her and lifted up his voice and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was Rebekah’s son, her father's sister, and Rachel ran and told it to her father. And Jacob wept exceedingly because he had nothing whatsoever to bring unto the house of Laban. And when Laban heard of the arrival of Jacob, his sister's son, he ran to meet him, and he embraced him, and kissed him, and "brought him to his house, and he gave him meat and he ate. And Jacob told him all that his brother Esau had done unto him, and what his son Eliphaz did unto him on his journey. And Jacob abode at Laban's house the space of a month, eating and drinking in the house of Laban. And finally Laban said unto Jacob: Tell me what shall thy wages be, for why shouldst thou serve me for naught? And Laban had no sons, only daughters, and his wives and hand-maids were still barren in those days. And these are the names of Laban's daughters, which his wife Adinah had borne unto him: the name of the oldest was Leah, and the name of the youngest was Rachel. And Leah was tender eyed, but Rachel was beautiful and well favored, and Jacob loved her. And Jacob said unto Laban: I will serve thee seven years for Rachel, thy youngest daughter. And Laban was satisfied, and Jacob served Laban seven years for Rachel, his daughter. And it was in the second year of Jacob's dwelling in Haran, which was the seventy-ninth year of Jacob's life, that Eber, the son of Shem, died, and he was four hundred and sixty-four years old when he died. And when Jacob heard that Eber died, he grieved greatly, and he wept and mourned over him for many days. And in the third year of Jacob's dwelling in Haran, Bosmath, daughter of Ishmael, Esau’s wife, bear unto him a son, and Esau called his name Reuel; and in the fourth year of Jacob’s dwelling in the house of Laban, the Lord remembered Laban, for the sake of Jacob, and sons were born unto him; and these are the names of his sons born unto him in those days: His first born was Beor, and his second was Alib, and his third was Horash. And the Lord gave unto Laban wealth and honor, and sons and daughters, and the man increased exceedingly, for the sake of Jacob. And Jacob served Laban, his mother's brother, in those days in all sorts of work and labor in the house and in the field, and the blessing of God was in everything that belonged unto Laban, both in the house and in the field. And in the fifth year of Jacob’s dwelling in Haran, Judith, daughter of Beeri, Esau’s wife, died in the land of Canaan; and she had no sons, but two daughters. The name of the oldest was Marnith, and the name of the youngest was Puith. And when Judith died, Esau went to Seir to hunt in the field as heretofore, and Esau dwelt in Seir for many days. And in the sixth year of Jacob’s dwelling in Haran, Esau took Abalibamah, daughter of Zebon the Hevite, to wife, in addition to his other wives, and Esau brought her unto the land of Canaan; and Abalibamah conceived and bear unto Esau three sons: Jaush, and Jaalon, and Korah. And there was a feud in those days in the land of Canaan, between the herdsmen of Esau and the herdsmen of the inhabitants of the land of Canaan. For Esau’s cattle and his wealth were too abundant to dwell in the land of Canaan, in the house of his father, and the land of Canaan could not bear him by reason of his cattle. And when Esau saw that the feud with the inhabitants of the land was increasing, he arose with his wives, and his sons, and daughters, and with all belonging unto him, and all his cattle and other property accumulated in Canaan, and he went away from the inhabitants of the land to locate in the land of Seir. Thus Esau and all that were his came to dwell in Seir. And now and then Esau would go to see his father and mother in the land of Canaan. And Esau intermarried with the Horites, and he gave his daughters to the sons of Seir, the Horite. And he gave Marzith his oldest daughter to Anah, the son of Zebon, his wife's brother, and Puith he gave to Azar, the son of Bilhan, the Horite. And Esau dwelt in the mountain, he and his children, and they were fruitful, and they multiplied greatly. And in the seventh year when Jacob’s servitude, in which he was bound to Laban, was completed, Jacob said unto Laban: Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled. And Laban was willing to do so; and Laban and Jacob gathered together all the people of the place, and they prepared a feast. And in the evening Laban came to the house, and later came Jacob with all the people of the feast, when Laban put out all the lights that were in the house. And Jacob said unto Laban: What causeth thee to do these things unto us? And Laban replied: Such is the custom in our land. And after wards Laban took Leah, his daughter, and brought her unto Jacob. And Jacob came unto her, and he did not know that it was Leah. And Laban gave his maid servant Zilpah to his daughter, Leah, for a hand-maid. And all the people of the feast knew what Laban was doing unto Jacob, but they told not one word of it to Jacob. And all the neighbors came that night to Jacob's house, and they ate and drank, and made merry before Leah with music and dancing, and they cheered Jacob, exclaiming: Hilleah, hilleah (it is Leah). And Jacob hearing their words, understood them not, for he thought such was the custom among them. And the neighbors spoke these words before Jacob in the night, when all the lights in the house were put out by Laban. And in the morning when it dawned, Jacob turned unto his wife, and behold it was Leah that lay resting on his bosom. And Jacob said: Now I understand what caused our neighbors to call unto me last night, Hilleah. Yes they told it unto me, but I knew it not. And Jacob said unto Laban: What is this thou hast done unto me? did I not serve with thee for Rachel, wherefore then hast thou beguiled me and given me Leah? And Laban answered unto Jacob, saying: It must not be so done in our country to give the younger into marriage before the first born; but if thou desirest to have her sister also, take her for the service which thou wilt serve with me yet seven years. And Jacob did so, and he took Rachel also to wife, and he served seven more years for Rachel. And Jacob came to Rachel likewise, and he loved Rachel more than Leah; and Laban gave her his maid-servant Bilhah, for a hand-maid. And when the Lord saw that Leah was hated, the Lord visited her, and she bear unto Jacob four sons in those days, and these were their names: Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah, and she ceased bearing afterwards. And Rachel was barren in those days, she had no children. And Rachel envied her sister Leah, and seeing that she bear no children to Jacob, she took her handmaid Bilhah, and she bear two sons unto Jacob, Dan and Naphtali. And when Leah saw that she had ceased bearing, she also took her hand maid, Zilpah, and gave her unto Jacob for a wife. And Jacob came to Zilpah also, and she too bear unto Jacob two sons, Gad and Asher. And Leah conceived again, bearing unto Jacob in those days two sons and one daughter, and their names were: Issachar and Zebulon, and Dinah, their sister. And Rachel continued in her barrenness in those days, and Rachel prayed unto the Lord, at that time, saying: Oh Lord God remember me and visit me, I pray Thee, for now my husband will abandon me, because I have borne no children unto him. Oh Lord, hear my cries before thee and see my misery and give me offspring like unto one of the hand-maids, that I may escape further reproach. And the Lord hearkened unto Rachel and she conceived and bear a son, and she said: God hath taken away my reproach. At that time Rebekah, Jacob’s mother sent unto Jacob her nurse Deborah, daughter of Uz, and two of Isaac’s servants with her. And they came unto Jacob to Haran, and they said unto him: Rebekah sends us unto thee that thou shouldst return to thy father's house to the land of Canaan. And Jacob listened to them as to what his mother had spoken, and at that time the seven years which Jacob was to serve Laban for Rachel were fulfilled. And at the end of fourteen years of Jacob's dwelling in the land of Haran Jacob said unto Laban: Give me my wives and my children and let me go to my land, for my mother hath sent unto me from the land of Canaan that I should return unto my father's house. And Laban replied unto him: Not so, I pray thee, but if I have found favor in thine eyes do not leave me; appoint me thy wages and I will give it, and tarry with me. And Jacob said unto him, this thou shalt give me for my wages. I will pass through all thy flocks this day, removing thence all the speckled and spotted cattle, and all the brown cattle among the sheep, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and of such shall be my hire. And if thou wilt do this thing for me, then I shall return to feed thy flocks and to keep them. And Laban did accordingly, and he removed from his flocks all that Jacob had spoken of, and gave them to him. And Jacob placed into the hands of his sons all that was removed from Laban's flocks, and Jacob attended to the remainder of Laban's flocks. And the servants of Isaac, which were sent unto Jacob saw that Jacob would not return with them into the land of Canaan, and they went away from him returning to the land of Canaan. But Deborah remained in Haran with Jacob, and would not return to the land of Canaan with the servants of Isaac. And Deborah dwelt with Jacob’s wives and children in Haran. And Jacob continued serving Laban for six more years and whenever the sheep brought forth, Jacob removed from their midst all that were speckled and spotted as he had agreed upon with Laban. And Jacob continued doing so for six years, and the man increased exceedingly, and he possessed cattle, and man servants and maid-servants, and camels and asses. And Jacob had two hundred herds of cattle, every head of which was of a very large size, beautiful in appearance and very fruitful. And all the people of the land desired to pro cure some of Jacob’s cattle, for it was very, very prosperous. And many of the sons of man came to purchase some of Jacob’s stock and Jacob gave them a sheep for a man-servant or for a maid-servant. Whatsoever Jacob asked from them they gave him. And Jacob attained wealth, and honor, and possessions through these sales to the sons of man; and the sons of Laban envied him on account of that distinction. And it came to pass after some days, that Jacob heard the words of Laban’s sons, saying: Jacob hath taken away all that was our father's; and of that which was our father's hath he gotten all his glory and the Lord appeared unto Jacob at the end of six years saying unto him: Return into the land of thy fathers and to thy kindred, and I will be with thee. Then Jacob rose up and set his sons and his wives upon camels, and he went away to the land of Canaan, to his father Isaac. And Laban knew nothing of Jacob’s leaving, for Laban was at that time away to shear his sheep. And Rachel had stolen the images that were her father's, and she took and concealed them upon the camel on which she sat. And this is the manner after which images like these were prepared. They took a man that was the first born and put him to death and took all the hair off his head, and then the head was salted with salt and anointed with oil. And afterwards they took a small plate of copper or of gold and wrote “the name” upon it and placed the plate under his tongue; and then the head was brought into the house and lights were kindled around it, and they worshipped it and bowed down before it. And when they bowed down to it the head spoke to them, concerning all that they would inquire of it, through the power of “the name’” under its tongue. And some people make those images in the likeness of man, of gold and of silver, and they go to them at certain times known to them, and the idols will attract the power of the stars, and tell them all about future things. And the images which Rachel stole from her father were of the latter kind. And Rachel stole those images of her father so that he should not be able to ascertain whither Jacob had gone. And when Laban returned home he asked for Jacob and his household and they could not be found, and he went seeking his images to find out whither Jacob had gone. And Laban went to other images and making inquiries they told him that Jacob had fled to the house of his father in Canaan. And Laban rose up and took all his brethen with him and all his servants, and he pursued Jacob and he overtook him on mount Gilead. And Laban said to Jacob: What hast thou done, that thou hast stolen away unawares to me, and hast carried away my daughters as captives taken with the sword. Where fore didst thou flee away secretly, and hast not suffered me to kiss my sons and my daughters and to send them away with gladness; and wherefore hast thou stolen my gods? And Jacob replied: For I said, peradventure thou wouldst take the daughters from me by force and now with whomsoever thou findest thy gods let him not live. And Laban searched for the images, looking through the entire tent of Jacob and through all the furniture, but he found them not. Laban said unto Jacob: Let us make a covenant, I and thou, and let it be for a witness between me and thee. If thou shall afflict my daughters, or if thou shalt take other wives beside my daughters, and may the Lord be a witness between me and thee concerning these things. And they gathered up stones and made of them a heap, and Laban said: This heap is a witness between me and thee. And he called the name of that heap Galeed. And Jacob and Laban offered up sacrifices on the mount, and they ate there together by the heap of stones, and they remained there all night. And early in the morning Laban arose and he wept over his daughters and he kissed them, and he returned to his home. And he sent hastily his son Beor, who was then seventeen years of age, and with him Abihoref, the son of Uz, the son of Nahor, and ten men, and they hastened and passed Jacob on the way, and they went by another road to the land of Seir. And they came unto Esau, saying unto him: Thus saith thy kinsman and relative Laban, thy mother's brother, the son of Bethuel: Hast thou heard what thy brother hath done unto me? For he came naked unto my house, and I went to meet him and I brought him with honors into my house. And I made him great, and I gave him for wives my two daughters and two of my maid servants. And the Lord blessed him for my sake, and he increased exceedingly, and he got sons and daughters and servants. And he hath also procured great many flocks and herds, and camels and asses and gold and silver in great plenty. And when he saw the abundance of his wealth, he went while I was away shearing my sheep, and he ran away secretly. And he sat his wives and children upon camels and he took along all his cattle and all the property which he hath gotten in my land, and turned his countenance to go to Isaac his father into the land of Canaan. And he did not even suffer me to kiss my daughters and their children, but he carried away my daughters like captives taken by the sword, and he stole also my gods and ran away. And now I have left him in the mountains near the river Jabbok with all that is his; he lacketh nothing. And now if it be thy desire to go unto him thou canst find him there, and thou canst do unto him whatsoever pleaseth thee best. And Laban's messengers went and told unto Esau all these words. And when Esau heard the words of Laban's messengers, his anger was kindled against his brother, and he remembered his hatred and his wrath burned within him. And Esau hastened and gathered together his sons and his servants and the people of his household, sixty men, and he assembled likewise all the sons of Seir the Horite, and their people, three hundred and forty men, and he went with this number of four hundred men, to smite his brother Jacob. And Esau divided this number into several bands. And he took the sixty men of his sons and servants and the people of his household in one band, and intrusted them to Eliphaz his oldest son. And the remaining bands he intrusted to the care of the six sons of Seir the Horite, placing every man over his family and their children. And the entire camp moved ahead with Esau among them, who urged them on to great speed. And Laban's messengers, after having left Esau, went into the land of Canaan to the house of Rebekah, the mother of Jacob and Esau and they said unto her: Be hold Esau thy son went with four hundred men against his brother Jacob; for he hath heard of his coming, and therefore he went to wage war with him and to kill him and to take away all that he hath. And Rebekah sent hastily seventy-two men of Isaac's servants to go and meet Jacob, for she said Esau might perhaps surprise him on the road when meeting him. And those messengers went and they met Jacob on the road on the opposite side of the brook Jabbok, and Jacob saw them and he exclaimed: This camp is sent to me from God, and he called the name of that place Mahanaim. And Jacob recognized all his father's men, and he kissed and embraced them and came together with all of them, and inquired concerning his father and mother, and they said: All is peace with them. And the messengers said unto Jacob: Thy mother Rebekah sent us to thee, saying: I have heard that thy brother Esau hath gone to meet thee on the road with men from the midst of the sons of Seir the Horite. Now therefore my son, listen unto my voice and reflect what thou art to do. And when he meeteth thee entreat him, and do not speak unto him harshly, and give him gifts from whatsoever thou findest in thy hands, wherewith the Lord hath favored thee graciously. And when he inquires of thee concerning thy matters and affairs do not withhold it from him, maybe he will thus be turned from his anger and thou wilt save thyself and all those that are with thee, for it is in thy place to give him respectful answers as he is the oldest brother. And when Jacob heard the words of his mother as told unto him by the messengers, Jacob lifted up his voice and he wept a great weeping and he did at once according to the command of his mother.
And when Israel prospers, the nations dissimulate, presenting themselves as "brothers." As Esav said to Jacob (Bereshith 33:9) "My brother, let there be yours what is yours." And thus did Chiram say to Solomon (I Kings 9:13) "What are these cities that you have given me, my brother?" (Devarim, Ibid.) "Lest they say: 'Our hand is exalted, etc.'" as in (Amos 6:13) "Behold, with our strength we have taken power for ourselves."
"And your foes will dissimulate to you" (in fear of you): When Israel was prospering, the Babylonians dissimulated to them, deporting themselves like brothers, as Esav spoke to Jacob (Bereshith 33:9) "My brother, let there be yours what is yours," and as Chiram to Solomon, (I Kings 9:13) "What are these cities that you have given me, my brother?"
ורב יעבוד צעיר, “and the older will become subservient to the younger.” This is where the Torah decreed that Yaakov, though the younger, will eventually wind up as the senior one of the twins to be born. Rav Hunna (Bereshit Rabbah 63,6) is quoted as having said that it means if Yaakov merits it he will become the senior, if not, Esau will become senior to him. [Not found in the editions of Bereshit Rabbah at my disposal. Ed.] An alternate exegesis: the word רב does not mean: “the senior one,” but simply means “הרבה,” a great deal,” or “for a long time.” The word occurs when Esau first declined Yaakov’s gift by saying: יש לי רב, “I have lots.” (Genesis 33,9).
רב לכם, סוב, “you have been skirting this land enough, now turn around (in a northerly direction) The word רב here is used in the same way as Esau used it in his encounter with Yaakov in Genesis 33,9 when he first wanted to refuse to accept Yaakov’s gift and said to him:יש לי רב אחי “I have lots, my brother;” he meant that he had been repaid sufficiently for any harm Yaakov had caused him in the past.
ורב יעבוד צעיר, “and the older one will serve the younger one.” Our author understands the word רב here not as “older, senior,” as do most commentators, but as meaning הרבה, “many, a great number.” Esau himself used the word in that sense when he told his brother Yaakov: יש לי רב, “I have lots,” (Genesis 33,9) The word may mean “lots” in terms of “time;” i.e. Esau would serve Yaakov for a long time.
Benjamin was born after Jacob redeemed himself from the stain of having attained the blessings underhandedly. He was born to a father whose rights were acknowledged; he was born after Esau surrendered the field. Until God renamed Jacob, the element of deception inherent within him was still present. It was only after the battle with the angel that Jacob prevailed openly, not through trickery, but through force of will. The angel renamed him Israel, giving him the strength to confront Esau. When they finally did meet, Esau fully and openly yielded: “Let what you have remain yours” (Genesis 33:9) – he conceded the blessings to Jacob. (BR 78:11, as quoted by Rashi.) Jacob was once more given the name Israel, this time by God himself, just prior to Benjamin’s birth.
And yet, Benjamin was innocent of theft or deception. He did not steal Joseph’s goblet. He was not part of the sale of Joseph, either. He was the clean-handed, pure son of Jacob and Rachel – and Judah, mastermind of the sale of Joseph, stepped in to take full responsibility for Benjamin’s welfare. From his oath to Jacob, “I personally will guarantee him,” (Genesis 33:9.) to his acknowledgement before Joseph of the special relationship Jacob would always have with Rachel, Joseph, and Benjamin, (When Judah declared before Joseph, “Your servant my father said to us, ‘You know that my wife bore me two sons’” (Genesis 44:27), he acknowledged the love that Jacob had for Rachel, Joseph, and Benjamin over and against Leah, the maidservants, and their offspring – including himself.) Judah passionately insisted on bearing Benjamin’s fate in his stead.
Eisov said, I have plenty. My brother, let what you have remain yours [be successful].
And Esau said, I have much substance, my brother; let what thou hast be confirmed to thee.
| וַיֹּ֣אמֶר יַעֲקֹ֗ב אַל־נָא֙ אִם־נָ֨א מָצָ֤אתִי חֵן֙ בְּעֵינֶ֔יךָ וְלָקַחְתָּ֥ מִנְחָתִ֖י מִיָּדִ֑י כִּ֣י עַל־כֵּ֞ן רָאִ֣יתִי פָנֶ֗יךָ כִּרְאֹ֛ת פְּנֵ֥י אֱלֹהִ֖ים וַתִּרְצֵֽנִי׃ | 10 E | But Jacob said, “No, I pray you; if you would do me this favor, accept from me this gift; for to see your face is like seeing the face of God, and you have received me favorably. |
10. And this is why, when Yaakov wanted to gain Esav’s favor, he said: “accept this offering from my hand; for I have seen your face as one might see the face of a Divine being, and you were favorably inclined toward me” (Genesis 33:10).
כי על כן ראיתי פניך , “for I have made a special effort to meet you face to face in order to present you with this gift. The word: ראיתי, in the past tense, although at the time described Yaakov had not yet met Esau face to face, may be understood in the same way as when Avraham said to Efron, concerning the money for the field and cave of Machpelah, “נתתי כסף השדה, “I have given the money for the field;” (he had not yet given it though he kept it at hand) (Compare 23,13) Compare also the expression: הרימותי ידי ,“I have raised my hand in an oath,”(14,23) where Avraham is prepared to swear that he will not accept any loot from the King of Sodom. He was about to swear this oath, but had not yet done so.
כראות פני אלוהים, “as if being received by G’d.” (After a pilgrimage) The Torah demanded from each pilgrim to Jerusalem during the three festivals not to appear empty-handed. (Deuteronomy 16,16,(Bereshit Rabbah 78,12.)
Because I have seen your face. That is, I have merited to be reunited with you in such a manner.
Like seeing the face. You have received me as if I were a great dignitary; allow me, then, to reciprocate by accepting my gift.
NAY, I PRAY THEE. I pray my lord not to so speak. (Al na (nay, I pray thee) is short for al na yomar adoni ken (I pray my lord not to so speak) (Weiser).) I have previously noted Rabbi Samuel Ha-Nagid’s interpretation of the term al (nay). (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 19:18.)
AS ONE SEETH THE FACE OF GOD. The face of an angel. Many of the commentators explain that the angel with whom Jacob wrestled came to encourage him not to lose heart and fear Esau. For if an angel could not overcome him, certainly no human could. The word sarita (thou hast striven), in thou hast striven (sarita) with (im) God (Gen. 32:29), (It does not mean prince over. It means thou has become a prince. I.E. does not interpret sarita to mean strove. Since Jacob alluded to the angel in his comments to Esau, I.E. now goes back and concludes his comments on that incident which is reported in the previous chapter.) does not mean the same as va-yaser (Although both roots are related. Cf. D.B.G., Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Hebrew Language, Oxford, 1968.) (was prince) in And Abimelech was prince (va-yasar) over (al) Israel (Jud. 9:22), because im (with) is not the same as al (over). Our phrase (Gen. 32:29) means that you are considered a prince among the angels, and also among human princes. (I.E. interprets sarita as, you have become a sar, a prince; im Elohim, among angels; ve-im anashim, and among human princes.) Some ask, what does Scripture mean by And the sun rose upon him (Gen. 32:32) when the sun rises all over the world at the same time? (The Hebrew implies it shone upon him but not upon other places. Cf. Bereshit Rabbah 78:8, “Did the sun rise only for him?”) This is a nonsensical question because the sun rises at different times in different places. For example, there is a difference of one and a third hours in sunrise and also twelve degrees in latitude between Jerusalem and the place where I wrote this commentary, namely the city of Lucca. (A northern Italian city and capital of a Lombard duchy. Its Jewish community was among the most important in northern Italy, and it was one of the three northern Italian communities mentioned by Benjamin of Tudela (c. 1165). See Introduction.) This thing is certain and beyond doubt. The meaning of tzole’a (and he limped) (Gen. 32:32) is, he walked on one side. (I.E. explains tzela as a side (see his comments on Gen. 2:21). Tzole’a is a denominative. A healthy person walks straight, a sick person leans on one side (Cherez).) The meaning of al ken (therefore) (Gen. 32:33) is, in commemoration of this thing. (In commemoration of Jacob’s victory over the angel, or of God’s saving Jacob from being overcome by the angel (Krinsky).)
כי על כן ראיתי פניך, “inasmuch as I have seen your face.” I believe the correct interpretation of this verse is: “accept this gift from me in order to demonstrate your goodwill towards me, just as someone who offers a gift to his ruler feels reassured when the ruler condescends to accept his gift.” Our sages (Sotah 41-42) understand the words כראות פני אלוהים as follows: Rabbi Yochanan said: “it is permissible to flatter the wicked people of this world as we know from the above verse where Yaakov flattered Esau.” He disagrees with Rabbi Pedot in this regard as the latter said that even if the motivation of such flattery is based on fear, it is not permissible. He bases his opinion on Psalms 101,7: “he who speaks untruths shall not stand before My eyes.” We also have a verse in Job 13,16: “for no flatterer can come into His presence.” As to how one can reconcile the message of these verses with Yaakov’s behaviour in our verses, or rather, with Rabbi Yochanan’s view that what Yaakov did was in order, Rabbi Yochanan will reply that the type of flattery attributed here to Yaakov is permissible as it was of a general nature and his wording allowed of more than one interpretation. His words were capable of a favourable interpretation or an unfavourable interpretation. The word ראיתי, “I have seen,” could be interpreted as Yaakov being critical of Esau just as we find such a meaning in Psalms 22,18: “while they look on (יביטו יראו בי) and gloat.” A similar negative meaning can be attributed to Yaakov using the word אלוהים in describing Esau’s face. The word is meant as a description of an idol. If the wicked person to whom Yaakov’s words were addressed chose to interpret them as flattering him, then this is Esau’s problem, not Yaakov’s. Our sages in Chulin 94 are on record as saying: “if he wants to deceive himself, he cannot claim that I have deceived him.” We similarly find that the sages ( Nedarim 62) permitted the Torah scholar to say: “I am a servant of fire,” in order to secure exemption from head-tax.” The reason such apparently flagrantly idolatrous statements are admissible is that G’d Himself has been described in the Torah as אש אוכלה הוא, “a consuming fire’ (Deut. 4,24). The Torah scholar may have referred to that verse when describing himself as the “servant of fire.” Seeing that such double-entendres were motivated by fear they were permissible.
ויאמר יעקב...כי על כן ראיתי, this is precisely why it is appropriate that you accept my gift for I give it to you wholeheartedly. When I looked at your face I recognised that it bears the same features as the angel whom I have encountered and who has blessed me. Yaakov alluded to that nocturnal encounter in order to make Esau afraid to harm him. Yaakov had learned from the effect an encounter with angel- albeit it in a nocturnal vision- had had upon Lavan, who had not dared to attack him (29.31) Esau was well aware that Yaakov was a righteous man ever since his youth and he did not hesitate to believe him when told that Yaakov had encounters with angels. When Yaakov flattered Esau that the latter’s features reminded him of the features of the angel he had had a dialogue with, this was an exaggeration, of course. We find a similar exaggeration in Samuel II 14,20 where the woman from Tekoah says to King David that “my lord is wise as an angel of G’d and he knows all that goes on in the land.”
ותרצני, it was a source of satisfaction for me. Alternatively, the word could mean: “after you have displayed your goodwill towards me.”
FORASMUCH AS I HAVE SEEN THY FACE. Jacob said to him: “Take my present from me because I have seen your face, which to me is as one seeth the sight of an angel, ‘vatirtzeini’ (and thou wast pleased with me), as you indicated by accepting the present,” just as G-d ‘rotzeh’ (taketh pleasure) in them that fear Him, (Psalms 147:11.) by accepting their offerings and sacrifices. This is similar to the verses: ‘Venirtzah’ (And it shall be favourably accepted) for him; (Leviticus 1:3.) Their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be ‘leratzon’ (acceptable) upon Mine altar, (Isaiah 56:7.) this being associated with the expressions: Let him be ‘retzui’ (the favoured) of his brethren, (Deuteronomy 33:24.) And the light of Thy countenance, for ‘ratzitham’ (Thou wast favourable to them), (Psalms 44:4.) For Thy servants ‘ratzu’ (take pleasure) in her stones. (Ibid., 102:15.) All these forms of ratzah connote desire and pleasure in a matter. But Rashi wrote, “Because you have agreed to pardon my offense. Vatirtzeini, you are reconciled with me.” But I have already said (Above, 32:21.) that it was not advisable for Jacob to bring iniquity to remembrance. (See Ezekiel 21:28.)
אל נא NAY, I PRAY THEE — Do not, I pray thee, speak to me thus.
אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך ולקחת מנחתי מידי כי על כן ראיתי פניך וגו' IF NOW I HAVE FOUND FAVOUR IN THY EYES THEN TAKE MY PRESENT AT MY HAND: FOR THEREFORE I HAVE SEEN THY FACE etc. — Accept my present because (כי) it is fitting and proper for you to accept my present, for that (על כן) I have seen your face which is as dear to me as the sight of the angel — for I have seen your guardian angel. And a further reason why you should accept my present is ותרצני — because you have agreed to pardon my offence. Why, however, did he mention to him that he had seen the angel? In order that he (Esau) should be afraid of him saying, “He has seen angels and nevertheless escaped safely! Now, certainly, I shall be unable to overcome him” (Sotah 41b)
ותרצני AND THOU WAST PLEASED WITH ME — You are reconciled with me. Wherever the term רצה (the verb, or the noun רצון) occurs in Scripture it means “propitiating”; old French appaisement; English appeasing. An example is, (Leviticus 22:20) “It shall not be (לרצון) acceptable as a propitiatory sacrifice to you”, for the purpose of the sacrifices is to conciliate and to propitiate. Similarly (Proverbs 10:31) "The lips of the righteous know רצון — they understand to conciliate and propitiate.
(10-11) Jakob gesteht es geradezu: ich muss dich in diesem Augenblicke als den sittlich und geistig Höhern erkennen, du hast den höchsten Sieg über dich errungen, einen Adel der Gesinnung, vor dem ich mich beuge, בכורה und ברכה waren die beiden Punkte, die sie entzweit hatten. Über beide spricht sich Jakob aus. Hinsichtlich der בכורה, dieses geistig sittlichen Momentes, reicht er in dem מנחה dem Bruder die huldigende Anerkennung seines Seelenadels. Hinsichtlich der ברכה spricht er es aus, daß er aus ihr keinen materiellen Vorteil gezogen; was er habe, habe Gott ihm gewährt, und mit diesem durch Gottes Segen Selbsterrungenen habe er alles, und weiter gehen seine Wünsche nicht. Damit war beides gesühnt.
כראות פני אלוקים, as is the custom when one is granted an audience by the people in high office. The Torah already commanded that when appearing in Jerusalem three times a year, the Israelite fulfilling this commandment must not appear before G’d empty-handed. (Exodus 23,15)
ותרצני, in order that you will receive me with goodwill. We have a similar construction in Maleachi 1,8 הירצך או הישא פניך?, This consideration also warrants my sending you a lavish gift.
Do not tell me this. [Rashi knows this] because אַל always prefaces an order [not to do something]. Thus Rashi explains it as, “Please do not tell me this.” [Rashi is also explaining] that we should not think that “Please no” relates to Eisov’s concession of the blessings, as that cannot be. Rather, “Please no” relates only to Eisov’s statement that he has plenty and does not want the gift. (Maharshal)
For it is right and proper for you to accept my gift... Rashi adds, “It is right and proper...” since על כן means “because.” [Consequently, על כן means the same as כי.] If so, one of them should have sufficed: either על כן ראיתי פניך, or כי ראיתי פניך. Therefore Rashi added, “For it is right...” so that כי gives the reason for the preceding statement, “Take my present from my hand.” It is as if Yaakov said, “Take my present from my hand because (כי) it is right and proper for you to accept it.” Whereas על כן connects to [what follows:] “Because I have seen your face...”
Which is esteemed to me like seeing the face of an angel for I have seen your guardian angel... [Rashi is explaining that] when it says, “Like seeing,” it does not mean: “I have seen your face, like I saw the face of a Godly being.” For that would not be a reason to give Eisov a gift. Thus Rashi explains, “Which is esteemed to me like seeing...”
You have become reconciled to me... Rashi is saying that the ו of ותרצני signifies the idea: “and there is another reason to receive the gift.” Otherwise, ותרצני [is not understandable, as] it does not relate to ראות פני אלהים.
Jacob said: Please, no, if I have found favor in your eyes, and we indeed have a good relationship, receive my gift from me, since the acceptance of a gift is an expression of kinship. For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels. I consider you like a marvelous being, and you welcomed me. You are so noble in my eyes that it would be an honor for me for my gift to be accepted by you.
כראות פני אלוקים ותרצני, “having seen you is like seeing an angel of G’d, and for becoming reconciled with me.” According to Rashi, Yaakov acknowledged Esau’s generosity in voluntarily reconciling himself with him. According to Nachmanides this was not the occasion when Yaakov mentioned any guilt at all. He simply told Esau that he would consider his accepting his gift as a source of great satisfaction, something comparable to being granted the vision of an angel. Looking at his brother’s face when it was well disposed towards him, was worth a great deal to him.
“For to see your face is like seeing the face of God” [33:10]. Jacob said: it is just that you should take a present from me, because I have seen you and this is like I have seen angels. That is to say, Jacob said to Esau: I have seen angels and they struggled with me and they could do nothing to me. That is to say, Esau should know that his angel had struggled with him and could do nothing, in the expectation that Esau should be afraid of Jacob. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:10.) Bahya writes. Rabbi Yohanan said: one is allowed to flatter evildoers out of fear, as Jacob did. He said to Esau: I see you gladly, like I had seen God. Even though Jacob hated Esau in his heart, yet Jacob flattered him, so that he should not do anything to him. In particular, Jacob said: “like seeing the face of God” [33:10]. In his heart, Jacob thought: I love you as much as the foreign god that you call Elohim. Similarly, Esau thought that “Elohim” means God. Our sages said that it is allowed to flatter a gentile, when the gentile thinks it is something important and the Jew thinks it is not. (Bahya, Genesis, 33:10.)
It seems to this writer that Mor u-Kezi'ah regarded the establishment of halakhic time, and hence of the Sabbath, in the places under discussion to be a matter of unresolvable doubt. To be sure, as clearly enunciated by R. David ibn Zimra, Teshuvot ha-Radvaz, I, no. 76, (See also Parashat Derakhim, Drush 23, s.v. od nakdim; R. Israel Lipschutz, Tiferet Yisra’el, Berakhot, note appended to Bo‘az, end of chapter 1; R. Chaim Joseph David Azulai, Birkei Yosef, Oraḥ Ḥayyim 242:1; R. Joseph Saul Nathanson, Teshuvot Sho’el u-Meshiv, Mahadura Revi’a’ah, no. 154; and R. Benjamin Aryeh Weiss, Teshuvot Even Yekarah (Lemberg, 5654), no. 11.) determination of the onset and conclusion of Shabbat is determined locally. Leviticus 23:3 mandates that the Sabbath be observed "in all your habitations." That phrase is understood by Radvaz (A similar interpretation of that verse was earlier advanced by Seforno in his commentary ad locum. See also the interpretation of Exodus 31:16 advanced by the Zohar, Genesis 56a. The verse “And the children of Israel observed the Sabbath to make the Sabbath for their generations (le-dorotam)” is rendered by the Zohar as “to make the Sabbath for their dwellings (le-dirotam).”) as signifying that the onset and conclusion of Shabbat is to be determined in accordance with sunset at each particular "habitation." (R. Abraham ibn Ezra, in his commentary to Genesis 33:10, understands the verse “And the sun rose upon him” (Genesis 32:32) as reflecting this underlying solar phenomenon, i.e., the sun rose for Jacob in the locale in which he found himself but did not rise simultaneously in other areas. R. Isaac di Trani, renowned as the author of Teshuvot Maharit, declares in his Ẓofnat Pa‘aneaḥ (Venice, 5413), Drush le-Parashat Bereshit, that the work of creation did not cease throughout the globe at a single instant. Rather, the process of creation came to a halt at each point when night fell at that spot. In effect, in observing Shabbat as determined by local sunset, man emulates the Creator who ceased from the process of creation at different times in different places. Ḥatam Sofer, cited by R. Israel David Jaffe, Ḥazon le-Mo‘ed, no. 8, sec. 7, also stated that this was the case during each of the six days of creation: the work of each day did not take place simultaneously throughout the world; rather, the entities created on each day of the week were created in every geographic area while it was day in that locale. This, Ḥatam Sofer asserts, applied even to the “ten things” which the Mishnah, Avot 5:6, declared to have been created on the sixth day between sunset and nightfall, i.e., those objects were created in different places at different times. Ḥatam Sofer interprets the verse “And God finished on the seventh day… and He rested on the seventh day” (Genesis 2:2) as referring, not to a single act of cessation of labor, but to a divine comportment at two different places, viz., God completed the work of creation at one locale while at the same time resting at another locale. See also R. Yechiel Michal Tucatzinsky, Bein ha-Shemashot (Jerusalem, 5729), p. 53; idem, Yomam (Jerusalem, 5703), p. 73; and R. Ben-Ẓion Uziel, Mishpetei Uzi’el, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, II, no. 29. Cf., R. Menachem Kasher, “Shabbat Bereshit u-Shabbat Sinai,” Talpiyot, vol. I, no. 1 (Tishri 5704), pp. 415-420. Cf., however, Teshuvot Sho’el u-Meshiv, Mahadura Revi’a’ah, who candidly acknowledges that, in observing Shabbat according to local time “in all their habitations,” Jews do not observe Shabbat during the same time period in which the Creator ceased from the work of creation. Moreover, he regards that concept to be reflected in the otherwise problematic words of the musaf prayer: “a people who sanctify the seventh day (am mekaddeshei shevi‘i).” Jews sanctify the month and hence the festivals which are calendar dependent. Shabbat, however, is predetermined and does not require sanctification of the new moon by the Bet Din. Nevertheless, explains Sho’el u-Meshiv, since Jews must observe Shabbat “in all their habitations” at different times they are indeed a “people who sanctify the seventh day.”) Shabbat is designed as a "sign between Me and between you" (Exodus 31:13) and accordingly, is to be observed during the period representing the culmination of six days of labor in each person's locale. The Sabbath day, which includes a period of darkness and a period of daylight, is roughly twenty-four hours in length in all places other than in the extreme northern and southern regions. As a result, the Sabbath is observed on the same day of the week in all parts of the globe. Accordingly, Mor u-Kezi'ah assumes that in locales in which that cannot be the case there is no discernible method for determining the days of the week. Hence, determination of the advent of Shabbat remains either a matter of irresolvable doubt or, alternatively, there is no concept of halakhic time in such places. Therefore, Mor u-Kezi'ah rules that a person finding himself in such a place faces a problem that is no different from that confronting a person lost in the desert or confused with regard to a sequence of days and must conduct himself in an identical manner. That is precisely the import of Mor u-Kezi'ah's concluding phrase "in the manner indicated earlier with regard to one who travels in the desert," i.e., he may perform no forbidden act on any day of the week and must recite kiddush and havdalah on the seventh day of every seven-day cycle subsequent to his arrival.
The difference between angel and man lies in the freedom of will possessed by man and the absence of such freedom of choice in angels. Man is able to rise or fall morally, ethically; angels remain forever on the same plateau. Rashi and Onkelos say what they say in addition to the peshat, the plain meaning of the verse. They do so to forestall the impression that G-d is described as talking to Himself or to any of His non existent partners. We find many instances when Onkelos translates elokim as "angels of G-d," such as Jacob saying "I have seen elokim face to face" (Genesis 32,31). In the case of the serpent using this term, seeing the serpent does not have encounters with angels, the term refers simply to elokim as the Creator and His power. Even the she-ass of Bileam did not see the angel as an angel (Numbers 22). It only saw him as a threatening obstruction. Had this not been so, she would not have said to Bileam, "Do I usually act in this fashion?" She would have said, "The angel of the Lord has prevented me."
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – come and see what is written before this matter: “Jacob said, when he saw them: [This is the camp of God]” (Genesis 32:3). How many were in a camp of God? Two thousand myriads of ministering angels, as it is stated: “The chariots of God are myriad, thousands upon thousands of companies. My Lord is among them, at Sinai, in holiness” (Psalms 68:18). “He called the name of that place Maḥanayim” (Genesis 32:3). Why were there two camps? It teaches that they gave Jacob four thousand myriads of ministering angels and they appeared to him like a king’s armies, some of whom were clad in iron, some of whom were on horseback, and some of whom were sitting in chariots. He [Esau] encountered those clad in iron. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those on horseback. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob.’ He encountered those in chariots. He said to them: ‘With whom are you affiliated?’ They said to him: ‘With Jacob,’ as it is stated: “He said: For whom do you intend this entire camp that I met?” (Genesis 33:8). Jacob, too, would mention to Esau the name of the Holy One blessed be He, to scare him and to frighten him, as it is stated: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). To what is this matter analogous? It is to one who invited another to a meal, and he (The guest.) ascertained that he sought to kill him. He [the guest] said: ‘The taste of this dish is like the taste of a dish that I tasted in the king’s palace.’ He said: ‘He knows the king?’ He was afraid and did not kill him. The same is true of Jacob. When he said to Esau: “As I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim]” wicked Esau said: ‘The Holy One blessed be He brought him to all this glory? I will no longer be able to overcome him.’
Rabbi Ḥama ben Rabbi Ḥanina said: It was Esau’s guardian angel. That is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels, and you welcomed me” (Genesis 33:10). “He saw that he could not prevail against him, and he touched the joint of his thigh; the joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated as he wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:26). This is analogous to an athlete who was standing and wrestling with the king’s son. He lifted his eyes, saw the king standing over him, and cast himself down before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not prevail against him” – He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not prevail over him. Rabbi Berekhya said: We do not know who was victorious, whether it was the angel or Jacob, but from what is written in the verse: “A man wrestled [vaye’avek] with him” – that is, who became covered with dust [avak]; the man who was with him. (Since the man who was with him became covered with dust, that indicates that Jacob was victorious.) Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to him [to the angel]: 'He comes against you with five amulets in his possession: His merit, his father’s merit, his mother’s merit, his grandfather’s merit, and his grandmother’s merit. Evaluate yourself whether you are able even to stand against his merit.' Immediately, “he saw that he could not prevail against him.” This is analogous to a king who had a wild dog and a tame lion. The king would take his son and embolden his heart with the lion, (He was emboldened by the fact that he would emerge victorious over the lion.) so were the dog to come and confront him, the king would say to him [the dog]: ‘The lion could not stand against him, and you seek to confront him?’ So, were the nations of the world to come and confront Israel, the Holy One blessed be He will say to them: ‘Your ministering angel could not stand against him, and you seek to confront his descendants?’ “He touched the joint of his thigh” – he touched the righteous men and women, the prophets and prophetesses, who are destined to emerge from him. Which is that [generation]? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived in the wake of the Bar Kokhva rebellion.) “The joint of Jacob's thigh was dislocated [vateka]” – Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Eliezer said: It was smoothed. (The bone that naturally protrudes in the thigh joint was driven inward, like a peg that is driven [tekua] into the ground.) Rabbi Berekya said in the name of Rabbi Asi: It was split like a fish. (It was split lengthwise. In this interpretation, vateka is a derivation of the word beka, meaning split.) Rav Naḥman bar Yaakov said: It was dislocated from its place, as it is written: “I was repulsed [vateka]…as My soul was repulsed [nake’a]” (Ezekiel 23:18). “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken. He said: I will not release you unless you bless me” (Genesis 32:27). Throughout that night each of them was striking the other, this one’s shield against that one’s shield. When dawn broke: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken.”
“Jacob said: Please, no, if I have found favor in your eyes, receive my gift from me, for therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim], and you welcomed me” (Genesis 33:10). “Jacob said: Please, no, if I have found favor in your eyes, receive my gift from me, for therefore [I have seen your face], as the sight [kirot] of the face [penei] of elohim” – just as “the face of elohim” connotes judgment, so, “your face” connotes judgment. (Elohim in this context means judges.) Just as the face of elohim: (Elohim in this context means God.) “They shall not appear before Me [yera’u fanai] empty-handed” (Exodus 23:15), so, you: They shall not appear before you empty-handed. “Please, take my gift that was brought to you as God has graced me, and because I have everything. He urged him, and he took it” (Genesis 33:11). “Please, take my gift that was brought to you” – he said to him: ‘How much exertion did I exert until it came into my possession, but you, it came to you on its own.’ It is not written here, “that you brought,” but rather, “that was brought” – it came to you on its own. “He urged him, and he took it” – he appeared as though he was withdrawing, but his hand was outstretched. Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: “Those who grovel [mitrapes] for pieces [beratzei] of silver” (Psalms 68:31) – he opens his palm [matir et hapas] and is placated [umitratze] with silver. Reish Lakish ascended to inquire after the well-being of Rabbeinu. (The grandson of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.) He said to him: ‘Pray for me, because this empire (The Roman empire.) is very wicked.’ He [Reish Lakish] said to him: ‘Do not take anything from anyone, and you will not need to give anything.’ While he was sitting with him, a certain woman came and gave him a bowl with a knife in it. He [Rabbeinu] stood and took the knife and returned the bowl to her. An imperial messenger came, saw it, coveted it, and took it. Before evening, Reish Lakish ascended to inquire after the well-being of Rabbeinu and saw that he was laughing. He said to him: ‘Why are you laughing?’ He [Rabbeinu] said to him: ‘That knife that you saw, a messenger from the empire came, saw it, coveted it, and took it.’ He [Reish Lakish] said to him: ‘Did I not say to you: Do not take anything from a person, and you will not need to give anything.’ A certain ignoramus said to Rabbi Hoshaya: ‘If I say to you a good saying, would you say it in public in my name?’ He said to him: ‘What is it?’ He said to him: ‘All those gifts that our patriarch Jacob gave to Esau, the nations of the world are destined to return to the messianic king in the future. What is the source? “The kings of Tarshish and of the islands will return tribute” (Psalms 72:10). It is not written here, “bring,” but rather, “return.”’ He said to him: ‘As you live, you said a good saying, and I will say it in your name.’
“He said to him: What is your name? He said: Jacob” (Genesis 32:28). “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name; rather, Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29). “He said to him: ‘What is your name?’ He said: ‘Jacob.’ “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name.” “Who confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers” (Isaiah 44:26) – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Since He “confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers,” do we not know that it says: “Of Jerusalem: It will be inhabited; and of the cities of Judah: They will be built” (Isaiah 44:26)? (Namely, from the fact that the Lord fulfills the word of the angel who told Jacob that his name would be changed, we can learn that He will fulfill the word of His prophets who prophesied that Jerusalem would be inhabited.) [It refers] to one angel who appeared to our patriarch Jacob. That is what is written: “He said to him: What is your name.… No [more…] Jacob.” “And fulfills the counsel of His messengers” – as the Holy One blessed be He appeared to our patriarch Jacob in order to fulfill the decree of that angel that said to him: “No [more…] Jacob.” The Holy One blessed be He also said so to him. That is what is written: “God said to him: Your name is Jacob; [your name shall no longer be called Jacob]” (Genesis 35:10) – “no [more] shall Jacob be said.” Bar Kappara said: Anyone who calls Abraham Abram violates a positive commandment. Rabbi Levi said: A positive commandment and a prohibition. “[Your name] shall no longer be called [Abram]” (Genesis 17:5) – a prohibition; “but your name shall be Abraham” (Genesis 17:5) – a positive commandment. And yet the members of the Great Assembly called him Abram, as it is written: “You are the Lord God who chose Abram…”? It was relating a narrative and saying that while he was still Abram You chose him. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Sarah Sarai violates a positive command? (And according to Rabbi Levi a positive command and a prohibition (Genesis 17:15).) It is, rather, that only he (Abraham. The verse states: “God said to Abraham…you shall not call her name Sarai.” In the case of Abraham the verse stated “your name shall no longer be called Abram.”) was commanded in her regard. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Israel Jacob violates a positive command? It is taught: It is not that the name of Jacob will be uprooted. Rather, “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Israel will be primary and Jacob secondary. Rabbi Zechariah in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: In any case: Your name is Jacob… “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Jacob is primary, and Israel is in addition to it. “For you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” – you have wrestled with the heavenly and prevailed over them, and with the earthly and prevailed over them. With the heavenly – this is the angel. Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He was Esau’s ministering angel. This is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [penei elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). Just as penei elohim is judgment, so too, your face is judgment. (As it were, Esau is passing judgment on Jacob (see Bereshit Rabba 76:7).) Just as penei elohim – “you shall not appear before Me [yera’u fanai] empty-handed” (Exodus 23:15), so too, you, I will not appear before you empty-handed. With the earthly and you prevailed over them – this is Esau and his chieftains. Alternatively, “for you have striven with God” – it is you whose image is carved on High. (The image of man in the Throne of Glory.)
(Ib. b) "And when he reached the passage, Thou mayest not," etc. We are taught in the name of R. Nathan: "At that moment when the sages tried to pacify King Agrippa, Israel deserved a punishment, because they flattered King Agrippa." R. Simon b. Chalafta said: "Since the above flattery had taken place, justice became perverted and man's actions became corrupt, so that no man can say to his associate, 'My deeds are better than yours.'" R. Juda b. Ma'araba, and according to others R. Simon b. Pazzi said: "One is permitted to flatter the wicked in this world as it is said (Is. 32, 5) The vile person shall be no more called liberal nor the churl said to be noble. This refers to the future world, hence in this world one is permitted to do so." R. Simon b. Lakish said: "The above may be inferred from the following (Gen. 33, 10) It is as though I had seen the face of an angel, and because thou hast received me kindly." This will differ with R. Levi's statement, for R. Levi said: "Unto what may the incident of Jacob and Esau be likened? Unto a man who invited his friend to a banquet. The guest being aware that the host desired to kill him [was afraid that poison might be in the food] passed a remark that the dish tastes like the dish he eats in the Royal house. His enemy said to himself: 'Since he is known to the Royal family, I am afraid to kill him.' In like manner was it with Jacob, when he mentioned the face of an Angel, it was for the purpose of frightening Esau he should not kill him."
R. Abahu said in the name of R. Simeon the son of Lakish: When Aaron saw that the angel was about to overpower him, he placed the censer before his countenance, as it is said: They shall put incense before Thee, and whole burnt-offering upon Thine altar (Deut. 33:10). This reveals how beloved incense is. R. Isaac the son of Eliezer declared: You know that after he constructed the Tabernacle and all its implements, he slaughtered the sacrifices, and arranged them on the altar, he set the table, made the menorah, and did everything that had to be done, but the Shekhinah still had not descended. Only when the incense was offered did it descend. You know this for it is written: Awake, O north wind, and come, thou south; blow upon my garden that the spice thereof may flow out (Song 4:16). The Holy One, blessed be He, said: You shall be forgiven in this world because of the incense, but in the world-to-come, I will offer unto Thee burnt-offerings of fatlings, with the smoke of rams; I will offer bullocks with goats. Selah (Ps. 66:15).
"Judah became holy. When Israel arrived at the sea, they fought with each other. One tribe went down to the sea first, and the sea did not dry up until they entered it. They continued to descend until they reached the bottom of the sea, as it is said: "Save me, O God! For the waters have come up to my neck" (Psalm 69:2). It is also written: "And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea on dry ground" (Exodus 14:22). Benjamin the Righteous went first into the sea, as it is said: "There is little Benjamin, their ruler, in the lead" (Psalm 68:28). Do not read "in the lead" [in Hebrew: "ro'dem"], but rather "into the sea" [in Hebrew: "yored yam"]. What did Nachshon ben Aminadav do? He jumped into the waves of the sea and sanctified the name of the Lord before all, and rebuked Benjamin, as it is said: "The leaders of Judah were shouting, and the rulers were with them" (Psalm 68:28). And it was under the leadership of Nachshon ben Yehudah that Israel crossed. And because he rebuked his brothers, he merited the purple robe, as it is written: "And they clothed Daniel with purple" (Daniel 5:29). God said to him, "You rebuked your brother to sanctify My name. You shall be a ruler over your brothers." Judah truly became holy through his leadership. The sea saw that Israel was fighting each other over the sanctity of God's name. The sea said, "What am I standing here for?" and immediately fled, as it is said: "The sea saw and fled" (Psalm 114:3). Another interpretation: The sea saw that Joseph's coffin was being lowered into it and said, "I will flee before him," as it is said: "And the sea fled before them" (Genesis 33:10). Just as the sea was a miracle for them, it shall be a miracle for you. Be like the sea and flee. Another interpretation: The sea did not want to split because the people were rebelling. It said, "They rebel, and I will split before them," as it is said: "They were rebellious at the sea, at the Red Sea" (Psalm 106:7). And just as the sea was punished for rebelling, God rebuked it, as it is said: "He rebuked the Red Sea also, and it dried up" (Psalm 106:9). As soon as the sea saw this, it fled, as it is said: "Be ashamed, O Sidon, for the sea speaks, the stronghold of the sea, saying: I have not been in labor or given birth, I have not raised young men or brought up young women." The sea said: I am afraid of Him because I have no protection other than Him. You, on the other hand, have raised numerous young men and brought up countless young women, yet you are not afraid of Him. (Exodus 14:29).
Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Ḥelbo: It is written: “A man wrestled with him” (Genesis 32:25). We do not know who was dominated by whom; whether the angel was dominated by Jacob or Jacob was dominated by the angel, except from what is written: “He said: Release me, as dawn has broken” (Genesis 32:27). The angel said to Jacob: ‘Release me, as the time for my lauding has arrived.’ Thus, the angel was dominated by Jacob. In what guise did he appear to him? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He appeared to him in the guise of Esau’s guardian angel. That is what is written: “For I have therefore seen your face like seeing the face of an angel” (Genesis 33:10). [Jacob] said to [Esau]: ‘Your face is like that of your angel.’ This is analogous to a king who had a tamed lion and a wild dog. What did the king do? He brought the lion and incited it against his son. He would say: If the dog comes upon my son, my son will say: If I overcame the lion will I not be able to overcome the dog? So too, when the nations of the world come upon Israel, the Holy One blessed be He says to then: ‘Your guardian angel was not able to withstand their ancestor, will you be able to overcome them?’ Rabbi Huna said: He appeared to him as a herdsman; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: (The angel said to Jacob.) ‘Cross mine and I will cross yours.’ (Help me cross the stream with my livestock, and I will help you cross with your livestock. Some suggest that the text should read: Cross yours and I will cross mine. This is consistent with the version of the text in Bereshit Rabba 77:3 and with the continuation of the midrash here (Etz Yosef).) After Jacob our patriarch crossed his, he said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ Once he returned, “a man wrestled with him.” (The angel, appearing as a herdsman, fought with Jacob under the pretense that after crossing his own livestock, Jacob had come to take some of his livestock.) Rabbi Ḥiyya the Great and Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi were engaged in commerce and were dealing silk fabric. They entered Tyre and engaged in their labor. When they exited the city gates, they said: ‘Let us return and see, perhaps we forgot something.’ They returned and found a bundle of silk fabric. They said: This matter is from Jacob our grandfather, as it is written: “A man wrestled with him.” (This event occurred after Jacob had returned to see if he forgot anything. They derived from Jacob’s behavior that checking if one forgot anything is a good habit.) The Rabbis say: He appeared to him as an arch robber; this one had flocks and that one had flocks, this one had camels and that one had camels. He said to him: Cross mine and I will cross yours. The angel crossed Jacob’s flocks in the blink of an eye. Our patriarch Jacob was crossing the flocks of the angel, and he was returning and finding other flocks all that night. What did Jacob our patriarch do? Rabbi Pinḥas said: At that moment, Jacob wrapped a soft woolen scarf around his neck. He said to him: ‘Sorcerer, sorcerer, you are a wizard, but wizardry is not effective at night.’ Rabbi Huna said: At that moment the angel said: ‘Shall I not inform him with whom he is dealing?’ What did he do? He placed a finger on a rock and it began bursting into flames. [Jacob] said to him: ‘With this you are seeking to frighten me? I am constituted entirely from it,’ as it is stated: “The house of Jacob will be fire” (Obadiah 1:18). Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to Esau’s guardian angel: ‘Are you standing against him? He is coming against you with five amulets in his hand: His merit, the merit of his father, the merit of his mother, the merit of his grandfather, and the merit of his grandmother. Assess yourself relative to him, as you are unable to stand even against his own merit.’ Immediately, “he saw that he could not overcome him” (Genesis 32:26). Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. [This is analogous] to an arch robber who was struggling with the son of a king. He lifted his eyes and saw that his father the king was standing over him, and he submitted to him. So too, when the angel saw the Divine Presence standing over Jacob, he submitted before him. That is what is written: “He saw that he could not overcome him.” Rabbi Levi said: He saw in the Divine Presence that he could not overcome him. “He touched the socket of his thigh” (Genesis 32:26), the righteous men and the righteous women and the prophets and the prophetesses who were destined to emerge from him and his sons. What is that? It is the generation of persecution. (The generation that lived after the destruction of the Temple, when the Romans persecuted the residents of the Land of Israel.) “The socket of Jacob’s thigh was dislocated [vateka]” (Genesis 32:26), Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Eliezer says: He smoothed it. (The bone that protrudes from the thigh no longer protruded.) Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rav Asi: (The Hebrew text says Ravasa, which is short for Rav Asi.) He fractured it like [one splits] a fish. (Lengthwise.) Rabbi Naḥman bar Yaakov said: He dislocated it, just as you say: “My soul was alienated [vateka] from her” (Ezekiel 23:18).
כי על כן עברתם FORASMUCH AS YE HAVE PASSED —For (כי) I ask you this thing because that (על כן) you have honoured me by calling at my place. כי] על כן] has the same meaning as על אשר “because that”. So, too, is the meaning wherever כי על כן occurs in Scripture, e. g., (Genesis 19:9) “For (כי) I ask you this because that (על כן) they have come under the shadow of my roof”; (Genesis 33:10)
“For (כי) you ought to do this because that (על כן) I have seen thy face”; (Genesis 38:26) “for (כי) she has done right because that (על כן) I gave her not”; (Numbers 10:31) “for (כי) thou ought to accompany us because that (על כן) thou knowest how we are to encamp”.
Because Heb. עַל-כֵּן. Like עַל אֲשֶׁר, because of that which. Comp. (Gen. 33:10) “Because (כִּי עַל-כֵּן) I saw your face”; (ibid. 27:36) “because (כִּי עַל-כֵּן) I did not give her to Shelah my son.”
”Make peace with me.” A greeting, as in, “And Yaakov greeted [=ויברך] Paroh.” (Bereishis 47:7.) (See Rashi in Bereishis 33:10 and above, in II Melochim 5:15.)
כי על כן ידעת — This is similar to על אשר ידעת, like (Genesis 38:26) “For (כי) she has acted rightly, because (על כן) I did not give her to Selah, my son”; (Genesis 19:8): “For (כי) this kindness please do out of respect to me, because (על כן) they have come under the shadow of my roof”; (Genesis 33:10): “For (כי) it is fitting and proper for you to accept my present, because (על כן) I have seen your face."
Because I loved Heb. על-כן. Because I loved Your commandments, it is fitting that You teach me a time of good will, and what I should do for You that You should accept me. There are many [instances of] על-כן that are to be interpreted as “because”; e.g., (Gen. 33:10): “because (כי על-כן) I have seen your face”; (Num. 10:33). “because (כי על-כן) you know our encampment”; (Isa. 15: 7), “Because of (כי על-כן) the many things they did.”
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said that this can be proven from here. Jacob said to Esau: “I have seen your face, as one sees the face of angels, and you were pleased with me” (Genesis 33:10). Jacob flattered him by comparing seeing him to seeing a divine vision.
The Gemara suggests: And let us derive a verbal analogy from the face of God, as it is written: “For I have seen your face as one sees the face of [penei] God, and you were pleased with me” (Genesis 33:10). The term penei is used with regard to the face of God as well. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: If you grasped many, you did not grasp anything; if you grasped few, you grasped something.
In Lord of lords, (Deut. 10, 17.) the first is sacred and the second is secular; in the God of Abraham (Gen. 31, 53.) it is sacred; in the God of Nahor (ibid.; Nahor did not worship the true God.) it is secular; in the God of their father (ibid.; Terah (their father) was an idolater.) it is secular. In Thou shalt not revile God (Ex. 22, 27.) [the noun may bear] a sacred or secular meaning. (It may denote God or judges.) R. Simeon maintains that the noun is sacred. (V inserts ‘as it says’ within brackets, the words being redundant. [H omits and reads ‘Ishmael’ instead of ‘Simeon’.]) In Forasmuch as I have seen thy face, as one seeth the face of God (Gen. 33, 10.) the noun is secular; (Because it refers to an angel or prince.) in God’s camp (ibid. XXXII, 3.) the noun is sacred.
Yaakov said, Please, no. If I have found favor in your eyes [now], take [accept] my present from my hand, because I have seen your face [and it was] like seeing the face of a God[ly being] [great ones]; and you have received me favorably.
And Jakob said, Say not so, I beseech thee. If now I have found favor in thy eyes, accept my present from my hand; because I have seen the look of thy face, and it is to me as the vision of the face of thy angel; for, lo, thou art propitious to me.
| קַח־נָ֤א אֶת־בִּרְכָתִי֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הֻבָ֣את לָ֔ךְ כִּֽי־חַנַּ֥נִי אֱלֹהִ֖ים וְכִ֣י יֶשׁ־לִי־כֹ֑ל וַיִּפְצַר־בּ֖וֹ וַיִּקָּֽח׃ | 11 E | Please accept my present which has been brought to you, for God has favored me and I have plenty.” And when he urged him, he accepted. |
It is known in kabbalistic circles that a righteous person, a צדיק, is also referred to as בן, “son.” When the Jewish people conduct themselves in the manner desired by G’d, the Torah quotes G’d as referring to them as בנים, “sons, children.” (Deuteronomy 14,1) What distinguishes a righteous person from normal people is that he does not suffer from an insatiable appetite for the comforts and allures that this world has to offer, but is content with what he has been granted by his Creator. This is another way of describing him as possessing כל, everything. He does not feel that he lacks anything. This is especially true of the type of righteous people who spend their days asking G’d to dispense His largesse to others whom they perceive to be in need. Their concern for others instead of their asking G’d for more for themselves, stamps them as having been blessed בכל, “with everything.” Moreover, it is to be assumed that people who concern themselves with the needs of their peers all the time, are clearly content that G’d has already given them all that they require for themselves. It is appropriate for every good Jew to emulate Avraham’s example in this respect, and this is why the same expression, i.e. מכל in the case of Yitzchok (Genesis 27,33), and כל in the case of Yaakov, (Genesis 33,11) has been used by the Torah to document that if Avraham was the “father” of this attitude, his children, i.e. descendants, have emulated him, so that the term בת as we explained several times, is a reference to the container from which the largesse of G’d is dispensed. What the sages meant when they said that G’d had blessed Avraham with a בת, is that his descendants had cultivated this virtue of his, of being concerned first and foremost with the needs of others. In psalms 21,3 David expresses his gratitude to G’d Who has granted him all of his aspirations. He too had emulated this virtue that his people’s founding father had been able to implant in his offspring.
4. Therefore, Yaakov, who is the aspect of inner intelligence, merited grace. As is written (Genesis 33:11), “God has ChaNani (granted me grace).” He, therefore, blessed the tribes with CheiN, as in (ibid., 33:5), “The children with whom the Lord has ChaNan (graced) your servant.” And Binyamin, who was not there at the time, was therefore blessed by Yosef with grace, as is written (Genesis 43:29), “May the Lord yaChNkha (grant you grace), my son.”
וכי יש לי כל, “seeing that I have everything;” he meant that he possessed everything in order to confront Esau if the need would arise to do so. This was because Joseph had already been born, so that he was in possession of fire and flame to burn Esau who has been compared by the prophet to mere straw. (Ovadiah I,18)
קח נא את ברכתי, the word ברכתי here means: “my gift.” It occurs in this sense in Kings II 5,15 קח נא ברכה מאת עבדך, “please accept a gift from your servant.”
אשר הובאת לך, by the servants who have been walking ahead of me behind those herds. Besides, I have all the wealth and honour I could wish for.
ויפצר בו, he pleaded with him insistently until he agreed to accept it.
TAKE, I PRAY THEE, MY BLESSING. I.e., the gift. Likewise, Make your blessing with me (II Kings 18:31.) means “bring me a gift” or “make your peace with me.” So also, Take a blessing of thy servant (Ibid., 5:15.) means “take a present from thy servant.” They called a gift which a man sends of his own free will “a blessing” because he sends it from that with which G-d had blessed him, just as the verse states, Wherewith the Eternal thy G-d hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him, (Deuteronomy 15:14.) and just as Scripture said above, And he took of that which he had with him. (Above, 32:14.) However, a specific gift of that which has been agreed upon as due the king is called mas (tribute).
חנני, this should by rights be חננני, that is why the first letter נ has a dagesh.
ברכתי means MY PRESENT — a present such as this that is brought, when one has an audience with a person after an interval of time is intended only as a greeting. Now wherever the term "blessing” (ברכה) is used in connection with an audience — as for example, (47:7) “Jacob blessed (ויברך) Pharaoh”, and (2 Kings 18:31) "make your peace (ברכה) with me” mentioned in connection with Sennacherib, and also (2 Samuel 8:10) to salute him and to bless him (לברכו)” mentioned in connection with Toi, King of Hamath — they all signify greeting, O.I. saluer. So that here, too: ברכתי really means “mon salut” — my greetings and the term is then transferred to the greeting-present.
אשר הבאת לך THAT IS BROUGHT TO THEE without any exertion on your part. I have myself taken the trouble to bring it all this way until it has reached your hand (Genesis Rabbah 78:12).
חַנַּנִי GOD HATH FAVOURED ME — The first נ has a Dagesh, because it serves the purpose of two נ’s since it should have said חַנְנַנִי as we always find the forms of חנן with two נ’s. The third נ here (Rashi means the third that is pronounced) serves as part of the accusative pronominal suffix (meaning “me”), as (Isaiah 29:16) עשני "He made me”, and as (30:20) זבדני “he endowed me”.
יש לי כל I HAVE EVERYTHING — all that will supply my needs. But Esau spoke proudly (v. 8): I have (רב) abundance — far more than my needs.
ויפצר בו, in order for him to accept the gift. Yaakov was aware that bribes sway people’s minds; in this case he used the bribe to blind Esau’s judgment. We encounter the very opposite with the prophet Elisha in Kings II 5,16 where he is urged to accept a well deserved gift and refuses, so that Naaman will know that a true servant of the Lord does not accept a reward for someone else’s accomplishment, i.e. G’d having cured Naaman from his leprosy.
You did not need to exert yourself for it, whereas I toiled... I.e., since you did not exert yourself over it like I did, it is fitting that you accept it. “Until it has come into your hand” means: until this time when it has already come into your hand.
Please, take my gift that was brought to you. I realize that you do not need the present, but I am offering it to you anyway, as God has graced me, and because I have everything. I lose nothing by giving you this gift. Apparently, Esau did not realize the extent of Jacob’s wealth. He did not ask about Jacob’s whole camp and flocks, perhaps because Jacob had cautiously left them behind. He, Jacob, urged him, Esau, to accept his present, and he took it.
קח נא את ברכתי, “please accept my gift.” When man sends a totally free-willed gift, מנחה, such a gift is described as a ברכה, a blessing. The reason is that he voluntarily gives away something which G’d had blessed him with. A gift which one tenders to a king, on the other hand, is called מס, “tax.”
ויפצר בו ויקח, “insisted, and Esau accepted.” There is a Midrash which explains why Yaakov made a point of having Esau accept his gift. Formerly, Esau and Yaakov had sort of divided the world into two domains, the here and now, and the hereafter. Yaakov had chosen for himself the hereafter, whereas Esau had chosen the here and now. When Esau now found out that Yaakov had acquired a substantial amount of wealth in the here and now, he was liable to demand in exchange part of the hereafter for himself. Yaakov now offered him everything in order to forestall any such claim by Esau. Esau agreed in principle, but stipulated that in the event that any of his people would want to convert to Judaism that Yaakov would accept such converts. This is the meaning of Esau’s proposal in verse 13 and 15.
“He urged him, he accepted” [33:11]. Jacob pleaded with Esau that he should take the present. Esau took the present and Esau said to Jacob: I will do you a favor and will go slowly. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:11.) Jacob very much wanted to keep Esau at a distance and he said: I cannot keep up with you. “For the children are frail” [33:13]. The children are frail and small. Bahya cites a midrash. Esau said to Jacob: let us divide this world and the world to come between us. Jacob responded: the children are frail and weak in the commandments. If they will take this world, they will not be able to withstand the Day of Judgment and will not be able to suffer Gehenna. (Bahya, Genesis, 33:12.)
As explained above, HaShem-יהו"ה, blessed is He, gave this quality called All-Kol-כל as a gift to Avraham, being that it is the foundation of the blessing-Brachah-ברכה and the pool-Breichah-בריכה. The Torah hints to this when it states, (Genesis 24:1) “And HaShem-יהו"ה blessed Avraham in all-BaKol-בכל.” From Avraham it was given over to Yitzchak, as it states, (Genesis 27:33) “And I ate from all-MiKol-מכל before you came, and I blessed him.” It was then transferred from Yitzchak to Yaakov, as it states, (Genesis 33:11) “For God has been gracious with me and I have all-Kol-כל.” That is, Yaakov said to Esav, “Lest it enter your mind that what I have given you caused a lacking for me, know that all the keys to the supernal blessing-Brachah-ברכה have been given over into my hand and that it includes all-Kol-כל.” This is the meaning of his words, “I have all-Kol-כל. Thus, I lack nothing as a result of giving to you.”
Now, all these legions between the earth and the heavens, are like a person who walks in a place of danger. So too, to ascend to the firmament, one’s prayers must pass through these camps. If one is meritorious, robbers will not attack his prayers, but if he is not meritorious, many obstacles and destructive forces will attack him on the way.
Now, wherever in Torah you come across the word All-Kol-כל keep this principle in mind and remember that it indicates one of three matters. Sometimes the word “All-Kol-כל” refers to HaShem’s-יהו"ה quality as the Living God-E”l Chai-א״ל חי, sometimes it refers to His quality of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ״י, and sometimes it indicates the sum of all creations, and as you have been shown to know, everything comes into being from the power of “All-Kol-כל.” This being so, contemplate what Torah states about our forefathers. About Avraham, it says, (Genesis 24:1) “HaShem-יהו״ה blessed Avraham in all-Kol-כל,” about Yitzchak, it says, (Genesis 27:33) “I partook of all-Kol-כל,” and about Yaakov, it says, (Genesis 33:11) “I have all-Kol-כל.” That is, all three were blessed with the quality that includes all-Kol-כל.
and “With everything”; (Jacob said: “I have everything.” Genesis 33:11)
Ours and all that is ours— just as our forefathers were blessed— Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob— In all things, (Abraham was blessed “in all things.” Genesis 24:1) “From everything,” (Isaac said: “I have partaken from everything.” Genesis 27:33) and “With everything”; (Jacob said: “I have everything.” Genesis 33:11) so may He bless us, all of us together, with a perfect blessing and let us say Amein.
Ours and all that is ours— just as our forefathers were blessed— Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob— In all things, (Abraham was blessed “in all things.” Genesis 24:1) "From everything," (Isaac said: “I have partaken from everything.” Genesis 27:33) and "With everything"; (Jacob said: “I have everything.” Genesis 33:11) so may He bless us, all of us together, with a perfect blessing and let us say Amein.
and "With everything"; (Jacob said: “I have everything.” Genesis 33:11)
“And blessed is God, the Most High, who delivered your enemies into your hand. He gave him a tithe of everything” (Genesis 14:20). “And blessed is God, the Most High, who delivered [migen] your enemies into your hand” – Rabbi Huna said: He turned the plot [mangenin] against you upon your enemies. Rabbi Yudan said: How many stratagems [mangenaot] did I perform in order to deliver them into your hand. They (The two sets of kings.) had been fond of one another; this one would send letters to that one, and that one would send gifts to this one, but I incited discord between this one and that one so they would come and fall into your hand. “He gave him a tithe of everything [mikol]” – Rabbi Yehuda bar Rav Simon said: On the basis of that tribute, three of the pillars of the world, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, benefitted. Regarding Abraham it is written: “The Lord had blessed Avraham with everything [bakol]” (Genesis 24:1), due to the merit of: “He gave him a tithe of everything [mikol].” Regarding Isaac it is written: “And I partook of all [mikol]” (Genesis 27:33), due to the merit of: “He gave him a tithe of everything [mikol].” Regarding Jacob it is written: “For God has graced me and because I have everything [kol]” (Genesis 33:11), due to the merit of: “He gave him a tithe of everything [mikol].” From where did Israel merit the Priestly Benediction? (Numbers 6:23–26.) Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis, Rabbi Yehuda said: From Abraham: “So [ko] shall your descendants be” (Genesis 15:5) – “so [ko] shall you bless the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:23). Rabbi Neḥemya said: From Isaac, as it is stated: “I and the lad will go to there [ko]” (Genesis 22:5). That is why the Omnipresent said: “So [ko] you shall bless the children of Israel.” The Rabbis said: From Jacob, as it is stated: “So [ko] you shall say to the house of Jacob” (Exodus 19:3). Corresponding to it is: “So [ko] shall you bless the children of Israel.” Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina, Rabbi Eliezer said: [God said:] ‘When will I increase your descendants like the stars? (This section is referring to the verse: “He took him outside, and said: Look now to the heavens, and count the stars, if you could count them, and He said to him: So [ko] will your offspring be” (Genesis 15:5).) When I reveal Myself to them through the word ko’ – “So [ko] you shall say to the house of Jacob” (Exodus 19:3). Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: When I reveal Myself to their leader (Moses.) through the word ko: “So [ko] said the Lord: My firstborn son is Israel” (Exodus 4:22).
“Jacob said: Please, no, if I have found favor in your eyes, receive my gift from me, for therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [elohim], and you welcomed me” (Genesis 33:10). “Jacob said: Please, no, if I have found favor in your eyes, receive my gift from me, for therefore [I have seen your face], as the sight [kirot] of the face [penei] of elohim” – just as “the face of elohim” connotes judgment, so, “your face” connotes judgment. (Elohim in this context means judges.) Just as the face of elohim: (Elohim in this context means God.) “They shall not appear before Me [yera’u fanai] empty-handed” (Exodus 23:15), so, you: They shall not appear before you empty-handed. “Please, take my gift that was brought to you as God has graced me, and because I have everything. He urged him, and he took it” (Genesis 33:11). “Please, take my gift that was brought to you” – he said to him: ‘How much exertion did I exert until it came into my possession, but you, it came to you on its own.’ It is not written here, “that you brought,” but rather, “that was brought” – it came to you on its own. “He urged him, and he took it” – he appeared as though he was withdrawing, but his hand was outstretched. Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: “Those who grovel [mitrapes] for pieces [beratzei] of silver” (Psalms 68:31) – he opens his palm [matir et hapas] and is placated [umitratze] with silver. Reish Lakish ascended to inquire after the well-being of Rabbeinu. (The grandson of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.) He said to him: ‘Pray for me, because this empire (The Roman empire.) is very wicked.’ He [Reish Lakish] said to him: ‘Do not take anything from anyone, and you will not need to give anything.’ While he was sitting with him, a certain woman came and gave him a bowl with a knife in it. He [Rabbeinu] stood and took the knife and returned the bowl to her. An imperial messenger came, saw it, coveted it, and took it. Before evening, Reish Lakish ascended to inquire after the well-being of Rabbeinu and saw that he was laughing. He said to him: ‘Why are you laughing?’ He [Rabbeinu] said to him: ‘That knife that you saw, a messenger from the empire came, saw it, coveted it, and took it.’ He [Reish Lakish] said to him: ‘Did I not say to you: Do not take anything from a person, and you will not need to give anything.’ A certain ignoramus said to Rabbi Hoshaya: ‘If I say to you a good saying, would you say it in public in my name?’ He said to him: ‘What is it?’ He said to him: ‘All those gifts that our patriarch Jacob gave to Esau, the nations of the world are destined to return to the messianic king in the future. What is the source? “The kings of Tarshish and of the islands will return tribute” (Psalms 72:10). It is not written here, “bring,” but rather, “return.”’ He said to him: ‘As you live, you said a good saying, and I will say it in your name.’
What is meant by the plague was stayed? R. Isaac declared that this means that he grasped the angel and restrained him. Therefore, when Moses was about to depart from this world, he said: Bless, Lord, his substance, and accept the work of his hands; smite through the loins of them that rise up (Deut. 33:11). Bless, Lord, his substance, that is, may his strength be blessed. Accept the work of his hands alludes to the incense through which he atoned, as it is said: And he put on the incense, and made atonement (Num. 17:12). Smite through the loins of them that rise up indicates that he smote the angel and restrained him.
I have already hinted that Jacob, who referred to himself as possessing כל, "all," in Genesis 33,11, is similarly described by that term in our grace prayer. What is meant is his remaining totally alive, seeing all his children continued to live according to their father's tenets. Jacob was also called איש, and our sages relate that whereas Jacob did not die, Esau did die (Taanit 8). Esau had said of himself in Genesis 25,32 that he was headed for death. Jacob's ability to remain "alive," חי, began with Sarah, who was not attached to the קליפה, and through whose son, ביצחק, one side of such pollutants was already removed, i.e. מיצחק, hence the description of his blessing as מכל. The terms בכל-מכל-כל, refer to elimination of the pollutants in ever-increasing measure. Abraham therefore is at the bottom of such a chain whereas Jacob is at the top, and thus was called חי.
And it mentioned three levels: “Has goodness bestowed upon him, his life is lengthened, and he inherits the land.” And these three things, which are levels of the world to come, are known to the sages and to the understanding. As that which it said, “has goodness bestowed upon him,” is the full goodness; “his life is lengthened,” is life that is completely eternal; “and he inherits the land,” is meaning to say that he will have in the world to come, that which includes everything. And hence it said, “and he inherits the land” - as it is written (Deuteronomy 8:9), “A land [...] in which you will lack nothing.” Such that he will have the complete good, which is mentioned in that which it said, “has goodness bestowed upon him”; and he will have eternal life which is hinted to in that which it said, “his life is lengthened”; and [he will have] the good that encompasses everything that is hinted to in that which it said, “and he inherits the land” - about which it is stated, “A land [...] in which you will lack nothing.” And it is as it is written with Avraham (Genesis 24:1), “and the Lord blessed Avraham with everything”; and with Yitzchak (Genesis 27:33), “and I ate of everything”; and with Yaakov (Genesis 33:11), “I have everything.” And in the first chapter of Bava Kamma (16b), they said about this, “Three were given a taste of the world to come,” as it is found there. Such that from this you learn that the world to come is everything, and there is nothing to add upon these three things - if there is complete good, if there is eternal life and if there is good that encompasses everything. And behold length of days is clinging to the supernal level, from which there is length of days. And the bestowing of good is the clinging to the level of good, as is known. “And he inherits the land,” is the holy Land of Israel that encompasses everything. And just like they hint to the world to come, so too do they hint to the levels of this world. So from this, the whole discussion [in the Gemara] is like its plain sense.
Jacob gave the blessing back. Indeed, he said so explicitly. He said to Esau: “Please accept the blessing [birkati] that was brought to you, for God has been gracious to me and I have all I need” (Gen. 33:11). In this reading of the story, Rebecca and Jacob made a mistake – a forgivable one, an understandable one, but a mistake nonetheless. The blessing Isaac was about to give Esau was not the blessing of Abraham. He intended to give Esau a blessing appropriate to him. In so doing, he was acting on the basis of precedent. God had blessed Ishmael with the words, “I will make him into a great nation” (Gen. 21:18). This was the fulfilment of a promise God had given Abraham many years before when He told him that it would be Isaac, not Ishmael, who would continue the covenant:
וצויתי את ברכתי, "And I shall command My blessing, etc." The blessing referred to in this verse does not pertain to the growth of the crop; that blessing has already been mentioned when the Torah spoke of the earth giving its full yield. The blessing the Torah speaks of here is in the nature of what we read in Kings I 17 and Kings II chapter 4 where the prophet made the little bit of oil of the respective petitioners stretch miraculously. This is alluded to in the words of our verse that ועשת את התבואה, i.e. that the existing crop will be made to last for three years. My comments on Genesis 33,9-11 are relevant to this verse.
Stubborness. An expression adding, and similarly, "He urged [וַיִפְצַר] him," ( Bereishis 33:11.) i.e., he spoke many words to convince him.
A blessing [a gift]. A gift of peace, upon greeting, [e.g.,] when a student or a servant greets [his] master, (See Bereishis 33:11.) salud, in O.F. (Na’amon lived as a righteous gentile, keeping the seven commandments that God gave to Noach and his descendants. However, he did not convert to Judaism. See Maseches Gittin 57b.)
brings a gift of violence Heb. מְבָרֵךְ, blesses Me with a gift of violence, brings a gift of violence. This is its explanation, and the expression of בְּרָכָה applies to a gift that is for a reception. Comp. (Gen. 33: 11) “Please take my gift (בִּרְכָתִי).” Also (supra 36:16), “Make peace (בְרָכָה) with me and come out to me.”
[42] And so though you be the younger in birth you shall be accounted the elder and judged worthy of the elder’s place. And if your life to the end be a progress to the better, the Father will give you not only the birthright of the elder, but the whole inheritance, even as He did to Jacob, who overthrew the seat and foundation of passion—Jacob who confessed his life’s story in the words ‘God has had mercy on me and all things are mine’ (Gen. 33:11), words of sound doctrine and instruction for life, for on God’s mercy, as a sure anchor, all things rest.
a taste of the World-to-Come. They are: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Abraham, as it is written with regard to him: “And the Lord blessed Abraham with everything” (Genesis 24:1). Isaac, as it is written with regard to him: “And I have eaten from everything” (Genesis 27:33). Jacob, as it is written with regard to him: “Because I have everything” (Genesis 33:11). This teaches that already in their lifetimes they merited everything, i.e., perfection.
He continues the interpretation: But if he repents from his arrogance, he is gathered in death at his proper time like Abraham our forefather, as it is stated: “Yes, they are brought low, they are gathered in as all [kakkol] others” (Job 24:24), indicating that when he repents from his arrogance he will die like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as it is written about them that they were blessed with the term “all,” as in the verse above. With regard to Abraham, the verse states: “And the Lord had blessed Abraham in all things [bakkol]” (Genesis 24:1). With regard to Isaac, the verse states: “And I have eaten of all [mikkol]” (Genesis 27:33). With regard to Jacob, the verse states: “And because I have all [khol]” (Genesis 33:11). And if one does not repent, then, the verse in Job continues: “And wither like the tops of the husks.”
Please [Now] accept my blessing [present] as it was brought to you, for God has been gracious to me, for I have everything. He thus urged him and he took [accepted] it.
Receive now the present which is brought to thee, because it hath been given me through mercy from before the Lord, and because I have much substance. And he urged upon him, and he received.
| וַיֹּ֖אמֶר נִסְעָ֣ה וְנֵלֵ֑כָה וְאֵלְכָ֖ה לְנֶגְדֶּֽךָ׃ | 12 E | And [Esau] said, “Let us start on our journey, and I will proceed at your pace.” |
I will move on with you. Alternatively, “I will go along to exchange stories with you”.
LET US TAKE OUR JOURNEY. Some say that nisah (let us take our journey) is an imperative. (According to this interpretation nisah (let us take our journey) means, take your journey. The usual form for let us take our journey is nissa with a dagesh in the samakh, not nisah which does not have a dagesh in the samekh and has a heh at the end. The usual imperative form for take your journey is sa. The commentators quoted by I.E. point out that in the elongated imperative the first letter of the root is vocalized with a chirik and the last with a kamatz, as in shilchah. Cf. Rashi.) It is similar to shilchah (send) in Send (shilchah) the lad (Gen. 43:8) (An elongated imperative. The usual form of the imperative for send is shelach.) and niflu (fall) in Fall (niflu) on us (Hos. 10:8). (Most roots having a nun as their first root letter drop the nun in the imperative, thus the imperative of nun, samekh, ayin is sa. I.E. points out that in nun, peh, lamed, the nun does not drop in the imperative. Hence while in nasa the nun normally drops out in the imperative, it does not in the elongated imperative. Hence nisah is similar to niflu.)
AND LET US GO. All of us. (In contradistinction to nisah, ve-nelekhah (and let us go) which is a plural. I.E. further points out that the meaning of and I will go before thee is: I will not move away from thee (Weiser). Compare Rashi, and I will go before thee, equally with thee. Krinky suggests that I.E.’s interpretation is: even if I perchance go before thee, I will not go far from thee but will keep up with thee.) And I will go before thee; i.e., I will not move away from you. However, it is possible that nisah is similar to va-nissse’ah (Nissse’ah in Ezra 8:31 is an elongated first person plural imperfect meaning: we will depart, we will take our journey. The vav prefixed to it changes it to a perfect. Hence va-nisse’ah means: then we departed. I.E. now says nisah in our verse, too, is a first person plural imperfect meaning: let us take our journey. However, he does not explain why there is no dagesh in the samekh.) (then we departed) in Then we departed (va-nisse’ah) from the river of Ahava (Ezra 8:31). The meaning of our verse thus is: Let us all take our journey, (That is, nisah is a first person plural imperfect. According to the first interpretation our verse reads: Take your journey, and let us go, and I will go before thee; according to the second: Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before thee.) and I will go before thee.
נסעה ונלכה ואלכה , “travel on and let us go!” Seeing that Esau uses both the singular and the plural when he said “let us go,” and “I will proceed, etc.,” it is possible to understand that Esau made two requests of Yaakov. He said: “if you want to we can travel together. Alternately, I will keep my distance and proceed on a course parallel to yours”. The word נגדך would then have a similar meaning to Genesis 21,16 ותשב לה מנגד הרחק, “she sat down some distance away.” Yaakov replied that he could not travel together with Esau. This is why he said: “my lord knows that the children are tender, etc.” However, Esau did travel a parallel route some distance away. This is what the Torah means that he went to Seir, whereas Yaakov went to Sukkot. According to the Midrash: There is a deeper meaning behind the mention of these names. When Esau said נסעה ונלכה, “let us travel on,” Esau had said to Yaakov: “let us divide the world” i.e. both the present life as well as the hereafter between us. Yaakov replied: “the children are tender;” he meant that they are still not trained to perform the commandments. If I choose to give them part of the attractions in the present life before they are able to handle such temptations, ומתו כל הצאן, “the whole flock may die,” (figure of speech for forfeiting one’s afterlife) and they will not be ready to cope with judgment in Gehinom. Therefore, יעבר נא אדוני, “go ahead my lord (and take possession of the good life in this world) and I will take my time in exile, etc. i.e. אתנהלה לאטי “according to my own slow pace”. The word אט occurs as an expression signifying שפלות, humiliation, in Kings I 21,27 “Achav walked in humiliation.” Yaakov implied that while in exile in this world he would not rebel against his humiliating conditions by provoking war against the host countries. This is implied by the words לרגל המלאכה. As to how long such a condition of the Jewish people in exile would continue, he said עד אשר אבא אל אדוני שעירה “until I come to my lord to Se-ir,” meaning until the time of the redemption arrives when ועלו מושיעים בהר שעיר, when they will conquer Mount Se-ir.
ויאמר נסעה, it is possible that Esau’s “suggestion” was in the nature of a command. He was conscious that Yaakov’s progress would be slow due to the animals as well as the children some of whom were of tender age.
ואלכה לנגדך, I will go faster but will remain close by, נגדך,. Alternately, the word נסעה is suggestion in the plural mode, Esau suggesting that they proceed side by side.
נסעה is an imperative like שִׁמְעָה and שִׁלָחָה which are equivalent to שְׁמַע "hearken!” and שְׁלֵח “send!” Similarly here, נִסְעָהis equivalent to נְסַע “travel on!”, where the נ is a root-letter of the word and not the prefix of the future in which case the word would mean “let us travel on”, similar to the following word ונלכה “and let us go”. The Targum also takes it in this sense, rendering it: “Travel on and let us go". Thus Esau said to Jacob, “Travel thou on from here and let us go etc.
ואלכה לננדך means AND I WILL GO SIDE BY SIDE WITH THEE — I will do you this favour: that I will take a longer time on my journey by going slowly as is necessary for you. This is the meaning of לנגדך — alongside of you.
נסעה ונלכה, to Seir, Esau’s home. This was in line with what Yaakov’s messengers had told Esau as being their destination.
The same as נְסַע with the נ being part of the root... It is like שְׁמָעָה and סְלָחָה, where the ש [and ס] is from the root, and the ה is added. Here too, the נ is from the root and the ה is added. It is a simple verb; [the נ is] not from the reflexive form. Neither is the נ from the prefix letters ה, א, י, ת, נ, [in which case it would mean, “Let us go.”] For if so, there should be two נ, one for the root and one for the prefix, and Scripture should have written ננסעה. (Re’m)
The translation of Onkelos טול ונהך. I.e., Onkelos is also a proof to this point. For he does not translate נסעה as נטל (“Let us go”), but as טול, implying it is a noun [meaning “going”]. Whereas נלכה, which refers to both Eisov [and Yaakov], Onkelos translates as ונהך.
Ever since Esau’s anger and animosity toward Jacob had been aroused many years ago, Jacob had avoided this encounter. Nevertheless, Jacob’s gift and gestures of submission were sufficient to subdue Esau’s resentment and restore their brotherhood. He, Esau, said: We will travel, and we will go, and I will go along with you. Let us continue together on the same road, as you are my brother. From Jacob’s subsequent response it is apparent that he understood Esau’s comment as an invitation to visit him or even to live with him in the place where he ruled.
And what is corresponding (keneged) to him? There is a corresponding that means across from, and there is a corresponding that means equal to, as it is stated: and I will go across from you (Genesis 33:12). But our teacher, Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi), explained it right there: "This is [the meaning of] 'across from you' — equal to you." As behold Jacob and Esau walked together, since they had made peace before they walked. And now they walked equally, one alongside the other.
When R. Joshua b. Chanania was dying, the Rabbis asked him: "What will be our relations with the infidels? Who will discuss with them?" He rejoined (Jer. 49, 7) Is counsel vanished from the sons, is their wisdom become corrupt? "This is to mean that when the children of God love their adviser, the wisdom of their adversaries becomes corrupt." And if we wish, we may infer the same conclusion from the following passage (Gen. 33, 12) Let us depart and move farther, and I will travel near thee" [which means that we will be always equal to our opponent]. While ascending the steps of the house of Rabba b. Shila, R. Hla heard a child read the following passage (Amos 4, 13) He that formeth the mountains, and createth the wind and declareth unto man what is his thought? And he said: "If there is a slave whose master can declare to him what his secret thought is, what hope can there be for him?" What is the meaning of, He declareth? Said Rab: "Even a trivial conversation between a man and his own wife is mentioned to him at the time of his death."
(Exod. 26:7:) THEN YOU SHALL MAKE TENT SHEETS OF GOATS' HAIR …. This text is related (to Mal. 1:2): I HAVE LOVED YOU, SAYS THE LORD. (Tanh., Exod. 7:9.) Who spoke this verse? Malachi spoke it. When? When he rebuked Israel. Malachi said to them (in Mal. 3:8): WOULD ANYONE ROB GOD? They answered him (ibid., cont.): HOW ARE WE ROBBING YOU? Our masters have said of the generation of Malachi: He rebuked them, and they answered him. He said to them (ibid.): WOULD ANYONE ROB (QB') GOD? R. Levi said: That (i.e., QB') is an Arabic word. (RH 26ab; M. Pss. 57:2.) When an Arab comes to talk with his companion says to him: Are you stealing (GNB) from us? Are you robbing (QB') us? (Ibid.:) WOULD ANYONE ROB (QB') GOD. Then he said (ibid., cont.): BUT YOU SAY: HOW ARE WE ROBBING YOU? IN THE TITHE AND THE PRIESTLY SHARE, because they are not collecting them properly. Again he said to them (in Mal. 1:2): IS NOT ESAU JACOB'S BROTHER? And you say (ibid.): HOW HAVE YOU LOVED US? By universal custom, when someone has two sons, one first-born and one younger, who receives the most? The first-born. Esau came out < of the womb> first, as stated (in Gen. 25:25): THE FIRST (i.e., Esau) CAME FORTH RUDDY. It was proper for him to receive two shares, but I did not act in this way. Instead Jacob received two shares, this world and the world to come. Esau said so to Jacob (in Gen. 33:12): LET US GO ON OUR JOURNEY…. Let both of us walk in the world . (Gen. R. 78:14; Deut. R. 1:20; Tanna deve Eliyahu Zuta 19; y‘AZ 2:1 (40c); cf. T‘AZ 3:4; PRE 37.) Jacob said to him: Take your world and go away. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 33:14): PLEASE LET MY LORD GO AWAY…, UNTIL I COME TO MY LORD IN SEIR. R. Jacob said: I went through all the Scripture whether Jacob did or did not go to Seir, and I found no < indication that he did so>. Then when is he going ? In the Age to come, as stated (in Obad., vs. 21): FOR SAVIORS SHALL GO UP ON MOUNT ZION …. Therefore (in Mal. 1:2): YET I HAVE LOVED JACOB. Jacob is a partner with Esau in this world; {I } [but Esau is no] partner with Jacob in the world to come. Solomon said (in Prov. 5:17): LET IT BE FOR YOU ALONE AND NOT FOR STRANGERS ALONG WITH YOU.
Normally, if a man has twins, and one is firstborn, the other is considered just another child. Who receives two portions? The firstborn. However Esau was the firstborn, as it is said: And the first came forth ruddy (Gen. 25:25), and was entitled to a double portion, but I did not do that. Instead, Jacob received two portions. That is why, when Esau said to Jacob: Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before thee (ibid. 33:12), Esau was saying to him: “Let us go together.” Jacob replied: Take your possessions and go forth, (He was fearful that Esau would take revenge for his stealing the birth-right.) as it is said: Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servants, and I will journey on gently according to the pace of the cattle that are before me, and according to the pace of the children, until I come unto my Lord, unto Seir (ibid., v. 14).
AT THE SHORE OF THE SEA. This, too, is proof that Jacob prophesied. (This verse is obviously a prophecy that Zebulun would inherit a portion which borders on the sea shore in the land of Israel. This supports I.E.’s contention that Jacob’s final words to his children recorded in Chap. 49 are prophesies. Cf. I.E.’s comments on verse 1.) The meaning of le-chof (at the shore) is, at the border of. It comes from the same root as chofef (covereth) in He covereth (chofef) him all the day (Deut. 33:12). The border of the sea is called chof because it “covers” the boats as boats cannot be anchored in places that are open to the wind. (Thus the border or shore (chof) protects or covers (chofef) the ships. Weiser suggests that what I.E. means by border is an inlet where the ships are anchored for protection.)
And the sons of Gad dwelt opposite them alongside them, like (Gen. 33:12): “...and I will go alongside you (לְנֶגְדֶּךָ).”
נעברה נא בארצך, “please allow us to traverse your land.” If you will compare a similar request made by the Israelites in connection with Sichon, King of the Emorites, you will find that there was no: “please,” and “let us,” but that the Torah reports the formula אעברה, “I wish to cross.” The reason is that by using a formula Esau himself had used in Genesis 33,12, i.e. נסעה ונלכה, emphasizing that they had similar interests, had something in common, Moses hoped to secure the king’s consent. Moses reminded the King of Edom that basically the two peoples were related by blood, and should have common interests.
The Gemara asks: Initially, when the Romans acted faithfully, what verse did they interpret, and ultimately, when they subjugated the Jews, what verse did they interpret? Initially, they interpreted the verse where Esau said to Jacob upon their meeting: “Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before you” (Genesis 33:12). In this verse, Esau equates himself to Jacob, prefiguring the initial Roman treatment of the Jews. And ultimately, they interpreted the verse that recites Jacob’s response to Esau: “Let my lord, I pray you, pass over before his servant” (Genesis 33:14), demonstrating Jacob’s subjugation to Esau, and by extension that of the Jews to Rome.
And if you wish, say instead that the same idea can be derived from here: “And he said: Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go corresponding to you” (Genesis 33:12). Just as the Jewish people rise and fall, so too, the nations of the world simultaneously rise and fall, and they will never have an advantage.
He [Eisov] said, Go and we will move on, and I will move on with you.
And he said, Let us journey and proceed, and I will go along with thee, till thou come to the house of thy habitation.
| וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֵלָ֗יו אֲדֹנִ֤י יֹדֵ֙עַ֙ כִּֽי־הַיְלָדִ֣ים רַכִּ֔ים וְהַצֹּ֥אן וְהַבָּקָ֖ר עָל֣וֹת עָלָ֑י וּדְפָקוּם֙ י֣וֹם אֶחָ֔ד וָמֵ֖תוּ כׇּל־הַצֹּֽאן׃ | 13 E | But he said to him, “My lord knows that the children are frail and that the flocks and herds, which are nursing, are a care to me; if they are driven hard a single day, all the flocks will die. |
The prophet Isaiah 40,10-11 teaches us something about different levels of holiness. The prophet writes as follows: הנה א-דוני אלוקים בחזק יבוא וזרועו משלה לו, הנה שכרו אתו ופעולתו לפניו. כרועה עדרו ירעה בזרועו יקבץ טלאים ובחיקו ישא עלות ינהל.. ”Behold, the Lord G’d comes in might, and His arm wins triumph for Him; see, His reward is with Him, His recompense before Him. Like a shepherd He pastures His flock; He gathers the lambs in His arms, and carries them in His bosom, He drives the mother sheep.” When we conduct ourselves in a holy spirit then all the largesse of the Lord that we experience contains holiness, so that in effect, even when eating our daily bread, we are participating at a meal served on a celestial table, the table of He Who owns the earth and all there is on it. Even though, as we have learned (based on a Midrash on Genesis 33,13) Yaakov and Esau agreed to divide the universe between them, Esau becoming heir to the earth and all its material blessings, while Yaakov reserved for himself the world to come a world of disembodied creatures, this did not mean that G’d cannot provide largesse of a material kind for His people to be enjoyed while their souls inhabit their bodies. When the prophet says: “Behold the Lord comes in might,” he refers to G’d giving us the Jewish people something that according to the division of Esau and Yaakov we did not have a legal claim to. [Esau is not being deprived by anything that G’d gives to us the Jewish people, through His largesse. Ed.] The simile of the shepherd used by the prophet, is reminiscent of a statement in the Talmud Baba Metziah 5 according to which it is natural for a shepherd who tends sheep that are his own, to treat them with even more care than he does the sheep belonging to others. There is therefore no reason why G’d should not treat His people with especial concern.
כי הילדים רכים, “for the children are frail;” when speaking of the flocks, Yaakov had expressed the fear that they die if rushed;” we find reference to something like this in Job 21,11: וילדיהן ירקדון, “and their children skip about.” Yaakov’s wives and children were riding slowly on camels. (Compare 31,17.)
THE CHILDREN ARE TENDER. The oldest was twelve years and some days old. (Jacob spent 20 years in Laban’s house. He was unmarried for the first seven years, after which he married Leah. Thus Reuben, Jacob’s eldest son, could not have been much older than 12.)
GIVING SUCK. Alot (giving suck) is similar to alot (pregnant) in and gently leadeth those that are pregnant (alot) (Is. 40:11). (This is how I.E. renders alot. The usual translation of alot is: those that give suck.) It means pregnant cattle. They are called alot because the he-goats went up (alu) on them. (Mounted them. This applies to the other kinds as well. I.E. is merely using the language of Scripture, viz., the he-goats which leaped (mounted) upon the flock (Gen. 31:10). The point is that pregnant animals are called alot because they were mounted by male animals.)
The meaning of alai (The Hebrew literally reads: upon me.) (are a care to me) is that I have to care for them that no harm befall them.
AND IF THEY OVERDRIVE THEM. If the drivers (The “they” is not identified in the text Hence I.E. points out that it refers to the drivers.) overdrive them, then all the flock will die.
ויאמר...עלות עלי, the word עלות is a term denoting mother animals that are still suckling their young. It is important for their well being that they not be hurried.
עלי, it us to me to take care of them by leading them at a leisurely pace.
ודפקום, if they were to be pushed (rushed), Yaakov explained that if his shepherds were to rush these animals even for a single day the sheep would all die from exhaustion. [the author understands Yaakov as telling Esau that “too much can be too little, sometimes.” This is why he quotes Isaiah 30,20. Ed.] In that verse the prophet explains that when G’d provides לחם צר ומים לחץ, “meager bread and scant water,” this is a promise and not a punishment. Too much of a good thing would be counterproductive, would ruin the health of recipient. Hence it is better for the sheep not to travel too fast.
ומתו, the prefix ו in this word is analogous to similar prefixes in the words ורכב וסוס in Psalms76,7, and other similar examples. [the point is that the Torah did not write umeytu, but vameytu. Ed.]
AND ALL THE FLOCKS WILL DIE. Jacob said this in a compassionate manner for he should have said, “And they will all die,” but he would not express himself this way about the children. Neither did he wish to say, “and they will die,” with reference to the herds and the flocks, because he had compassion on the children lest they be included by implication. He also did not want to be verbose and say, “and all the flocks and herds will die.” It may be that the explanation of the verse is that “the children are tender — even the youths shall faint and be weary (Isaiah 40:30.) — and they will not want to go, and that the flocks and herds giving suck are a care to me, and if they will be overdriven the flocks will die, as they are small cattle, but the herds [signifying larger cattle] will not die although they will be harmed.”
עלות עלי WITH YOUNG ARE WITH ME — The sheep and the oxen which are giving suck constitute a charge upon me (עלי) to drive them slowly.
עלות means bringing up their young. Words of the same root are found in (Lamentations 2:11) “young children (עולל) and the sucklings”: (IsaiahLXV.20) “an infant (עול) of days”: (1 Samuel 6:7) “and two milch kine (עלות)”. old French enfantées.
ודפקום יום אחד AND IF MEN SHOULD OVERDRIVE THEM, wearying them on the journey by making them run, מתו כל הצאן ALL THE FLOCKS WILL DIE.
ודפקום has the same meaning as in (Song. 5:2) “Hark, my beloved knocketh (דופק)” — knocks at the door — so that it means to beat the animals in order that they may travel quickly.
עלות עלי, wie עלה, das Aufsteigen zu der zu Boden sinkenden und am Boden bleibenden toten Materie, zum Ausdruck der von belebten und belebenden Kräften geförderten Entwicklung wird, und daher רפאות תעלה ,עלה ארכה, das beginnende Heilen, und עָלֶה das Blatt bedeutet: so scheint auch עָלָה das in Entwicklung begriffene, oder auch das säugende Tier zu bedeuten, das ja fortwährend belebten organischen Stoff für die Entwicklung eines anderen Organismus aus sich erzeugt. Hier scheint es zu sagen: die Tiere, die ich bei mir habe, brauche ich weder zur Arbeit noch zum Schlachten, sondern als Zuchttiere, zur Vermehrung meines Besitzstandes; als solche liegen sie mir ob und habe ich sie mit Rücksicht auf ihre gedeihliche Entwicklung zu behandeln.
כי הילדים רכים, for it is my task to take care both of the children of tender age and of the sheep and other animals which are sensitive to overexertion.
ודפקום, in your honour, not to delay you.
He, Jacob, said to him: My lord knows that the children are tender. You can see that the children are young. Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn son, was about thirteen years old at the time. And you know that the responsibilities of attending to the needs of the nursing flocks and cattle are upon me; if they drive them hard one day, all the flocks will die. With my large family and many sheep, I cannot keep up with your troops.
ומתו כל הצאן, “and all the flocks would die.” Yaakov did not say “and they will all die,” seeing the word “flocks” is the obvious subject, as he did not want to mention the word death in a way that could be understood as applying to the children. Alternately, he mentioned the צאן once more, seeing that they are the smaller animals, the goats and sheep, whereas he refrained from including the cattle in any such context. Esau knew that cattle are more hardy and that Yaakov’s excuse not to keep company with him could not be based on such a phony consideration.
It is interesting that the temple in later years was to be erected in the territory of Benjamin, the only one of the brothers who had not bowed down to Esau. (he had not been born yet) The defeats inflicted in times to come on the descendants of Esau were likewise administered by descendants of Benjamin, i.e. Saul, and Mordechai. Even Haman's wife realised that if Mordechai was descended from the tribe that had defeated Amalek once, there was little hope of Haman being able to overcome him. Esau, believing that anyone trying to atone for a capital offense would at least offer all his worldly goods, thought that in coming face to face with the gifts, he had actually seen all of Jacob's wealth. (9) Therefore, he said, "I have lots, keep what is yours." In this manner he wanted to show that he was in a generous mood. Jacob then had to correct Esau's mistaken impression by announcing that what Esau had just seen was merely a gift as is befitting when one meets a superior person. Jacob himself, however, had retained so much of his own wealth that he was able to say, "I have all that a person could wish for." Esau's offer to travel with Jacob, demonstrates his error in believing that the time had already come when no more basic differences in their respective outlooks on life existed between them. Jacob is at pains to explain that the Jewish attitude to material values is such that the slightest overemphasis leads to negative spiritual results. In alluding to this, he says that if one pushes the sheep too much even for a single day, the flock will die (Genesis 33,13). In conclusion, it is clear that Divine help had been forthcoming only after every effort had been made to exhaust natural means.
“He said to him: My lord knows that the children are tender, and the nursing flocks and cattle are upon me; if they drive them hard one day, all the flocks will die” (Genesis 33:13). “He said to him: My lord knows that the children are tender…” – this is Moses and Aaron. “And the nursing flocks and cattle are upon me” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “You, My flock, the flock of My pasture, you are people” (Ezekiel 34:31). Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Aḥa: Had it not been for the mercy of the Holy One blessed be He, “if they drive them hard one day” the entire flock would have died in the days of Hadrian. Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: “My lord knows that the children are tender” – this is David and Solomon. “And the nursing flocks and cattle are upon me” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “You, My flock…” (Ezekiel 34:31). Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Aḥa: Had it not been for the mercy of the Holy One blessed be He, “if they drive them hard one day” the entire flock would have died in the days of Haman.
Indeed, Yaakov applies this lesson concerning his own children, rebuffing a friendly Esav’s offer to help and protect him, by telling him that the children are “soft” (Bereshit 33:13). Ostensibly, he is telling Esav that his children cannot keep up with the strenuous pace of Esav’s camp. Yet within his words, one can find an allusion to an important lesson that Yaakov learns from his own life: His children are not just tender physically. More important, they are still tender in their values and so, not yet ready to withstand the compromising influence of Esav and his band. One day, when they mature to emulate their father Yisrael, they will be resilient. In the meantime, they must remain sheltered from pernicious moral influences. Thus, while one should become a Yisrael, one cannot do so during childhood. Rather, one must first become a Yaakov, only later moving on to the next step.
“And numerous” - as it is stated, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field, and you increased and grew and became highly ornamented, your breasts were set and your hair grew, but you were naked and barren.” (Ez. 16:7) “And he became there a nation” - This teaches that Israel was distinguishable there: The interpretation of Israel being distinguishable is based solely on the word goy, nation. (When the text in Deuteronomy says that Israel became a “nation” it means that they remained distinguishable from the Egyptians.) The Maggid interprets gadol atzum, “great, powerful” as a reference to, “And the children of Israel multiplied and swarmed.” (Ex. 1:7) Rav, numerous, is interpreted as, “I have given you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field…” (Ez. 16:7) The Maggid suggests that this verse in the First Fruit declaration contains four descriptive adjectives: nation, great, powerful, and numerous that describe four wondrous qualities of the Israelites when they were in the Egypt. First, they remained a goy, “a nation;” that is, they always remained a distinctive nation unto themselves, separate from the Egyptians. During the two hundred and ten years that they were enslaved they never mixed with the Egyptians while living among them. Most other peoples that live among another nation, become one people with them. They stop practicing their own customs and they become like the other people. This is what Shechem and Chamor said to the people at the city gate (Gen. 34:21) and what Jacob’s sons said to the people of Shechem, “Then we will give our daughters to you and we will take your daughters for us and we will live with you and we will become nation.” (Gen. 34:16) But this did not happen to the Israelites living in Egypt. They did not change their Jewish names, nor their language, nor their faith, nor their unique manner of dress the many years that they dwelled among the Egyptians. Moses, our teacher said, “Has God ventured to take a nation from the midst of another nation.” (Deut. 4:34) Israel and Egypt remained separate nations, one from the other. This is how the Maggid interprets the word goy. “This teaches that Israel was distinguishable there.” A distinguishable sign refers to the customs that made them recognizable and set them apart. They were distinguishable and recognizable from the Egyptians in all their customs and thoughts. Further, he interpreted the word gadol, “great,” as a reference to the increase of Israel’s population. According to the ways of the world, nations increase by adopting people from other nations, as in the verse, “And many people of the land became Jews…” (Esther 8:17) But this was not the case in Egypt. Though they remained distinguishable and separate, yet they miraculously increased in number. Balaam took note of this in his prophecy, “As I see them from the mountain tops, gaze on them from the heights, there is a people that dwells apart, not reckoned among the nations, who can count the dust of Jacob…” (Num. 23:9-10) I understand this to mean: other nations increase by other groups joining them, but this nation is not like them. I have seen that they branched off from, “Their mountain tops,” the Patriarchs and “from the heights,” the Matriarchs. They have had a direct set of roots one from the other so that they were a “people that dwells apart,” and no outsider ever infiltrated them. This is what Balaam meant when he said, “They are not reckoned among the nations. Nations that do not mix with others, do not increase, but this people increases without limits. Balaam said, “Who can count the dust of Jacob?” All of this is an interpretation of the word “gadol.” The Maggid now offers a separate interpretation of the word, atzum, “mighty.” It means that they were strong and robust. The sages already offered this interpretation regarding the verse, “They grew numerous and strong, most exceedingly,” (Ex. 1:7) to mean that they increased in number. That is, the women did not miscarry and each woman gave birth to sextuplets, as it Scripture states, “multiplied and swarmed and grew numerous.” Each of these verbs is plural and therefore represents (at least) two. Thus, they add up to six. However, since twins are generally weakly because by nature they divide into two, therefore twins tend to be smaller and feebler; it is only though God’s compassion that many twins are born from the same womb. Yet, despite this, these children were hardy and strong limbed. Three explanations were brought based on the adjectives in this verse: first, that the Israelites were distinguishable (goy)… second that they grew populous (gadol), and third that they were strong (atzum)… But there is one more descriptive word used for the Israelites, rav, numerous, for the Israelites fourth characteristic. All children in their infancy face many dangers and die of illnesses because they are tender, as Jacob said to Esau, “My lord knows that the children are frail…if they are driven hard a single day, all the flocks will die.” (Gen. 33:13) Even so, while they were in Egypt this was not so for the Israelite children. They did not suffer from the trauma of exile…and they continue to grow like weeds. That is why, the Maggid brings the verse, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field…” Ezekiel was saying that these children grow on their own like plants that come forth from the earth, bursting forth in various colors without any labor or effort. No artist can create something as beautiful as they are. So too, the Israelites grew in all their beauty without training or education as they were born naturally complete. The verse states, “You increased and grew and became highly ornamented, your breasts were set and your hair grew.” This verse speaks of the fate of the body and it beauty, and its characteristics which are described as “highly ornamented.” This is the case even though they “were naked and barren,” that is, lacking in Torah learning and ethical characteristics which govern a person’s actions. The sages have already taught us that when it came time to give birth in Egypt the daughters of Israel were fearful lest the Egyptians try to take their children and cast them into the Nile River. They would go out into the field and give birth to them under a tree so that no one would hear their cries. About this it is said, “I have aroused you under the apple tree; there your mother was in labor with you; there she who bore you was in labor.” (Song 8:5) They would leave their babies there and return to nurse them, and the babies would grow up on their own among the bushes, as it is said, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field.” The verse continues, “Your breasts were set;” this is a reference to Moses and Aaron who were like two breasts which God prepared for Israel. “Your hair grew” is a reference to the twelve tribes, who were already worthy of being redeemed. “But you were naked and barren.” They were barren of commandments. They were like a bride and the Holy One was the groom. We have now answered the questions in the fifty-third, fourth, fifth and sixth gates. However one should note that the Maggid uses the expression milamed, “This is to teach…” twice, in response to the passage, “He resided there,” and “They became a nation” since these two explanations were based on logical inference from the verse In Deuteronomy 26 in the style of the Torah portion and the meaning of the verses. There was nothing specific explaining them as in the other verses which are expounded.
He [Yaakov] said to him, My master knows that the children are delicate, and that the sheep and cattle with me are nursing. If they are driven hard for [even] one day, all the sheep will die.
That the children are tender.
And he said to him, My lord knoweth that the children are tender, and the flocks and kine giving milk are with me; and if I overdrive them one day, all the flock may die.
| יַעֲבׇר־נָ֥א אֲדֹנִ֖י לִפְנֵ֣י עַבְדּ֑וֹ וַאֲנִ֞י אֶֽתְנָהֲלָ֣ה לְאִטִּ֗י לְרֶ֨גֶל הַמְּלָאכָ֤ה אֲשֶׁר־לְפָנַי֙ וּלְרֶ֣גֶל הַיְלָדִ֔ים עַ֛ד אֲשֶׁר־אָבֹ֥א אֶל־אֲדֹנִ֖י שֵׂעִֽירָה׃ | 14 E | Let my lord go on ahead of his servant, while I travel slowly, at the pace of the cattle before me and at the pace of the children, until I come to my lord in Seir.” |
“And the children of Israel journeyed and camped at Ovot.” (Bamidbar, 21:10) “Ovot” (a place name) signifies the principles of Torah and mitzvot, comparable to the expression “av [like ov] b’chochma,” a father in wisdom. It is written in the Gemara (Berachot, 54a), “ ‘it is a time to act for God, for they have made Your Torah void’ (Tehilim, 119). Rebbe Natan says, ‘It is a time to do for God, for they have made void your Torah.’ This means, since they have made your Torah void, act only [in the will] of God.” (The laws are temporarily suspended in order that the Torah can later be strengthened. (Steinsaltz)) At a time when it is perfectly clear that it is a time to act solely for God, like Eliyahu on Mount Carmel, (See Kings 1, Ch. 18, where though the building of an altar outside of the temple was not permitted at that time, still Eliyahu had to do it to show the greatness of God.) then it is necessary to put aside the principles of the holy Torah and act only in the understanding that God instills in you. Rebbe Natan is saying that at a time when this God-given understanding is not completely clear to you, you must act according to the principles of the Torah and mitzvot without stepping out of the bounds of the Halacha. Yet Rebbe Natan is also saying that if your heart is drawn after God’s will, and have removed from yourself any kind of impurity (anything that could bring you down), afterwards God may provide you with an opportunity to act in a way that may seem as if, God forbid, you have removed yourself from the bounds of the principles of the Torah. Concerning this Rebbe Natan said that for the one whose heart is drawn after God and has cleaned himself from any negiot (personal motive, partiality), certainly God will not let him fall into a transgression, God forbid. He will surely then know that it is “a time to act for God.” (This is one of the classic teachings of the Mei HaShiloach and the one that has perhaps engaged him in more controversy with his opponents than any other. It could be easily misinterpreted as being antinomian, that God forbid the Torah is not absolute and we may choose to act based on our own perception of what God wants. This is not what he is saying. It is rather the deepest expression of how one may at times be drawn after God’s will, what Reb Shlomo Carlebach ZTs’L used to call being “beyond choice.” As the author mentions twice, it only happens in a state of complete clarity and after a process of being purified from any affliction or ulterior selfish motive. Then, once this has been clarified, he must start over and inspect himself again. Of course it is not a way to make anything permitted, as only a fool would interpret it, and some fools in our generation have. It is relevant when we find examples of our holy forefathers seemingly “breaking” the Torah, when in fact they are doing God’s will. Take Lot and his daughters, an act of incest, which created the line of David. Yehuda and Tamar, also making way for the Moshiach. Tslofchad, who was killed for gathering wood on Shabbat, actually making us aware of the awesome greatness and depth of Shabbat. Aharon and Miriam’s “little foolishness” [see the end of Mei HaShiloach bha’alotcha] speaking against Moshe, which made us aware of the greatness of Moshe, and Korach’s challenge of Aharon, which revealed to us the great depth of the level of Aharon haCohen. One would also include Zimri, who is described in Parshat Pinchas as one who was on the highest level of separation from licentious behavior, so his incident with Cosbi can only be understood as an act of God’s will. The author mentions Eliyahu on Mount Carmel. This is a central theme of the Mei HaShiloach, and one that must be investigated further.) Thus it was when Israel camped at Ovot. For the entire time that Aharon was with them they would conduct themselves according to the understanding of their hearts, which was completely clear to them, as we understand from the clouds of glory in the desert. (This is expression of God’s will, where the clouds went, they went.) Yet when the clouds of glory left them (after the passing of Aharon), they began to conduct themselves according to the principles of the Torah. This is like now, with our Holy Temple destroyed, where the only dwelling place of the Holy One, blessed be He, is within the four cubits of the Halacha (Berachot 8a). Thus they began to act according to the principles. This is Ovot, or the principles (ovot—av b’chochma—wisdom of the Torah), as explained above on the verse, “Do not make molten gods,” in Parshat Ki Tissa. However, they understood that through conducting themselves only according to the principles their hearts could not become sufficiently purified so as not to be detracted from the goal of God’s will. This is as it is written (21:1), “and the Caananite heard … that Israel came by the way of the spies [through Edom].” In this, they saw that Israel was confused, for according to the principles it was not yet the time to enter the border of Esav as it is written (Bereshit, 33:14), “until I shall come to my master in Seir [Esav].” The Caananite is Amalek, as explained by Rashi, who saw that God presented them with a situation not in accordance with the principles. Thus (God) advised them to clean themselves from all forms of negiot (personal motive, partiality), and then any suspension of the Torah would be only because it is “a time to do for God.” This is why it says that they camped at Iye Ha’avarim (21:11), for there they inspected themselves concerning the two prohibitions (avarim is similar to averot, transgressions) “do not kill” and “do not commit adultery,” two laws that are the foundation and root of the entire Torah. (This is what the Author seems to have been referring to in the “removal of all affliction.”) Thus the advice given if you happen upon a situation that seems to you is against the Torah, you must inspect yourself concerning these two transgressions. The place name “Iye Ha’avarim” hints at this, for Iye shares the letters of ya’im (like a dustpan, ya’e), meaning to remove these transgressions from yourself. Avarim, like avera, Hebrew for transgression, that you have purified yourself from these two sides. If you put your power into this process of purification, then you arrive at the meaning of what is said, “and they camped by the stream of Zared,” meaning that God gives us special strength. (Tekifut. See note 61, Sefer Shemot.) For zared is strength, as it is written (Yoma, 47a), “all the women did valiantly, but the valor [zered or strength] of my mother exceeded them all.” And in the desert, when they had inspected themselves and removed any trace of negiot (personal motive, partiality), from what had been prohibited, then God heard their voice. (This is referring to arriving at Be’er, where they merited receiving a spring of water, and sang [Bamidbar, 21:17].)
עד אשר אבוא אל אדוני שעירה, “until I shall join up with my lord in Seir. Yaakov meant that once he had settled his wives and children and had made suitable arrangements for his flocks and herds, he would visit his brother in his homeland, Seir. At that time there would be an opportunity to celebrate their reunion with joy.
AND I WILL JOURNEY ON. This is to be understood as, and I will journey on with them.
GENTLY. The yod of le’itti (gently) is either superfluous (The word for gently or slowly being le’at. Hence the yod of le’itti is superfluous.) or is a first person pronominal suffix. (Meaning at my ease or at my slow pace.)
ACCORDING TO THE PACE OF THE CATTLE. Because of the cattle, whose care is my work. (Melakhah usually means work. I.E. explains why it refers to cattle here.) I believe that the meaning of melakhah is what a person can do by himself or through his agent. (I.E. does not disagree with his original point that melakhah here refers to cattle. He now expands on the meaning of the word (Filwarg). According to the first interpretation “work” refers to cattle because Jacob’s work was taking care of cattle. According to the second interpretation “work” can refer directly to cattle, for one’s possessions are one’s work.) Also, one’s property is called melakhah, as in whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods (melekhet) (Ex. 22:7). The word messenger (malakh) comes from the same root. A malakh (messenger) is so called because he is under the control of the one who sends him. The meaning of the word regel (the pace) is the same as le-ragli (because of me), (Le-regel (according to the pace) means because. Although the basic meaning of melachah is changed in the second interpretation, the meaning of le-regel (because) remains unchanged.) as in and the Lord hath blessed thee because of me (le-ragli) (Gen. 30:30). (I.E.’s interpretation of Gen. 30:30.) However, it is possible that le-regel should be taken literally, since Jacob led the animals on foot. (Since melakhah means cattle, why not interpret regel literally as meaning feet, since the animals walked, viz., according to the pace (foot) of the cattle.)
.עד אשר אבא אל אדוני שעירה , until I come to my lord at Se-ir.” Actually Yaakov had no intention of traveling to Se-ir; on the contrary, he wanted to put as much distance as possible between himself and Esau. This is why he told Esau that he had a distant target although we find he stopped already at Sukkot, way short of that distance (compare Rashi). Basing themselves on what Yaakov said here, our sages in Avodah Zarah 25 advised “if a pagan asks you where you are headed, tell him a destination which is twice as far removed as your true destination just as did Yaakov at the time he met Esau.” A Midrashic approach based on Bereshit Rabbah 78,14. We cannot find a single reference in Scripture that Yaakov ever arrived in Se-ir. Was the truthful Yaakov then a liar? He was no liar. He referred to the time in the future of which Ovadiah 21 prophesied that the Jews, i.e. Yaakov’s descendants, would capture Mount Seir as part of the process of redemption of the Jewish people. This is why you find an allusion to this when you put together the last letters in the words אבא אל אדוני שעירה where you found that they combine to make the name אליה the harbinger of the redemption, the period when Israel will defeat Edom, Se-ir. This is a reference to Maleachi 3,23 “Here I am going to send you Eliyahu the prophet, etc.”
יעבר נא ...לרגל המלאכה, the cattle is referred to as מלאכה, because cattle are the instruments by means of which most basic agricultural work is performed. We find a similar usage of the word מלאכה in Samuel I 15,9 וכל המלאכה נמבזה ונמס, “and all the inferior cattle (those they killed).”
UNTIL I COME UNTO MY LORD UNTO SE’IR. In returning to his land Jacob could have gone by way of the land of Se’ir. Now Esau told him, And I will go before thee, (Verse 12 here.) meaning that he will not be separated from him until Jacob returns to his father in order to honor him when he comes into his land. But Jacob said, “I will proceed slowly and let my lord return to the city of his rule, and if I will return by way of his city, he will honor me and go with me as he desires.” This was not a vow on the part of Jacob that he will come to him, for Esau did not need him. Our Rabbis have further said (Abodah Zarah 25 b, and mentioned here by Rashi.) that Jacob had no intention of returning by way of Se’ir, and his desire was to remove himself from him as much as possible, but he mentioned until I come … unto Se’ir in order to extend the length of his journey [so that if Esau meant to do him harm he would wait until Jacob reached his abode at Se’ir]. This also was wise counsel. The Rabbis have yet another Midrash, (Bereshith Rabbah 78:18.) which states that Jacob will fulfill his word in the days of the Messiah, as it is said, And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau. (Obadiah 1:21.) Scripture is saying that the saviors [i.e., the judges of Israel] (See Judges 2:16.) who are on Mount Zion shall come up to judge the mount of Esau.
עד אשר אבא אל אדוני שעירה, he described the trek as quite long. (compare Avodah Zarah 25)
יעבר נא אדני LET MY LORD, I PRAY THEE, PASS — do not prolong the time of your journey: pass on at your usual speed even though you thereby get far away from me.
אתנהלה is the same as אתנהל I WILL LEAD ON. The ה at the end of the word is redundant as in (8:21) ארדה “I will go down”, and in (Psalms 85:9) אשמעה “I will hear”.
לאטי SLOWLY — the word means “my slowness", לאט having the meaning of ease, gentleness. Examples are: (Isaiah 8:6) “that go (לאט) softly”; (2 Samuel 18:6) “Deal (לאט) gently for my sake with the young man.” In לאטי the ל is a root-letter and not a prefix, so that the meaning is, “I will lead on at my slow rate”.
לרגל המלאכה ACCORDING TO THE PACE OF THE DROVE — according to the requirements made by the pace of the feet of the cattle which is incumbent on me to drive.
ולרגל הילדים AND ACCORDING TO THE PACE OF THE CHILDREN — according to the speed (רגל) which they are able to keep up.
עד אשר אבא אל אדני שעירה UNTIL I COME UNTO MY LORD UNTO SEIR — He mentioned a much longer journey, for he really intended to go only as far as Succoth (Avodah Zarah 25b). He said, “If he means to do me harm let him wait to do so until I reach his abode at Seir.” Therefore he did not go to Seir. But when will he go? In the days of the Messiah, as it is said (Obadiah 1:21) “And saviours shall go up on Mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau”. There are many Midrashic explanations of this section.
Please do not extend the length of your trip... Rashi is saying: It does not mean Eisov should go in front, with Yaakov following.
According to the requirement of the pace of the feet of the work... [Rashi is saying that] the ל of לרגל conveys כפי רגל (“according to the feet”). Accordingly, [with Rashi’s addition of, “Of the pace,”] the verse means: according to the ability of the feet to move, rather than according to the fact that they are feet.
Please, my lord will pass before his servant. You go first, and I will advance slowly, according to the pace of the property that is before me and according to the pace of the children, until I will come to my lord to Se’ir. There is a long way ahead of us until we reach your land.
“Let my lord go on ahead of his servant” [33:14]. That is to say, you Esau, take your share of this world first. “While I travel slowly” [33:14]. I, Jacob, will go slowly into exile in this world. (Ibid.)
“Until I come to my lord in Seir” [33:14]. Until the Messiah will come. “For liberators shall march up on Mount Zion to wreak judgment on Mount Esau; and dominion shall be the Lord’s” [Obadiah 1:21]. (Bahya, Genesis, 33:14.)
If a gentile asks a Jew where he is going, he should give him a misleading answer, as Jacob gave a misleading answer to Esau, as Genesis 33:14 states: "Until I come to my master, in Seir."
Man's life is lived on two planes. He lives privately within the circle of his family, and he lives as a member of society, and must interact with such society in greater or lesser measure. The good he does must be divided then between the good he does within the family circle, and the good he does by contributing to the well being of the community he lives in. He will receive rewards for both his good deeds within the family circle and for the good deeds performed as part of society. To the extent that the good performed as part of society benefits everyone in that society equally, the reward can be collective. Since every member of that society benefitted equally by the input of good, so the reward is the kind that lets everyone benefit equally. Output is commensurate with input. The promise of the Jewish people living together in security, enjoying economic prosperity etc., is a reward for such good deeds performed by dint of being part of a certain society. It is a reward for the physical part of man, but it is allocated on a collective basis. Reward for the spiritual part of the input of everyone involved, is based on the degree of dedication that each person's contribution represents. It is in the nature of things that every individual brings a different degree of kavanah, intent, dedication to the performance of his mitzvoth. That is why our sages say that in the world to come everyone will occupy a level of his own. Since there are many commandments which can be fulfilled only collectively, the building of the temple for instance, the reward for such mitzvot, spiritual though it may be, will be collective. The time for receiving a reward for such mitzvot performed collectively, but not because such mitzvot benefit society (called by our sages yishuv ha-olam), is in the post-messianic era, but on this earth when ideal conditions for physical life will exist. In all cases however, the reward for the degree of the spiritual input by each individual into each mitzvah, regardless if it is of the kind that can only be fulfilled collectively or if it is fulfilled individually, is in olam haba.
THE term regel is homonymous, signifying, in the first place, the foot of a living being; comp. “Foot for foot” (Exod. 21:24). Next it denotes an object which follows another: comp. “And all the people that follow thee” (lit. that are at thy feet) (ib. 11:8). Another signification of the word is “cause”; comp. “And the Lord hath blessed thee, I being the cause” (leragli) (Gen. 30:30), i.e., for my sake; for that which exists for the sake of another thing has the latter for its final cause. Examples of the term used in this sense are numerous. It has that meaning in Genesis 33:14, “Because (leregel) of the cattle that goeth before me, and because (leregel) of the children.”
[c]. little by little. We must know beforehand that the beginning of the Redemption will come gradually, a little at a time. According to our Sages of blessed memory (Yerushalmi: Brachot, ch. 1), the redemption of Israel will come about little by little, like the first rays of light before dawn, [Micah 7:8] "though I sit in darkness, the Lord is a light to me" and [Prov. 4:18] “a light that increases more and more until the day is established.” Therefore, one should start any deed connected with the beginning of the Redemption, even to a small extent, as is written: [Jer. 3:14] “one from a city, and two from a family. The Gaon states that there is an important rule that anything that will occur when the Redemption is complete, will begin gradually at its beginning. This is also true of rebuilding Jerusalem. One should begin, even with one stone. According to what is written, [Isa. 28:16] “behold I lay in Zion a foundation stone, a tried stone, ” for this stone will test the will to rebuild Jerusalem and to enlarge the site of its tent, and God will help us do this. We also asked the Gaon about what is revealed by the words, [Gen. 33:14] “I will direct it at my slow pace, ” that is, why must the beginning of the Redemption occur slowly? If it comes when it is a time of favor on the part of God in connection with gathering in the exiles of Israel, is the hand of God short [is it too difficult for God] to accomplish this task on a large scale all at once? The Gaon then explained to us that the period of the beginning of the Redemption will come into being if the Jews do not have the merit, which means when it does not come because of our righteousness. In that case, if the Redemption comes suddenly, then on the one hand it will be impossible to bear the suffering that will come with the quality of Din, as explained above. On the other hand, it will be impossible to accept the great light that will come all at once from the side of Lovingkindness. We must understand all this beforehand in connection with the practical work involved in gathering in the exiles.
“Please, let my lord pass before his servant, and I will advance slowly, according to the pace of the property that is before me and according to the pace of the children, until I will come to my lord, to Seir” (Genesis 33:14). “Please, let my lord pass before his servant” – He [Esau] said to him: ‘Do you seek that we will be partners with you in your world?’ He [Jacob] said to him: “Please, let my lord pass before his servant.” He said to him: ‘Do you not fear my ministers, my governors, and my officers?’ He said to him: “I will advance slowly [le’iti]” – I will walk slowly in accordance with my possessions, just as it says: “The water of the Shiloaḥ that flows slowly [le’at]” (Isaiah 8:6). Alternatively, I will go with a covered face, just as it says: “Behold, it is wrapped [luta] in the cloth” (I Samuel 21:10). “Until I will come to my lord, to Seir” – Rabbi Abbahu said: We reviewed the entire Bible and did not find that Jacob ever went to Esau at Mount Seir. Is it possible that Jacob, [who] was truthful, [nevertheless] deceived him? When, then, did he go to him? In the future. That is what is written: “Saviors will ascend Mount Zion to judge the mountain of Esau” (Obadiah 1:21).
Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem and Ḥamor his father with guile, and spoke, as he had defiled Dina their sister” (Genesis 34:13). “Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem…” – what do you think, that there is deceit here? The Divine Spirit says: “As he had defiled Dina their sister…” “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace for us” (Genesis 33:14). “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace” – Rabbi Neḥemya said: Where do we find that the foreskin is called disgrace? It is from here, as it is stated: “As it is a disgrace.” “Are their livestock and their property and all their animals not ours? We only must accede to them, and they will live with us” (Genesis 34:23). “Their livestock and their property” – they thought to despoil them, and were despoiled. “All who emerged from the gate of his city heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son; every male, all who emerged from the gate of his city, was circumcised” (Genesis 34:24). “[They] heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son…” – one of them would enter the city bearing his burden, and they would say to him: ‘Go and be circumcised.’ He would say: ‘Shekhem is marrying and Magbai is circumcised?’ (Magbai is a generic name. Just because Shekhem is marrying, I should get circumcised?)
“Command the people, saying: You are passing through the border of your brethren, the children of Esau, who live in Se’ir; they will be afraid of you, and you shall be very careful” (Deuteronomy 2:4). “Command the people, saying” – The Holy One blessed be He said to [Moses]: ‘Not only am I commanding you, but you, too, shall command your children.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: ‘You, too, shall command the leaders of the generation, that they should treat [Esau] with deference.’ That is, “command the people, saying.” Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: When Esau stood with Jacob, Esau said to him: ‘Jacob my brother, let the two of us walk in this world as one.’ Jacob said to him: “Let my lord now pass before his servant” (Genesis 33:14). What is “now pass”? Take your world first. (Esau offered Jacob to be partners in both this world and the World to Come. Jacob responded that Esau should take his world first, meaning that he would be successful in this world without Jacob, and Jacob would enjoy the World to Come without Esau (Etz Yosef). ) What is: “And I will advance slowly, according to the pace of the property [that is before me, and according to the pace of the children]”? (Genesis 33:14). He said to [Esau]: ‘I still need to produce Ḥananya, Mishael, and Azarya, in whose regard it is written: “Youths in whom there is no blemish”’ (Daniel 1:4). (Jacob did not want his descendants to be tainted by a potential partnership with Esau. ) Another matter, he said: ‘I still need to produce the messianic king, in whose regard it is written: “For a child has been born to us”’ (Isaiah 9:5). “Until I will come to my lord, to Se’ir” (Genesis 33:14) – Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: We reviewed the entire Bible and did not find that Jacob stood with Esau in Se’ir. What is “to Se’ir”? He said to him: ‘I still need to produce judges and redeemers in order to exact retribution from that man.’ From where is this derived? As it is stated “Saviors will ascend [Mount Zion to judge the mountain of Esau]” (Obadiah 1:21). Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, until when will we be subjugated to him?’ He said to them: ‘Until that day will come, about which it is written: “A star will rise from Jacob, and a scepter will rise from Israel” (Numbers 24:17) – when a star will emerge from Jacob and burn the straw of Esau.’ From where is this derived? As it is stated: “The house of Jacob will be fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, [and the house of Esau for straw…]” (Obadiah 1:18). The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘At that time, I will cause My kingdom to appear, and I will reign over you, as it is stated: “Saviors will ascend Mount Zion….”’
(Exod. 26:7:) THEN YOU SHALL MAKE TENT SHEETS OF GOATS' HAIR …. This text is related (to Mal. 1:2): I HAVE LOVED YOU, SAYS THE LORD. (Tanh., Exod. 7:9.) Who spoke this verse? Malachi spoke it. When? When he rebuked Israel. Malachi said to them (in Mal. 3:8): WOULD ANYONE ROB GOD? They answered him (ibid., cont.): HOW ARE WE ROBBING YOU? Our masters have said of the generation of Malachi: He rebuked them, and they answered him. He said to them (ibid.): WOULD ANYONE ROB (QB') GOD? R. Levi said: That (i.e., QB') is an Arabic word. (RH 26ab; M. Pss. 57:2.) When an Arab comes to talk with his companion says to him: Are you stealing (GNB) from us? Are you robbing (QB') us? (Ibid.:) WOULD ANYONE ROB (QB') GOD. Then he said (ibid., cont.): BUT YOU SAY: HOW ARE WE ROBBING YOU? IN THE TITHE AND THE PRIESTLY SHARE, because they are not collecting them properly. Again he said to them (in Mal. 1:2): IS NOT ESAU JACOB'S BROTHER? And you say (ibid.): HOW HAVE YOU LOVED US? By universal custom, when someone has two sons, one first-born and one younger, who receives the most? The first-born. Esau came out < of the womb> first, as stated (in Gen. 25:25): THE FIRST (i.e., Esau) CAME FORTH RUDDY. It was proper for him to receive two shares, but I did not act in this way. Instead Jacob received two shares, this world and the world to come. Esau said so to Jacob (in Gen. 33:12): LET US GO ON OUR JOURNEY…. Let both of us walk in the world . (Gen. R. 78:14; Deut. R. 1:20; Tanna deve Eliyahu Zuta 19; y‘AZ 2:1 (40c); cf. T‘AZ 3:4; PRE 37.) Jacob said to him: Take your world and go away. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 33:14): PLEASE LET MY LORD GO AWAY…, UNTIL I COME TO MY LORD IN SEIR. R. Jacob said: I went through all the Scripture whether Jacob did or did not go to Seir, and I found no < indication that he did so>. Then when is he going ? In the Age to come, as stated (in Obad., vs. 21): FOR SAVIORS SHALL GO UP ON MOUNT ZION …. Therefore (in Mal. 1:2): YET I HAVE LOVED JACOB. Jacob is a partner with Esau in this world; {I } [but Esau is no] partner with Jacob in the world to come. Solomon said (in Prov. 5:17): LET IT BE FOR YOU ALONE AND NOT FOR STRANGERS ALONG WITH YOU.
Normally, if a man has twins, and one is firstborn, the other is considered just another child. Who receives two portions? The firstborn. However Esau was the firstborn, as it is said: And the first came forth ruddy (Gen. 25:25), and was entitled to a double portion, but I did not do that. Instead, Jacob received two portions. That is why, when Esau said to Jacob: Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before thee (ibid. 33:12), Esau was saying to him: “Let us go together.” Jacob replied: Take your possessions and go forth, (He was fearful that Esau would take revenge for his stealing the birth-right.) as it is said: Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servants, and I will journey on gently according to the pace of the cattle that are before me, and according to the pace of the children, until I come unto my Lord, unto Seir (ibid., v. 14).
Listen, Ranati. There is no "rana" here, but rather a similar "rana" as mentioned above, as it says (Kings I 8:28) "to hear the cry." There it is written (Deuteronomy 33:7) "Hear, O Lord, the voice of Judah," and here it is written "Hear, O Lord, the cry of righteousness." Why is it that the righteous want the Divine Presence and reduce themselves from what is given to them? (Psalms 37:9) "Happy is he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rock." Thus said the Holy One, blessed be He: "Happy is he who takes and dashes your little ones against the rock." Thus said the Holy One, blessed be He, "I will dash your little ones against the rock, just as you dashed mine." We did not hear during the destruction of the Temple that our children were dashed, but rather that they were taken into captivity. Rather, thus said the Holy One, blessed be He, "You have destroyed my Temple, which I built so that Israel might uphold my Torah, which they received from me as children," as it says (Psalm 8:3) "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings have you established strength." Therefore, I will dash yours. And thus it says (Psalm 28:4), "Give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavors; give them after the work of their hands; render to them their just deserts." (Psalm 64:9) "They shall take hold of their own tongues; all that see them shall flee away." (Psalm 10:15) "Break the arm of the wicked and evil man; seek out his wickedness until You find none." When the Holy One, blessed be He, takes revenge against the wicked, we will play music before Him. Rabbi Akiva expounded (Isaiah 5:14), "Therefore hell has enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure." Without measure is written here, but it means "without limit." To one who does not have a commandment in his hand, let him decide in favor of merit, for this is for the World to Come. However, even in this world, a Talmudic teaching obligates him, and one teaches him about merit, as it is stated (Job 33:23): "If there is an angel of one thousand who will intercede for him." (2 Samuel 21:2) "Now the Gibeonites were not of the people of Israel." Why did David distance himself from them, causing famine year after year? David said that there are four things that cause rain to cease: idol worship, illicit sexual relations, bloodshed, and judges who rule over the public but do not give charity. Concerning idol worship, it is written (Deuteronomy 11:16), "Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart be deceived." And it continues (Amos 4:7), "He stopped the heavens." Concerning illicit sexual relations, it is stated (Jeremiah 3:2), "You have acted like a harlot with many lovers." And it continues (Hosea 2:9), "And I will restrain the rain." Concerning bloodshed, it is stated (Numbers 35:33), "The blood pollutes the land." Concerning judges who rule over the public but do not give charity, it is stated (Proverbs 25:14), "Like clouds and wind without rain is a man who boasts of gifts he did not give." David searched in every generation and did not find one of them. He asked in the Urim and Thummim, as it is stated (2 Samuel 21:1), "David inquired of the Lord about Saul and his house of blood." Of Saul, for you did not show him kindness. "And to the house of the Damim who killed the Gibeonites, David sent and called to them, saying, 'What shall I do for you, and with the house of Saul?' They said to him, 'It is because he killed seven of us, the sons of the Damim, who were woodcutters and water drawers, and the chief and scribe and sun.' David said to them, 'What do you want me to do for you?' They replied, 'Let seven men from his descendants be given to us, and we will hang them before the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, the chosen one of the Lord.' But the king said, 'I will give them to you.' David then asked, 'What should I give you?' And they said to him, 'We have no silver or gold with Saul.' David said, 'Perhaps they are divided in their hearts, let each man give what he thinks is best, and we will reconcile with him.' Then David said to them, 'What do you want me to do for you?' And they said, 'Give us silver and gold, for those who killed us are destroying us.' David said, 'I have no silver or gold with Saul.' At that time, the Lord granted three good things to Israel: merciful people, those who are ashamed, and those who do good deeds. Merciful, as it is said, 'And He will give you mercy and have mercy on you.'" "Regarding those who are bashful, it is said (Exodus 20:17), 'And for this purpose His fear shall be upon your faces, that you shall not sin.' Therefore, being bashful is a sign that one does not sin. And whoever does not possess the trait of shame has the status of an uncircumcised person who did not stand with our forefathers on Mount Sinai. Those who do acts of loving-kindness are mentioned in Deuteronomy 7:12, 'And keep the covenant and the loving-kindness.' However, the Gibeonites do not possess any of these traits, as it says in 2 Samuel 21:2, 'The Gibeonites are not of the children of Israel.' Come and see how beloved the Holy One, blessed be He, holds the converts, for our father Abraham did not circumcise anyone until he himself was ninety-nine years old. If he had circumcised his son at the age of fifty or sixty, a convert would have been able to convert at the age of forty or fifty. Therefore, the wheel of the Holy One, blessed be He, revolved with him until he reached the age of ninety-nine, so that the door would not be closed to future converts. And so that He could give reward for days and years and increase the reward of those who do His will, in order to fulfill what is said (Isaiah 42:21), 'The Lord desired for the sake of His righteousness.' Similarly, it is found in four categories that confess and say before He who spoke and brought the world into being (Isaiah 45:23), 'This one will say, "I am for the Lord," and this one will call in the name of Jacob, and this one will write with his hand to the Lord, and adopt the name of Israel.' 'This one will say, "I am for the Lord," and will not be intermingled with sin.' 'This one will call in the name of Jacob' refers to the righteous converts. 'This one will write with his hand to the Lord' refers to those who repent. 'And adopt the name of Israel' refers to those who fear Heaven." And the Gibeonites who were not called by the name of Jacob, as it says about them (Genesis 33:14), "And let El-Shaddai grant you mercy." And they did not show them mercy. David stood up for them and reconciled with them. Therefore it is said, "And the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel." Ezra also reconciled with them, as it says (Nehemiah 3:26), "And the Nethinim dwelt in Ophel." Even God will distance them in the future, as it says (Ezekiel 48:19), "And those who serve the city shall serve it out of all the tribes of Israel. It shall be that which remains." Rabbi Elazar said that the Holy Spirit appeared in three places: in the court of Shem, as it says (Genesis 38:26), "And Judah recognized and said, 'She is more righteous than I.'" Perhaps he did not say this, but rather someone else said it in his presence. A Heavenly Voice went forth and said, "She is more righteous than he." In the court of Samuel, as it says (1 Samuel 12:3), "Here I am; testify against me before the Lord and before His anointed." And they said, "You have not defrauded us." A Heavenly Voice went forth and said, "He is telling the truth in this matter." In the court of Solomon, as it says (1 Kings 3:26), "Give her the living child, and by no means kill him." She is his mother. A Heavenly Voice went forth and said, "She is his mother." Rava interpreted that 613 commandments were stated to Moses at Sinai, corresponding to the number of the days of the solar year, and 248 positive commandments correspond to the number of a man's limbs. Rav Hamnuna said, "What is the verse that teaches this?" (Deuteronomy 33:4) "Moses commanded us a law." The word "law" has a gematria of 611, and when you add "Anochi" and "I am" from the verse (Exodus 20:2), the total is 613. And Rav Yehudah said, "A word and the Sabbath preceded the giving of the Torah." David came and established them on 13, as it says (Psalms 15:1-2), "Who shall dwell in Your tent, who shall reside on Your holy mountain?" "Going innocently" means Abraham, who "walked innocently and did righteousness" (Genesis 17:1). "Speaking truth in his heart" means Rav Sapphira, who "never let a lie cross his lips." "Not slandering with his tongue" means Jacob, who said "Perhaps my father will feel me up," but did not commit any evil against his fellow. "Not taking shame upon his relatives" refers to one who is close to his family. Rabbi Simon said that God's attribute of mercy is not like that of humans. If a human has a shameful or poor relative, he disowns him, but God brought the children of Israel out of Egypt and called them his relative. He considered Hezekiah a wicked king who dragged his father's bones with a rope, but he honored Jehoshaphat, who treated his disciples with respect. One who swears to do evil and does not change is like Rabbi Yochanan, who said, 'I fast until I finish my portion [of the daily study]. He never took interest even from a non-Jew, nor did he accept a bribe even from an innocent person, like Rabbi Yishmael son of Rabbi Yose. Whoever does all these things will never fall. One who does some of them may fall eventually. These are the things that are said [in praise of the righteous] - one of them is: 'He who walks righteously' [Isaiah 33:15], referring to Abraham. 'And speaks uprightly' - one who does not speak insultingly of others. 'He who stops his ears from hearing of bloodshed' [ibid.] - one who does not listen to slander. 'And shuts his eyes from looking upon evil' [ibid.] - one who does not gaze at women when they are washing clothes. [Other examples of righteous behavior include:] 'He has told you, O man, what is good' [Micah 6:8] - this is [the practice of] performing acts of kindness. 'And what does the Lord require of you but to do justice' [ibid.] - this is the obligation to pursue justice. 'And to love mercy' [ibid.] - this is the act of giving charity. 'And to walk humbly with your God' [ibid.] - this refers to acts that are typically done publicly, such as accompanying a bride and groom [to their wedding], which the Torah refers to as 'walking humbly.' Other acts, which are typically done privately, are even more praiseworthy. Isaiah returned and cited two [righteous] qualities, as it says, 'Keep justice, and do righteousness' [Isaiah 56:1]. Amos cited one, as it says, 'Seek me and live' [Amos 5:4]. Habakkuk also cited one, as it says, 'And the righteous shall live by his faith' [Habakkuk 2:4]."walk humbly with God."
Jacob took all the tithe of his possessions and sent it by the hand of his servants, and gave it to Esau, saying to them: Say ye || to him, "Thus saith thy servant Jacob" (Gen. 32:4). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! That which was holy hast thou made profane? He replied to Him: Sovereign of all worlds ! I flatter the wicked, so that he should not slay me. Hence the (wise men) say, we may flatter the wicked in this world for the sake of the ways of peace. Esau said to him: O my brother, I have enough; as it is said, "And Esau said, I have enough" (Gen. 33:9). And because he gave honour to Jacob, therefore the sons of Jacob paid honour to the sons of Esau with the same expression; as it is said, "Ye have compassed this mountain long enough" (Deut. 2:8). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! Is it not enough for thee that thou hast made profane that which is holy? Nay, but I have said, "And the elder shall serve the younger" (Gen. 25:23); and yet thou hast said, "Thy servant Jacob" (Gen. 32:4). By thy life ! it shall be according to thy words; he shall rule over thee in this world, and thou shalt rule over him in the world to come. Therefore Jacob said to him (Esau): "Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servant" (Gen. 33:14). Hence thou mayest learn that the sons of Esau will not fall until a remnant from Jacob shall come, and cut off the feet of the children of Esau from Mount Seir, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will descend. "And there shall not be any remaining to the house of Esau; for the Lord hath spoken it" (Obad. 18).
In order to survive in our lengthy exile we must employ the weapons of repentance, prayer and charity so as to mobilize the support of G–d on our behalf. The equivalent of "war" is repentance, which reflects the battle with our evil urge. He who can conquer his baser urges has proved himself to be a mighty warrior. This condition will prevail until the prophecy that we will conquer Mount Se'ir will be fulfilled. The redemption will come as a result of repentance, as we know from: ובא לציון גואל ולשבי פשע ביעקב "The redeemer will come to Zion and to those in Jacob who have repented their iniquities" (Isaiah 59, 20).
There were these three wealthy people, etc.: In Eichah Rabbati, this whole story is found in a different form: There the name, Nakdimon ben Gurion, is considered two [names of two people], so they are four wealthy people. And it said, "Nakdimon, because the sun pierced (nakad), etc." - it explains their names according to that which is written in the first chapter of Yoma about the Second Temple; that they were occupied with Torah [study] and with the commandments, etc. And that is why it said, "Since even their wealthy people were masters of good deeds. Nakdimon, because [the sun] pierced for him, etc. from his prayer" - as it is explained in Taanit. "Ben Kalba Savua, anyone who entered, etc." - as his bread was available to all. "Ben Tzitzit, etc." - as he was careful about the commandment of fringes (tzitzit), as it is written about them (Numbers 15:40), "In order that you will remember [...] all of My commandments, etc." "There are those who say that his seat was found, etc." - so he was able to apologize for them in front of the government, if it were not because "there were zealots in it, etc.," as it concludes. And these were unbridled Jews who were among them, as is explained in Yossifon (Josephus). And from their hatred of one another, they caused the destruction and the exile. As they were not willing to submit to the Romans, as it says, "The Sages said to them, 'Let us make peace, etc.'" As they already knew [they could not win], for it was a sign from the Fathers to the children. As Yaakov said, "Let my master go before his servant, etc." (Genesis 33:14) - as it is explained in my Novellae on the Aggadot in the first chapter of Avodah Zarah. And that is why the Sages said, "You will not be successful in waging war against them." And it said...
במלאכת רעהו, a somewhat strange sounding expression; it means: “something belonging to his fellowman;” we find a similar construction in Genesis 33,14: לרגל המלאכה, Yaakov referring to his livestock.
אם לא שלח ידו במלאכת רעהו, “that he did not lay his hand on the property of his fellow;” the Torah refers to the object held in trust for his fellow (compare Ibn Ezra). This is also the opinion of Onkelos who translates these words as לא יושיט ידה במא דמסר ליה חברה, “he did not stretch out his hand against what his friend had given him.” The reason such a deposit is described by the Torah as מלאכה, is that a person’s wealth is often referred to as his מלאכה; one example is found in Genesis 33,14 where Yaakov explains that he has to travel more slowly than his brother Esau due to his “wealth” moving slowly. His wealth consisted primarily of his flocks and herds. The major point our verse makes is that the person to whom the deposit has been entrusted must not make any use of it whatsoever. If the deposit consists of beasts of burden the trustee must not use them for his own purpose; if they consist of vessels he must not use them for his own purposes either. Using such vessels would also fall under the heading מלאכה. Vessels have been manufactured for precisely the use called מלאכת תשמיש. Our sages in Baba Metzia 41 stated that the trustee who made any kind of use of deposits of vessels entrusted to them even if they did not deteriorate in value by such use, will henceforth be liable for anything which happens to such vessels. Two scholars, Rav and Levi disagree with one another on that subject, one saying that the word שלח ידו implies that the item under discussion loses value as a result of such use. The other scholar says that it does not need to lose value in order to fit the description in our verse. The decision in the Talmud is that it does not need to lose value in order for the trustee to become liable for any damage from that point on.
LET NEITHER MAN NOR WOMAN MAKE ANY MORE ‘MLACHAH’ (WORK). Money [and possessions] are called mlachah. Similarly: whether he have not put his hand ‘bimlecheth’ (the goods of) his neighbor; (Above, 22:7.) according to the pace of ‘hamlachah’ (the cattle) that are before me; (Genesis 33:14.) ‘v’chol hamlachah’ (but everything) that was of no account and feeble, that they destroyed utterly. (I Samuel 15:9.) Thus the meaning of this verse is that they should not bring anything more for the sacred work. Scripture, however, states, Let them not make any more ‘mlachah’ [using the verb “to make”] in order to include therein the women, that they should no longer spin the goats’ hair. (Above, 35:26.) Thus even the act of bringing is here referred to as “making,” and [it was now Moses’ wish] to restrain them altogether [from bringing more donations, and from making any work in their homes, as explained].
Furthermore, if the gentile asks him where he is going, the Jew should extend the journey when relating his destination to him, i.e., he should claim that he is traveling to a place beyond his actual destination, in the manner that Jacob our father did to the wicked Esau. As it is written that Jacob said to Esau: “Let my lord pass over before his servant and I will journey on gently, according to the pace of the cattle that are before me and according to the pace of the children, until I come unto my lord unto Seir” (Genesis 33:14).
The Gemara asks: Initially, when the Romans acted faithfully, what verse did they interpret, and ultimately, when they subjugated the Jews, what verse did they interpret? Initially, they interpreted the verse where Esau said to Jacob upon their meeting: “Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before you” (Genesis 33:12). In this verse, Esau equates himself to Jacob, prefiguring the initial Roman treatment of the Jews. And ultimately, they interpreted the verse that recites Jacob’s response to Esau: “Let my lord, I pray you, pass over before his servant” (Genesis 33:14), demonstrating Jacob’s subjugation to Esau, and by extension that of the Jews to Rome.
It was stated (Tosephta 3:4, Babli 25b.) : “If a Gentile is paired with a Jew, he puts him on his right hand side. Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose says, with a sword, at his right; with a staff, at his left (Since the sword is girded at his right side and the staff held in his left hand. The Gentile should not have space to swing his weapon.) . If he climbs with him to an upper floor or descends to the exit, the Jew should be higher and the Gentile below. He should not lie down before him lest he smite his skull. And he should extend the way to him, that if he asks him where he goes he should indicate a farther distance, as our father Jacob did with Esau, until I shall come to my Lord at Seir (Gen. 33:14.) . But he went to Sukkot. Rebbi Huna said, we do not find that our father Jacob went to Seir. Rebbi Yudan, son of Rebbi [Aivo] (Added from G, missing in L.) , he spoke to him of the future world, when saviors will climb on Mount Sion to judge Mount Esau. (Ob. 21.) ”
Please [Now] my master, go on ahead of your servant. I will lead on gently, in my slow pace, according to the pace of the work that is before me, and according to the pace of the children, until I come to my master in Seir.
Let me beseech my lord to pass over and journey before thy servant, and I will lead oil quietly alone, according to the foot of the work which is before me, and according to the foot of the instruction of the children; until the time that I come to my lord at Gabla.
They put up animals in inns of Samaritans, even males in the places of females and females in the places of males, and it is unnecessary to say males in the places of males and females in the places of males. They give possession of an animal to their shepherd, and they give over their child to teach him book(s) and to teach him art and to be alone with him. A daughter of Israel (may) act as a midwife or a wet-nurse for a Samaritan woman and a Samaritan (woman may) act as a midwife or a wet-nurse for an Israelite woman. They do not put up an animal in inns of idol worshipers, not even males in the places of males or females in the places of females, as a male will have sexual relations with a male and a female will have sexual relations with a female, and it is unnecessary to say males in the places of females and females in the places of males. And they do not give possession of an animal to their shepherd, nor a child to teach him book(s) or to teach him art or to be alone with him. A daughter of Israel may not be a wet-nurse for the an idol worshiper because she raise him for idol worship; but an idol worshiper may act as a wet-nurse for an Israelite woman in her domain. A daughter of Israel may not act as a midwife for an idol worshiper because she delivers (the child) for idol worship. An idol worshiper may not act as a midwife for a daughter of Israel, because they suspect (idol worshipers) of (taking) lives, (these are) the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say that an idol worshiper may act as a midwife for a daughter of Israel in a time when others stand over her, but when they are alone together, it is prohibited, because they suspect (idol worshipers) of (taking) lives. One may be treated by them (provided that it is) monetary treatment, but not personal treatment. An idol worshiper should not cut the embryo from the female organs of an Israelite woman, and she should not drink a cup of infertility potion, because they suspect (idol worshipers) of (taking) lives. An Israelite should not be alone with an idol worshiper, whether to bathe or in a bathhouse. An Israelite who encounters an idol worshiper on the road should (put the idol worshiper) to his right and not to his left. R. Yishmael ben R. Yohanan ben Beroqa says, (if the idol worshiper has) a sword, to his right. (If the idol worshiper has) a stick, to his left. (If) the two of them go up an incline or down a decline, the Israelite should stay above and the idol worshiper below. And he should not bend down before him, lest the idol worshiper break his skull. He should extend the journey (if an idol worshiper) asks him where he is going and divert him from the path, as it says Jacob did to Esau (Genesis 33): "until I come upon my lord at Seir," but he went to Sukkot. An Israelite may get a haircut from an idol worshiper (if) he can see in a mirror. (If) from a Samaritan, he does not need to look in a mirror. The house of Rabban Gamaliel permitted one to look in the mirror because they are in contact with the government. An Israelite who cuts the hair of idol worshiper, when he reaches the forelock, he should remove his hand.
| וַיֹּ֣אמֶר עֵשָׂ֔ו אַצִּֽיגָה־נָּ֣א עִמְּךָ֔ מִן־הָעָ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֣ר אִתִּ֑י וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ לָ֣מָּה זֶּ֔ה אֶמְצָא־חֵ֖ן בְּעֵינֵ֥י אֲדֹנִֽי׃ | 15 E | Then Esau said, “Let me assign to you some of the people who are with me.” But he said, “Oh no, my lord is too kind to me!” |
Let me leave with you. For your protection and honor.
What for. Why should you go to the trouble and why do I need it?
Let me find favor. It will be more of a favor to me if you do not send them. Eisov understood from this that Yaakov did not really desire his company and left off speaking to him, although at that point he did not have the heart to harm him.
[WHAT NEEDETH IT?] I have no need of it. (The Hebrew reads, lammah zeh emtzah chen be-ene adoni. This can be rendered: why then shall I find favor in the eyes of my lord? I.E. explains that this is not the way to interpret the verse. Lammah zeh is not to be connected to emtza chen, etc. The verse is to be interpreted: lammah zeh, why this? That is, why do this when I have no need of it? Emtza chen be-ene adoni is another clause meaning: I merely want to find favor in your eyes (Weiser, Krinsky). Cf. Rashi.)
למה זה, אמצא חן בעיניך, "Why do this? Let me find favour in my master's eyes." Jacob preferred an ongoing good relationship with Esau rather than to become the beneficiary of a one-time exaggerated display of Esau's loving concern for him and his family. Jacob hinted at the future when he said אמצא חן, "let me find favour in the future."
למה זה אמצא חן בעיני אדני, “why all this? Let me find favour in your eyes.” The words למה זה do not form part of the four words למה זה אמצא חן, but they are two separate statements. The first two words refer to Esau’s offer (or threat) to provide Yaakov with an escort. The second part of the verse means: “you have already done enough for me by letting me find favour in your eyes.” Yaakov implied that this was more important to him than an escort of numerous people.
ויאמר למה זה אמצא חן בעיני אדוני, this is Yaakov speaking, saying to Esau that he need not bother to honour him so excessively. We find a similar verse in Ruth 2,10 מדוע מצאתי חן בעיניך להכירני, where Ruth expresses her disbelief about the kindly interest taken in her the alien, the widowed stranger, by Boaz.
WHY THIS? LET ME FIND FAVOUR IN THE EYES OF MY LORD. Why this, that you should do me a favor which I do not need? Let me find favour in your eyes, and do not give me any recompense at present [for the gift which I have presented to you]. This is the language of Rashi. Now Jacob’s meaning was that he did not want them and their company at all, the more so since he intended to go another way. Our Rabbis have further seen an advisory aspect in this entire chapter. Thus they have said: (Bereshith Rabbah 78:18.) “Before embarking on a journey to the Roman ruler, Rabbi Yanai would peruse this section of the Torah, and he never took Romans with him as an escort on the return journey. One time he did not peruse this section and he took Romans with him, and he had not yet reached Acco when he was compelled to sell his travelling cloak for bribery money.” [The significance attached to this chapter] was because of the Rabbinical tradition that this was the section of the exile. Therefore when Rabbi Yanai entered Rome, in the court of the kings of Edom, [on a mission] concerning public matters, he would peruse this section of the Torah in order to follow the advice of the wise patriarch, for it is he that the generations are to see and emulate. Thus he would not accept the company of the Romans as an escort for they draw no man near to them except for their own interest (Aboth 2:3.) and take liberties with people’s belongings.
ויאמר למה זה means AND HE SAID, WHY IS IT— that thou shouldst do me a favour which I do not need?”
אמצא חן בעיני אדני LET ME FIND FAVOUR IN THE EYES OF MY LORD and do not give me any recompense at present for the gifts I have made you.
Do you do this favor for me for which I have no need. Rashi is answering the question: למה זה אמצא חן seems to imply that Yaakov did not want to find favor. But did he not send a large gift in order to find favor in Eisov’s eyes? Thus Rashi explains it as, “For what do you do this favor?” Whereas “Let me find favor in your eyes” is a separate statement.
And Esau said: If so, please, I will place with you some of the people who are with me to protect you and your family. He, Jacob, said: Why do that? I will find favor in the eyes of my lord. I am independent; I have no need for such assistance. Furthermore, I do not wish to burden you by accepting this service.
למה זה, אמצא חן בעיניך, “why do that? Let me find favour in the eyes of my lord.” Yaakov absolutely did not want the company of Esau. This too, is an aspect of מעשה אבות סימן לבנים, that the patriarchs’ mode of conduct should serve as a model for their descendants when they find themselves in similar circumstances. We are to refrain from becoming chummy with the secular authorities of the country which hosts us when we are in exile, seeing that friendliness by such rulers reflects only what they can get out of us and not what we can get out of them.
“Esau said to him: Please, I will place with you some of the people who are with me. He said: Why do that? I will find favor in the eyes of my lord” (Genesis 33:15). “Esau said to him: Please, I will place with you…” – he sought to accompany him, but he did not accept it. Rabbeinu, when he would ascend to the empire, he would look at this portion and would not take a Roman (The text says Aramean, but the reference is to Romans.) with him. One time, he did not look at it, and he took Romans with him. He did not reach Akko before he sold his horse. (He did so in order to garner funds to bribe the Romans to allow him to proceed.) “Esau returned on that day on his way to Seir” (Genesis 33:15) – and the four hundred men who were with him, where were they? Each and every one left on his way; they said: Let us not be burned in Jacob’s coals. When did the Holy One blessed be He repay them? It was elsewhere: “Not a man of them escaped except for four hundred lads, who rode on the camels and fled” (see I Samuel 30:17). (These were Amalekites, descendants of Esau.)
I have explained the word סם-אל as being composed of סם, poison, something harmful and of א-ל, something godly, i.e. good and wholesome. We can divide the expression מלאך המות, angel of death, similarly. The מות, i.e. death part of the expression is something negative, whereas the מלאך, i.e. angel part of the word is something good, positive. The good is mixed in with the bad. This is the mystical dimension of Esau's offer in 33, 15: אציגה נא עמך מן העם אשר אתי, "Let me assign you some of the people who are with me." There is a hidden reference in this to the proselytes and their influence on the Jewish people. Esau made this suggestion after Jacob had said to him in verse 14: עד אשר אבא אל אדוני שעירה, "until I come to my lord in Se'ir." Jacob's comment was a reference to Messianic times described in Ovadiah 1, 21, where Israel is described as ascending the mountain of Se'ir, home of Esau, preparing to execute final judgment on Esau. When we look at the respective last letters in the words אבא אל אדוני שעירה, we have the word אליה, as pointed out by Baal Haturim. This was Jacob's reply to Esau's suggestion for his people to convert to Judaism at the time the Messiah would arrive. Jacob hinted that we have a rule that we do not accept converts when there is reason to suspect that these converts only want to reap the benefit of a period of good fortune of the Jewish people (Yevamot 24). Jacob answered at the end of verse 15: למה זה אמצא חן בעיני אדוני The word חן is an allusion to the potential convert's motivation for becoming a גר, proselyte.
AND THE ANGELS OF G-D MET HIM. Rashi comments: “The angels who minister in the Land of Israel came to meet him. And he called the name of that place Mahanaim: the plural form implies two camps, one consisting of the angels ministering outside of the Land of Israel who had accompanied him thus far, the other consisting of those ministering in the Land of Israel who had come forth to meet him.” But I wonder at this, for Jacob had not yet reached the Land of Israel and was still distant from there for he sent messengers to Esau from afar. And then it says there, And he passed over the ford of the Jabbok, (Further, 32:23.) which is the river Jabbok which is the border of the children of Ammon. (Deuteronomy 3:16.) This is to the southeast of the Land of Israel, and he still had to pass the boundary of the children of Ammon and Moab, and then the land of Edom, and his first entry into the Land was at Shechem, as it is said, And Jacob came in peace to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. (Further 33:18. This poses a difficulty to Rashi’s interpretation of “Mahanaim.”) Instead, we must say this vision came to Jacob as he arrived in enemy territory in order to inform him that “they that are with him are more than they that are with them.” (See II Kings 6:16.) And the name of the place was called “Mahanaim” in the plural, for such is the way of Scripture with names. (For a single event or person, a plural name is given, as for example, “Mitzraim”.) It may be that “Mahanaim” refers to His camp and the camp of the higher beings, (In that case the plural in the word Mahanaim is naturally justified.) that is to say that His camp on earth is as the camp of the angels, all of them being camps of G-d, blessing Him and confessing His Unity, may His name be blessed forever. Vayishlach This section was written in order to inform us that the Holy One, blessed be He, delivered His servant, and He redeemed him from the hand of him that is stronger than he, (Jeremiah 31:11.) and he sent an angel (Numbers 20:16.) and saved him, and in order to further teach us that Jacob did not place his trust in his righteousness and that he strove for delivery with all his might. There is yet in this section a hint for future generations, for everything that happened to our father with his brother Esau will constantly occur to us with Esau’s children, and it is proper for us to adhere to the way of the righteous (See Job 17:9.) by preparing ourselves in the three things for which he prepared himself: for prayer, for giving him a present, and for rescue by methods of warfare, to flee and to be saved. Our Rabbis have already derived this hint from this section, as I shall mention.
‘LIKMATZIM’ (HANDFULS). They stored up the grain handful upon handful, fist by fist. This is the language of Rashi. Onkelos translated it as, “into store houses,” since excavations made in the earth for storage or other purposes are called ‘kmatzim.’ He is hid now in one of ‘hap’chothim’ (the pits), (II Samuel 17:9.) Jonathan translated, “in one of the kumtza.” Similarly, he always translated the term pachath as kamtza, which is related to the expression, He that diggeth ‘gametz’ (a pit), (Ecclesiastes 10:8.) as the letter gimmel serves here as kuph, just as it serves as a kaph in the following verses: Never lacking in ‘hamazeg’ (mingled wine), (Song of Songs 7:3.) the word hamazeg being derived from the term, ‘Mas’cha’ (She hath mingled) her wine; (Proverbs 9:2.) ‘v’chano’ which Thy right hand hath planted, (Psalms 80:16. Translated: ‘And of the stock’ which Thy right hand hath planted. But Ramban explains it as: “And of the garden, etc.”) which is like ganoh (garden); ‘vayisachru’ the fountains of the murmuring deep, (Above, 8:2.) which is like vayisagru (and they were closed); To their native land (‘m’churatham’); (Ezekiel 29:14 (m’churatham); 16:3 (m’chorotayich).) Thy origin (‘m’chorothayich’) and thy birth; (Ezekiel 29:14 (m’churatham); 16:3 (m’chorotayich).) And I will give over (‘v’sikarti’) Egypt. (Isaiah 19:4.) In all of these cases the kaph and the gimmel are alike. The kuph and the kaph are often alike, as in kova and chova, (both meaning “hat”); (I Samuel 17:38 (kova); 17:5 (chova).) ‘tikein’ (he set in order) many proverbs, (Ecclesiastes 12:9.) the word tikein being like the term sichein in the verse, Who has directed (‘sichein’) the spirit of the Eternal? (Isaiah 40:13.) Our Rabbis have said in connection with the term jewelry: tachshitim and takshit. Similarly, it is said, ‘Vayatziku’ (And they set down) the ark of G-d — but Abiathar went up — until all the people hath passed out of the city, (II Samuel 15:24.) and the Targum translates: “And they put down the ark,” thus making vayatziku as vayatzig, just as it is said concerning it, And they brought in the ark of the Eternal, ‘vayatzigu’ (and set it) in its place, (Ibid., 6:17.) the word being derived from the expressions, ‘atziga’ (let me place) with thee, (Above 33:15.) and ‘v’hitzagtiv’ (And I will set him) before thee. (Further, 43:9.)
Eisov said, Let me leave [now] with you some of the people that are with me. He [Yaakov] said, What for? Let me find favor in the eyes of my master.
And Esau said, Let me now leave with thee some of the soldiers who are with me. But he said, Why this? Let me find favour before thee, my lord.
| וַיָּ֩שׇׁב֩ בַּיּ֨וֹם הַה֥וּא עֵשָׂ֛ו לְדַרְכּ֖וֹ שֵׂעִֽירָה׃ | 16 E | So Esau started back that day on his way to Seir. |
וישב ביום ההוא עשו, “on that day Esau returned;” according to Rashi, from this verse we derive that the four hundred men who had formed Esau’s entourage had simply melted away, seeing Esau is described as returning alone. They had clearly still been with him in verse 15.
On that day Eisov returned. He was perturbed by Yaakov’s attitude towards him and did not part from him with a kiss as Lavan had done. For this reason Yaakov refrained from visiting him in Seir as he had said he would do.
וישב ביום ההוא עשו לדרכו SO ESAU RETURNED THAT DAY ON HIS WAY — Esau alone returned, but the four hundred men who had accompanied him slipped away from him one by one. When did the Holy One, blessed be He, reward them for this? In the days of David, as it is said (1 Samuel 30:17) (in reference to an attack which he made upon the Amalekites, descendants of Esau) “[and there escaped not a man of them] save four hundred young men who rode upon camels” (Genesis Rabbah 78:15).
וישב לדרכו שעירה, dieses לדרכו ist nicht ganz klar. Vielleicht ist es bezeichnend für die Richtung, zu welcher Esau nunmehr in seiner Lebens- und Sinnes- weise wieder zurückkehrte. Es ist ja das letzte Mal, daß wir Jakob und Esau zusammen sehen, von da an trennen sich ihre Lebenswege völlig. Wie das ganze Gid Hannascheh-Ereignis erst in fernster Zukunft seiner Verwirklichung und Vollendung harrt, so war dies Zusammentreffen in dem gehobenen Momente nur ein Wahr- und Anzeichen, wie einst am Ende der Tage sich die Beziehungen Jakobs und Esaus zu einander gestalten werden. Für die damalige Gegenwart und für noch geraumere Zeit hinaus heißt es jedoch: Noch desselbigen Tages zog Esau gen Seir zurück "zu seiner gewohnten Weise". Vielleicht!
Eisov alone. Whereas the four hundred men that had gone with him slipped away... You might object: Although Eisov alone is mentioned in the verse, his men are tacitly included, for the verse speaks of the primary figure. [And the proof is that] the next verse says, “Yaakov traveled to Sukkos,” which includes Yaakov’s wives and children. Why does the same not apply here? The answer is: Eisov said, “Let me leave some of the people with you,” and we might mistakenly think that they indeed stayed with Yaakov. Thus, it should be clearly written that they went with Eisov, [if in fact they did]. (Re’m) Another answer: It is written in v. 1, “He saw Eisov was coming, and with him, four hundred men.” Since the verse [specially] mentions the four hundred men, it is implied that Eisov was secondary to them. Accordingly, our verse should have mentioned them, too. But this is not the case with Yaakov.
Esau returned on that day with his entourage and the animals he had received on his way to Se’ir.
“Esau started back on that day on his way” [33:16]. Esau went home alone. The four hundred men separated from Esau and ran away, and the Holy One paid them a good reward. King David killed many nations, but the Holy One protected the four hundred men of Esau. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:16.)
“Esau said to him: Please, I will place with you some of the people who are with me. He said: Why do that? I will find favor in the eyes of my lord” (Genesis 33:15). “Esau said to him: Please, I will place with you…” – he sought to accompany him, but he did not accept it. Rabbeinu, when he would ascend to the empire, he would look at this portion and would not take a Roman (The text says Aramean, but the reference is to Romans.) with him. One time, he did not look at it, and he took Romans with him. He did not reach Akko before he sold his horse. (He did so in order to garner funds to bribe the Romans to allow him to proceed.) “Esau returned on that day on his way to Seir” (Genesis 33:15) – and the four hundred men who were with him, where were they? Each and every one left on his way; they said: Let us not be burned in Jacob’s coals. When did the Holy One blessed be He repay them? It was elsewhere: “Not a man of them escaped except for four hundred lads, who rode on the camels and fled” (see I Samuel 30:17). (These were Amalekites, descendants of Esau.)
“And Yaakov traveled to Sukkos and he built for himself a house and for his livestock he made shelters [sukkos] therefore he called the name of the place Sukkos” (Bereishis 33:17). All of Israel’s customs are Torah and it is our custom that as soon as we come home from the synagogue at the conclusion of Yom Kippur we immediately immerse ourselves in the mitzvah of building the sukkah. I have found a fitting explanation for this among the essays of Rabbi Shelomo Molcho, z”l (Sefer HaMefo’ar, p. 168), where he discusses why it is that Israel engages specifically in this mitzvah at the conclusion of Yom Kippur as opposed to any other. His explanation is as follows: The Holy One Blessed is He commanded that on Yom Kippur one goat be offered up to Hashem while a second be sent to Azazel. The Kohein Gadol would first confess all the iniquities and transgressions of Israel over the one that was to be sent to Azazel, as it is stated, “And the goat shall bear upon it all their iniquities” (Vayikra 16:22). Through this Israel achieved tremendous atonement. This is an example of the principle that everything that befell the Patriarchs was a foreshadowing of what was to befall their descendants, for in the ritual of the scapegoat Israel inherited a mitzvah recalling an incident from the time of their forefathers. As it is stated, “And Eisav returned along his way to (the land of) Se’ir” (Bereishis 33:16). Then it states, “And Yaakov traveled to Sukkos” (ibid. 17). In other words, after Eisav, who was a hairy man [ish se’ir], had gone on his way to Se’ir — i.e., to receive his portion in the form of the goat [se’ir] that was sent to Azazel — Yaakov went on to Sukkos — i.e., to engage in the mitzvah of sukkah. In this passage the Torah intimates that we must emulate our ancestor by engaging specifically in the mitzvah of sukkah, rather than any other, after we have sent off the scapegoat on Yom Kippur. This is Rabbi Shelomo Molcho’s explanation and the words of the wise are pleasing.
BLESSSINGS OF THE DEEP. Moses similarly said, And for the precious things of the earth and the fullness thereof (Deut. 33:13). (So Cherez. The point is that the blessing of the deep means that the land will be well watered and fertile, as Moses blessed the tribe of Joseph with a fertile land. Krinsky suggests that our text is corrupt and that the proof text should read: For the precious things of heaven, for the dew, And for the deep that coucheth beneath (Deut. 33:13). In this case I.E. is pointing out that Jacob and Moses’ blessings are identical.) The word tehom (the deep) is feminine both in our verse and in Deut. (33:16). It is similarly feminine in The deep (tehom) made it to grow (Ezek. 31:4). (Our verse reads, tehom rovetzet (the deep that coucheth). Deut. 33:13 reads, u-mi-tehom rovetzet (and for the deep that coucheth). Rovetzet (coucheth) is feminine, hence tehom (the deep) must be feminine. Ezek. 31:4 reads, tehom romematehu (the deep made it to grow). Since romematehu is feminine, tehom, too, must be feminine. I.E. makes this point because tehom is masculine in Ps. 42:8. Thus we see that tehom is both masculine and feminine.) The meaning of With blessings of heaven above, Blessings of the deep that coucheth beneath is that rain will descend from the heavens above upon the land of Joseph and that the deep which coucheth beneath the earth will fill its rivers and springs with an abundance of water.
וילך אל ארץ מפני יעקב אחיו, “he went to a (different) country on account of his brother Yaakov.” The plain meaning of the verse is that Esau went to the land of Seir which was his real home at that time, just as the Torah had mentioned already in Genesis 33,16: “Esau returned on that day on his way to Seir.” We have independent support for the fact that Esau resided in Seir in 36,8: “Esau resided in the mountain of Seir.” Ibn Ezra comments on this that this mountain is adjacent to the land of Israel as the Torah reports in Deut. 2,8: “we by-passed our brothers the sons of Esau who reside in Seir.” We also have Deut. 1,2 where Moses speaks of “eleven days march from Mount Chorev by way of Mount Seir.” This mountain is not identical with the country in which the Edomites live in nowadays, i.e. the land of Greece.
HALAKHAH: “The House of Shammai permit the co-wives to the brothers,” etc. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Yose in the name ofNehorai: The reason of the House of Shammai, “the outside wife of the deceased shall not belong to a strange man (Deut. 25:5. The verse reads לֹא־תִהְיָה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. In the masoretic text, הַחוּצָה is adverbial לֹא־תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר and therefore is stressed on the penultimate syllable. The House of Shammai read an unlikely adjective לֹא־תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. Following masoretic grammar, הַחוּצָה then should be stressed on the last syllable. As E. Y. Kutscher has shown in his study of the Isaiah scroll, one may assume that in the last century of the Jewish state the stress was penultimate irrespective of meaning. Therefore, in Mishnaic times there may not have been an audible difference between the two versions. The House of Shammai would translate: “The deceased man’s wife who is outside [the family of the levir] shall not be to a strange man,” implying that only the widow who already belongs to the levir’s family is free from the obligations of the levirate. The argument is quoted in the Babli, 13b.) ,” the “outer one” should not be another man’s. It turns out that the House of Shammai hold like those Samaritans who perform levirate with the betrothed but remove the married, for they explain “outside” as “the outer one (Having received qiddushin but not yet finally married, she is not yet part of the family. This interpretation avoids any appearance of conflict between Lev. 18:16, declaring relations with the brother’s wife incestuous, and Deut. 25:5, requiring marriage to the brother’s wife. In rabbinic Hebrew, ארוסה “the betrothed one”, is a seldom used synonym of מקודשת “who had received qiddushin”.) .” How do the House of Shammai (The commentators want to replace “House of Shammai” by “Samaritans”, but it was stated before that the House of Shammai accepts the reading of the Samaritans while giving it another interpretation.) confirm “when he has no child (Deut. 25:5. You do not expect a man to have a child before marriage.) ”? Rebbi Jacob the Southerner said before Rebbi Yose, “when he has no child” from the married one, “the outer one shall not belong outside to a strange man. (In this interpretation, the “outside” wife is the woman betrothed, legally a wife, but not married to live in her husband’s family. For them, a woman widowed after marriage is never subject to levirate, only one becoming a widow from betrothal to a childless man. This eliminates any conflict between Deut. 25:5 and Lev. 18:16. The practice of the Samaritans is confirmed in the Babli, Qiddušin 75b–76a.) ” He said to him, will not the Samaritans love you that you confirm their interpretations! Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar stated: I told the learned Samaritans, what did cause you to err? That you did not explain following Rebbi Neḥemiah, since it was stated in the name of Rebbi Neḥemiah: Anything which needs a ל as a prefix but did not get it, we give it a ה at the end, e. g., to the outside חוּצָה, to Se‘ir (Gen. 33:16.) שְׂעִירָה, to Succoth (Gen. 33:17.) סוּכּוֹתָה. They objected to Rebbi Neḥemiah, is it not written: “The wicked shall return to the pit לִשְׁאוֹלָה (Ps. 9:18; one of the two signs of direction is superfluous.) .” Rabba bar Zabda said, to the lowest living space (Greek δίαιτα.) in Sheol.
‘In which way should one honour his teacher’, etc.? It has been taught: (B.M. 86b-87a (Sonc. ed., p. 500).) Michael came to bring good tidings to Sarah, (That a son would be born to her.) Gabriel to overthrow Sodom, and Raphael to heal Abraham. (Of the effects of his circumcision.) Some say that Raphael came to bring good tidings to Sarah and to heal, (Abimelech.) as it is stated, And God healed Abimelech, (Gen. 20, 17.) Michael and Gabriel to overthrow Sodom. What is the reason for the first view? [Because it is stated,] And He overthrew those cities. (ibid. XIX, 25, where the verb is singular.) And what is the reason for the opinion of the others? [Because it is stated,] And the two angels came to Sodom. (ibid. 1.) Why is it that with Abraham [the angels said], So do, as thou hast said, (ibid. XVIII, 5.) but with Lot, Nay; but we will abide in the broad place all night? (ibid. XIX, 2.) R. Eleazar said: Infer from this that one may display reluctance (By refusing his invitation.) towards an inferior but not a superior. The Rabbis taught: (Suk. 52b (Sonc. ed., p. 251), an explanation of the seven shepherds of whom Micah 5, 4. speaks.) In the time to come the son of David will be in the middle, Adam, Seth and Methuselah on his right, and Abraham, Jacob and Moses on his left. Why is Isaac omitted? Raba said: Isaac is better than they because to him all Israel declare, For thou art our Father. (Isa. 63, 16. For the allusion, cf. Shab. 89b (Sonc. ed., p. 426).) If so, Esau ascended into Paradise. (Since he was Isaac’s son.) That is why Scripture states, For thou art our Father: children are like their father—as the father did not repudiate the covenant so too the children. And whence do we know this? It is stated, I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee; surely thou hast hated thine own blood, therefore blood shall pursue thee. (Ezek. 35, 6. Ezekiel’s prophecy is directed against Mount Seir, the home of Esau (cf. Gen. 33, 16).) Did Esau hate blood? Were not all his deeds connected with the shedding of blood, as it is stated, He is like a lion that is eager to tear in pieces, and like a young lion lurking in secret places? (Ps. 17, 12. Like is dimyono in the Heb. and is spelt without the waw.) Whence do you infer this? Perhaps he was only out to rob? No, since it states dimyeno and not dimyono; (This form of the word is understood as being more closely connected with dam, ‘blood’.) so draw this conclusion.
not to provoke them. For I will not give you of their land so much as a foot can tread on; I have given the hill country of Seir as a possession to Esau.
On that day Eisov returned on his way—going to Seir.
And a miracle was wrought for Jakob, and that day Esau returned on his way to Gabla.
| וְיַעֲקֹב֙ נָסַ֣ע סֻכֹּ֔תָה וַיִּ֥בֶן ל֖וֹ בָּ֑יִת וּלְמִקְנֵ֙הוּ֙ עָשָׂ֣ה סֻכֹּ֔ת עַל־כֵּ֛ן קָרָ֥א שֵׁם־הַמָּק֖וֹם סֻכּֽוֹת׃ | 17 E | But Jacob journeyed on to Succoth, and built a house for himself and made stalls for his cattle; that is why the place was called Succoth. (Succoth Meaning “stalls,” “huts,” “booths.”) |
And Yaakov journeyed to Sukkot and built a house for himself; and for his cattle, he made Sukkot; hence he called the name of the place, Sukkot. (Genesis 33:17): One should explain several hints in this verse. For also according to its simple meaning, it is necessary to understand what the Torah added for us by telling us this. But it can be explained about the holiday of Sukkot, which is the time of our joy, to rejoice in front of the Lord, our God - to teach that 'this is all of man' - to serve God, may He be blessed. Whereas all of his seeming possessions in this world are fleeting and transient like a sukkah (hut) in a vineyard. Hence we were commanded to dwell then during the time of joy in a sukkah and to rejoice in front of the Lord, since that is the essence [of life]. So the hint of, "And Yaakov journeyed to Sukkot," is that when the whole of the nation, which is called Yaakov, travels to Sukkot - meaning to say, when it reaches the holiday of Sukkot - it should then, "build a house for himself": You already know (Sefer Yetzirah) that a letter is called a stone and a word, a house. If so, every letter in its full spelling is also called a house, since it is a word [when spelled out] like this, alef, bet. So, if so, it is hinted here, "and he built a house for himself," that he builds for himself houses from the word, Yaakov, in its full spelling - like this, yod, ayin, kof, bet. That is the numerical equivalent (gematria) of rejoice (tismach); which is to teach that the time of our joy is then, to rejoice in God, may He be blessed. And then the name of Yaakov will be complete in its fullness and goodness. "And for his cattle (mikneh)" - meaning acquisitions (kniyot) of the world - "he made Sukkot." That is to say that through the joy in God, he meditates that all possessions in the world are similar to sukkot, which are 'here for a night, etc.' And this is [the meaning of], "he made" - that he made them in his thought like naught and nothing, similar to sukkot which do not have permanence. "Hence he called the name of the place," of the whole world, "Sukkot" (as it has no permanence). And also the full spelling of [the letters that spell] Yaakov, without [those letters in] the simple spelling are the numerical equivalent of, sweeten (yamtiku). For the judgements are sweetened at that time (Sukkot), as is known about [the mystical] intention of Sukkot. And that is [the meaning of], "and he built a house for himself." And the meaning of, "and for his cattle" (meaning the letters of his [name's] simple spelling, since they are his essential possession), is that Yaakov is the numerical equivalent of two times, sukkah. That is to teach that with the arousal from below, there is an arousal of actions from above - two sukkot (which are shelters): The Higher Mother to shelter over the Small Face and the Female; and the Lower Mother to shelter over her children. And understand.
And the extent of his fall, and of the bounty that he takes from the animals—causing the deaths of the animals and beasts, as well—is commensurate with his blemish of sukkah. This is the aspect of “and he made sukkahs for his livestock” (Genesis 33:17)—the sukkah is for the sake of his livestock, as mentioned above.
Meaning “stalls,” “huts,” “booths.”
And built himself a house. He made a permanent house in which to serve Hashem and temporary shelters in which to tend to worldly matters.
נסע סכותה, He journeyed towards Sukkot. The reason this place was called סוכות was because there Jacob built pens and shelters for his herds and cattle. The Torah purposely does not say לסוכות, "to Sukkot" because this would have led us to believe that this place had already been known by the name סוכות. You may well ask why the Torah bothered to mention the fact that Jacob called the name of the place where he built shelters for his animals סוכות. Perhaps the reason is that Jacob was the first human being who expended so much time, energy, and money in order to assure his animals a degree of comfort both in summer and in winter.
ויעקב...ויבן לו בית, this teaches that it was during the rainy season. In Bereshit Rabbah 78,16 it is concluded from this detail that Yaakov stayed at Sukkot for several years. [other versions say that it was in Bet El where he stayed 18 months or longer. Ed.]
AND HE BUILT FOR HIMSELF A HOUSE. It is possible that the place was a location which had no city, and he therefore found it necessary to build for himself a house and make booths for his cattle. Or it may be that the expression, and he built for himself a house, means that he built for himself a large house with a strong tower to fortify himself against Esau.
ויבן לו בית AND HE BUILT FOR HIMSELF A HOUSE — He stayed there eighteen months — summer, winter and summer again (Megillah 17a); for the first mention of Succoth (booths which are erected for the cattle) points to the summer (when booths are necessary for the cattle), the mention of building a house to the winter, and the second mention of booths to the next summer.
Es war dies das erste wirkliche Haus, das Jakob sich erbaute, und es weist dies darauf hin, daß er jedenfalls längere Zeit dort verweilte. Der Ort ist übrigens jenseits des Jordans, somit außerhalb Kanaans.
He stayed there eighteen months; a summer, a winter, and a summer. Re’m objects: “I do not know why Rashi cites this Midrash [which does not fit with the simple meaning of the verse.] The house and the shelters were all [used] at the same time—the house by Yaakov, and the shelters by his animals—as the verse states. And Rashi writes [in many places], ‘My intention is only to explain the simple meaning.’” Maharshal answers: Scripture wrote סכות twice, and בית once, indicating that “סכות is one summer, בית is a winter...” The Kitzur Mizrachi answers: Rashi cites this Midrash in order to corroborate the twenty-two years in which Yaakov did not fulfill the mitzvah of honoring his parents, mentioned by Rashi in Parshas Vayeishev (37:34).
Jacob traveled to a location named Sukot, and built him a house, and established booths for his livestock. Therefore, he called the name of the place Sukot. This was a temporary lodging, where Jacob stayed until he decided upon his next destination.
ויבן לו בית, “he built himself a house.” It is possible that this was not an urban area and he had to build himself a house; alternately, the Torah reports that Yaakov built himself a very strong and solid house, one that could serve as a fortification against an attack by Esau.
In response to this, King David, peace be upon him, composed his songs-zemirot-זמירות, in order to clear the path for the prayers to pass. This is because all those camps are like a cloud that obstructs the prayers from ascending. About this it states, (Lamentations 3:44) “You have covered Yourself in a cloud that prayer cannot penetrate.” However, now that David came and composed songs-zemirot-זמירות, when a person recites these songs-zemirot-זמירות, then these destroyers, spoilers and obstructers withdraw and go away. They are called songs-zemirot-זמירות from the term “machete-mazmer-מזמר,” as in the verse, (Isaiah 18:5) “He will cut down the young branches with machetes-mazmerot-מזמרות.” About this scripture states, (Psalms 119:54. This verse is usually translated, “Your statutes were music to me in my house of residence.”) “Your statutes were like machetes-zemirot-זמירות for me in the house of my fears-megurai-מגורי.” This is to say that in those places on the way that I was in fear and terror-magor-מגור, I scattered and cut through them with those machetes-zemirot-זמירות (songs).
Opposed to this stone-Even-אבן is another stone called, “a large stone-Even Gedolah-אבן גדולה,” (Genesis 29:2) and when it covers the mouth of the well-Be’er-באר, Israel is subjugated beneath it, (Also see Zohar I 151b that this is a reference to the evil inclination which is called (Isaiah 8:14), “a stumbling stone-Even Negef-אבן נגף.” (See also Psalms 91:12.)) “until the coming of the executor of judgment, when I will deliver him [into his hands].” (Ezekiel 21:32) This is indicated by the verse, (Genesis 29:10) “Yaakov came forward and rolled the stone-Even-אבן off the mouth of the well-Be’er-באר,” and is the meaning of the mystery of the Torah portion, (Genesis 33:17) “Yaakov journeyed to Sukkot,” and the section in Prophets that states, (Zachariah 14:1 – That is, the era of the true and complete redemption upon which (14:9), “HaShem-יהו״ה will be King over all the land; on that day HaShem-יהו״ה will be one and His Name one.”) “Behold, a day is coming for HaShem-יהו״ה.”
And when will the Middle Pillar be complete? When it becomes joined with the Shekhinah. It is this that is written: (Gen. 33:17) And Jacob travelled to Sukkot, and he built for himself a house... It is this that is written: (Gen. 2:22) ... and Y”Y ELQYM built the rib...
You redeemed him [Isaac] with a ram caught in a thicket, therefore, do not disgrace our petition and affliction. (Our fasting on Yom Kippur.) Hear our cry and hearken to our entreaty, in the merit of the Patriarch [Jacob] who traveled to Succos. (See Genesis 33:17.)
who traveled to Succos. (See Genesis 33:17.)
You redeemed him [Isaac] with a ram caught in a thicket, therefore, do not disgrace our petition and affliction. (Our fasting on Yom Kippur.) Hear our cry and hearken to our entreaty, in the merit of the Patriarch [Jacob] who traveled to Succos. (See Genesis 33:17.)
“Jacob traveled to Sukot, and built him a house, and established booths [sukot] for his livestock. Therefore, he called the name of the place Sukot” Genesis 33:17). “Jacob traveled to Sukot” – how many years did our patriarch Jacob remain in Sukot? Rabbi Abba said: Eighteen months – Sukot, house, Sukot, and in Beit El six months. Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: All those months that he remained in Beit El, he would give Esau that same gift. Rabbi Avin says in the name of Rabbi Ḥuneya: For nine years he would give Esau that same gift. Rabbi Pinḥas said in the name of Rabbi Abba: All those years (Some commentaries suggest that the correct reading is “months.” Others explain that Jacob returned to pour libations in Beit El for many years after he left Beit El. ) that Jacob remained in Beit El, he did not refrain from pouring libations. Rabbi Ḥanan said: Anyone who knows how many libations Jacob our patriarch poured in Beit El would know how to calculate the waters of Tiberias.
"to succoth": "succoth," ("booths") literally, as in (Genesis 33:17) "And Jacob traveled to Succoth, and for his cattle he made succoth (booths), for which reason the place was named Succoth." These are the words of R. Eliezer.
(Gen. 34:1:) < NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT > TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. TO SEE < implies > TO BE SEEN. (The unpointed Hebrew text could be read either way by assuming a contraction of the passive common in Mishnaic Hebrew. See M.H. Segal, A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew (Oxford: Clarendon, 1958), section 115. See also Gen. 22:14, where the same contracted passive is used to explain a place-name based on the active Hebrew verb, “to see.” On Gen. 22:14, see E.A. Speiser, Genesis (“Anchor Bible,” 1; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 163f.) To what is the matter comparable? To one who was walking in the marketplace with a piece < of meat > in his hand. (Gen. R. 80:5.) A dog, having seen it, went after it, and snatched it from him. Thus did Dinah go out TO SEE (and TO BE SEEN) when Shechem saw her and seized her. (See Eccl. R. 10:8:1.) Another interpretation (of Gen. 34:1): TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. When the children of Jacob came into the land of Israel, they began to exhibit their strength, their wealth, and their beauty. They exhibited their strength (according to Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, < SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH >, [EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. They exhibited their wealth (according to Gen. 33:17): BUT JACOB JOURNEYED TO SUCCOTH, BUILT A HOUSE FOR HIMSELF, AND MADE STALLS (sukkot) FOR HIS CATTLE. He began opening < cattle > bazaars. (Gk.: katalusis (“resting place” or “inn”). See Gen. R. 79:6; Eccl. R. 10:8:1; Esth. R. 3:7.) And where is it shown concerning their beauty? (In Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT TO SEE AND TO BE SEEN. (Note that the midrash understands the one verb, “see,” in both an active and passive sense. See above, note 59.) (Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < It is > the wicked < who > "see." (Thus in Esth. 3:5:) WHEN HAMAN SAW. (Similarly in Gen. 28:6:) WHEN ESAU SAW. (So also here, in Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR … SAW. David said (in Ps. 69:24:) LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED SO THAT THEY DO NOT SEE.
Our forefather Jacob was 63 when he was blessed. Ishmael died at that time as is written, "Esau saw that Isaac had blessed...Jacob listened to his father...Esau saw [the Canaanite women] were bad [in the eyes of Isaac]...Esau went to Ishmael..."(Genesis 28:9). There seems no need for the verse to state "sister of Nebaioth." What do we learn from the fact that it says "sister of Nebaioth"? We learn that Ishmael died and Nebaioth [Ishmael's firstborn therefore] married off his sister to Esau. Jacob our forefather hid [from Esau] 14 years in the land of Israel and served Eber. Eber died two years after Jacob went to Aram-Naharaim. [Jacob] left and went to Aram-Naharaim and he was found by the well when he was 77 years old and he was in Laban's house for 20 years: 7 before he married any matriarchs, 7 from when he married in the Matriarchs and 6 years after the 11 tribes and Dinah were born. It comes out that all the tribes were born in seven years besides Benjamin. Each and every one each 7 months. He left Aram-Naharaim and came to Succoth and stayed there 18 months as is written "And Jacob went to Succoth" (Genesis 33:17). He left Succoth and went to Bet El and made 6 new encampments close to the place.
And in the morning Jacob and his men arose and they selected a gift for Esau from the choice of the cattle. And this is the number of the cattle which Jacob selected from his flocks and herds for Esau his brother. And he selected four hundred and forty head from among the sheep, and from the camels and asses thirty each, and fifty head of cattle. And he assorted the cattle after its kind, and he divided all into ten droves and put them into the hands of ten of his servants, every drove by itself. And he commanded them saying: Keep ye at a distance from each other, and put a space be twixt drove and drove. And when Esau and those that are with him meet you and ask of you, saying: Who are ye and whither do ye go and whose are those before you? then you shall say unto him: We are the servants of Jacob who cometh to meet Esau in peace; and behold Jacob also cometh behind us, and that which is before us is a present sent from Jacob to Esau his brother. And when they shall say unto you: Why delayeth he, being so far behind you, in coming to meet his brother and to see his face? then ye shall answer: Verily he cometh cheerfully to meet his brother, yet he is behind us for he said: I will appease him with the gift that goeth before me, and afterwards I will see his face; peradventure he will accept it of me. So went the present ahead of Jacob on that day in the hands of his servants, and he himself lodged that night with his company by the banks of the brook Jabbok. And he rose up that night, and took his two wives and his two women-servants and his eleven sons, and passed over the ford Jabbok. And when he had passed over the brook, all belonging to him, Jacob was left alone; and a man met him and wrestled with him until the breaking of the day, and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint as he wrestled with him. And when the morning dawned the man left Jacob, and he blessed him and went his way. And at dawn Jacob passed the brook and he halted upon his thigh. And the sun rose upon him after passing the brook and he reached the place of the cattle and his children. And they went on till mid-day with the present passing on before them. And Jacob lifted up his eyes, and behold Esau was in the distance and with him many men, about four hundred of them, and Jacob was greatly afraid of his brother. And Jacob hastened and divided his children unto his wives and unto their two hand-maids, and Dinah his daughter he concealed in a chest and delivered her into the hands of his servants. And he went ahead of his children and wives to meet his brother, and he bowed down to the ground; seven times he bowed down until he reached his brother. And the Lord caused Jacob to find favor and grace in the eyes of Esau and his men, for the Lord hath hearkened unto Jacob’s prayer.
And the fear and terror of Jacob fell over his brother Esau; for Esau was in great fear of Jacob on account of what the angels of God had done unto him, and Esau’s anger against Jacob became turned into kindness. And when Esau saw Jacob running towards him Esau too ran to meet him and he embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed him; and they wept. And the Lord filled the hearts of the men that came with Esau with fear and kindness, and they also kissed and embraced Jacob. And Eliphaz the son of Esau, with his four brothers, the sons of Esau, wept with Jacob, and kissed and em braced him; for the fear of Jacob had come over them and Esau lifted up his eyes and saw the women and the children of Jacob, following Jacob and bowing down before Esau on their way, and he said: Who are those with thee my brother, are they thy children or thy servants? And Jacob answered: The children which God Whath graciously given thy servant. And while Jacob was speaking with Esau and his men, Esau beheld the entire camp and he asked him: Whence didst thou get all the camp that I met yesterday? And Jacob answered: To find grace in the eyes of my lord, the Lord graciously gave it to thy servant. And when the present came before them Jacob urged Esau saying: Take, I pray thee my blessing that is brought to thee, my lord! But Esau said: What is it good for, my brother? Keep that thou hast unto thyself, for it was my duty to give a gift unto thee, after that I have seen thy face and thou art still alive and in peace. Thus Esau refused to accept the gift, but Jacob pressed him, saying: I beseech thee my lord, if now I have found grace in thy sight then receive my present at my hand; for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I have seen the face of God and thou wast pleased with me. And Esau took the present, and Jacob further gave unto Esau silver, and gold, and bdellium, for he urged him so much that he had to accept. And Esau divided the cattle that was in the camp, giving one-half to the men that came with him, for they came on hire, and the other half to his sons. And the silver and gold and bdellium he delivered into the hands of Eliphaz his oldest son. And Esau said unto Jacob: Let me take our journey with thee and we will go along slowly until thou comest to my place and there we can dwell together. And Jacob answered unto his brother: I should gladly do as my lord speaketh unto me, but my lord knoweth that the children are tender, and the flocks and herds with their young are with me; and if men should overdrive them one day all the flock would die. Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servant, and I will lead on softly according to what the cattle, that goeth before me, and the children be able to endure, until I come unto my lord into Seir. And Esau said: Let me now leave with thee some of the men that are with me, to take care of thee on the road, and to bear thy burden and fatigue. And Jacob said: Why should I find such grace in thy eyes, my lord? Behold I will come unto Seir to dwell with thee together, as thou hast spoken, only pass thou on with thy people, and I shall follow thee. And Jacob said these words unto Esau simply to free himself from Esau and his men, that he might be allowed to go to his father's house, unto the land of Canaan. And Esau listened to the voice of Jacob and he departed with the four hundred men that. were with him to return on their road towards Seir; and Jacob with all belonging to him went on that very day to the extreme boundaries of the land of Canaan, and he remained there for some time.
“And Yaakov traveled to Sukkos and he built for himself a house and for his livestock he made shelters [sukkos] therefore he called the name of the place Sukkos” (Bereishis 33:17). All of Israel’s customs are Torah and it is our custom that as soon as we come home from the synagogue at the conclusion of Yom Kippur we immediately immerse ourselves in the mitzvah of building the sukkah. I have found a fitting explanation for this among the essays of Rabbi Shelomo Molcho, z”l (Sefer HaMefo’ar, p. 168), where he discusses why it is that Israel engages specifically in this mitzvah at the conclusion of Yom Kippur as opposed to any other. His explanation is as follows: The Holy One Blessed is He commanded that on Yom Kippur one goat be offered up to Hashem while a second be sent to Azazel. The Kohein Gadol would first confess all the iniquities and transgressions of Israel over the one that was to be sent to Azazel, as it is stated, “And the goat shall bear upon it all their iniquities” (Vayikra 16:22). Through this Israel achieved tremendous atonement. This is an example of the principle that everything that befell the Patriarchs was a foreshadowing of what was to befall their descendants, for in the ritual of the scapegoat Israel inherited a mitzvah recalling an incident from the time of their forefathers. As it is stated, “And Eisav returned along his way to (the land of) Se’ir” (Bereishis 33:16). Then it states, “And Yaakov traveled to Sukkos” (ibid. 17). In other words, after Eisav, who was a hairy man [ish se’ir], had gone on his way to Se’ir — i.e., to receive his portion in the form of the goat [se’ir] that was sent to Azazel — Yaakov went on to Sukkos — i.e., to engage in the mitzvah of sukkah. In this passage the Torah intimates that we must emulate our ancestor by engaging specifically in the mitzvah of sukkah, rather than any other, after we have sent off the scapegoat on Yom Kippur. This is Rabbi Shelomo Molcho’s explanation and the words of the wise are pleasing.
"Jacob journeyed towards Sukkot;" this is a hint that after the offering of the two he-goats (on the day of Atonement), Israel will observe the מצוה, i.e. holiday of tabernacles, which is symbolic of the סכת שלם, "the hut of completion, peace, fulfillment. This is also the meaning of 33, 18: ויבא יעקב שלם, "Jacob arrived intact."
In a later passage, in writing of Adam’s three sons, far be it from (the writer of the Torah) to say that the righteous Seth made a sacrifice, as was said of Cain and Abel, the (foolish) enthusiasts. (17. Gen. 4:3–5. In Hebrew the term is he-ḥasid. Kaspi uses the term pejoratively below on fol. 143a, he-ḥasid shoṭeh.) In order to benefit the masses, however, it is written that they (sacrificed) to the Lord, and not to God, as it is written, “He that sacrifices unto God, save unto the Lord only, shall be utterly destroyed.” (18. Exod. 22:19.) Later, regarding Noah, who was as righteous as Abel, Job and his friends, the Torah was careful not to write that the Lord commanded Noah to sacrifice to Him, and not to write that he should take many animals into the ark for the purpose of making a sacrifice. Instead (the purpose was) to maintain the species, and Noah made the sacrifices of his own accord, as did Abel and Job. (19. Job 42:1–10.) In any case, Noah’s sacrifice is described as made “to the Lord,” and also (resulting in) “the Lord smelled the sweet savor,” (20. Gen. 8:20–21.) for that is what the masses should believe. Proof of this is provided by the words “for a sweet savor unto the Lord.” (21. Lev. 4:31, 17:6; Num. 15:24, 18:17, et al. He means that “a sweet savor unto the Lord” means that those who sacrifice consider it sweet. In addition it is also “unto the Lord.” Here, the Lord smelled what was to Noah a sweet smell.) For select individuals, however, the writer of the Torah did not write that the three patriarchs sacrificed to the Lord, but wrote only that they made an altar (22. Gen. 13:4, 26:25, 35:7.) and a house (23. Gen. 33:17.) and a pillar. (24. Gen. 28:18.) Generally a structure is erected in commemoration, as is written regarding the Gadites and the Reubenites, (25. Josh. 22:9–24.) and some of the acts of Gideon. (26. Judg. 6:24.) These (structures) remind us that they are to be preferred over making a sacrifice, and the Torah, by omitting to make any mention of sacrifice (by the patriarchs), teaches us that sacrifice is not desirable. Thus neither the patriarchs nor Moses at the altar known as ’Adonai-nissi (27. Exod. 17:15.) offered (sacrifice). When subsequently Moses began to command Israel to make sacrifices, it was commanded to be performed by the young men among them, as it is written, “the young men of the children of Israel.” (28. Exod. 24:5, in Heb. na‘arei benei yisra’el.) Onkelos translated this as zeṭuṭi benei yisra’el, (29. This is not found in our editions of Onkelos, where we have instead buḥrei benei yisra’el. The term zeṭuṭi quoted here is found in both Talmuds. In BT Megillah 9a it is related that the seventy-two sages who translated the Bible at the behest of Ptolemy all substituted the word zeṭuṭi for na‘arei. In JT Ta‘anit 4:2 it is related that three Torahs were discovered (II Chron. 34:15), one of which had substituted zeṭuṭi for na‘arei. Kaspi might have had another version of Onkelos or, more likely, confused Onkelos with the translation mentioned in the Talmud. The Targum Yonatan b. Uziel on Exod. 24:11 has zeṭuṭi in translating ’aṣilei. Cf. M. Jastrow, Dictionary (New York, 1967), s.v. za‘ṭuṭi.) which connotes “youths” in Hebrew. It is clear, for those who can see, that from the way in which sacrifices are described in the Torah, they were (permitted) only by way of necessity, for the reason mentioned by Maimonides. (30. See Guide III:32, of which this entire section is a reflection.) This is certainly true of the description in Jeremiah of child-sacrifice to Baal and Molech, (31. Jer. 7:31, 19:5.) and all the more true of the fact that the writer of the Torah recorded the binding of Isaac, as I wrote in Ṭirat Kesef (32. Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 102–103).) and Maṣref La-Kesef. (33. Maṣref La-Kesef (MK II 62).) If the Lord grant me length of days, I will gather all (these ideas) in the present work. (34. See below chaps. XIV and XVIII. The phrase “length of days” implies that the work was written at the end of his life. On this point, see above p. 131.)
A kabbalistic approach: The three festivals listed here in their proper sequence correspond to the three patriarchs who represented the three attributes of חסד, דין, רחמים, “loving kindness” (undeserved), “Justice,” “Mercy” (allowance being made for man’s inadequacy). Pessach symbolises that on the one hand G’d practiced judgments on the Egyptians when He killed their firstborn, whereas at the same time He extended kindness to us by “passing over” the houses of the Jewish people. [Remember that G’d did not entrust this task to an angel, as angels do not have the latitude to extend this kind of kindness when it is not warranted by some merits. Ed.] Onkelos translates the word ופסח, which we normally translate as “he passed over,” (Exodus 12,23) as ויחוס, “He displayed loving kindness.” This is also reflected in Psalms 136,10: “Who struck Egypt through their first-born, His steadfast love is eternal.” Whereas this plague was judgment meted out to the Egyptians, it was a great act of kindness for the Israelite firstborn. Shavuot corresponds to the attribute of Mercy, an attribute which usually reconciles the opposing demands of the attributes of Chessed and Justice respectively. This is why the sages in Berachot 58 consider the term והתפארת in Chronicles I 29,11 as referring to the giving of the Torah. The Torah was given under the exclusive aegis of the tetragram. Sukkot on the other hand, corresponds to the attribute of Justice. The very word סוכה is interpreted in Megillah 14 as “Holy Spirit” [Avraham was told by G’d to submit to the dictates of Sarah known already as יסכה when introduced in Genesis 11,29. She was covered like a סוכה with Holy Spirit.] When David writes in Psalms 68,18: “the Lord is among them (the myriads of chariots) at Sinai in holiness,” he referred to the difference between סיני בקדש and בקדש סיני respectively. Had the Torah written the latter formulation I would have thought that a place was assigned to the Lord. As it is, it is the reverse. He determines “place,” no one determines a place for Him. He is the “place” of the universe. Even the (whole) universe is not “His place.” The meaning of מקום עולמו is similar to בית עולמו. We find that בית is an allusion to חכמה already in the very first letter ב in the Torah, at the beginning of the Torah. Just as חכמה is known as בית, so סוכה is known as בית (compare Genesis 33,17); in other words סוכה symbolizes חכמה. Solomon reinforces this concept in Proverbs 24,3: “a house is built by wisdom.” The symbolism is extended by our author to include the three walls which the סוכה has to have and which are symbolized by the shape of the letter ב which is closed on three sides. [Although the author sees the festival Sukkot as representing the attribute of Justice, presumably because it follows the activity of that attribute during the early part of the month of Tishrey, he goes out of his way to equate the procedures of building a Sukkah with the emanation חכמה which is only one rung below the highest emanation כתר, and several rungs above that of דין, Justice. Observance of the commandments then signifies that we have successfully contended with that attribute with the conclusion of Yom Kippur. Ed.].
The first time we are told that a patriarch built a house, proves the point: “Jacob travelled to Sukkot. There he built himself a house and made shelters [sukkot] for his livestock. That is why he called the place Sukkot” (Gen. 33:17).
Genesis 33:1-17
Once the Yabbok crisis is past, there is hope for reconciliation of the brothers. Even so, Yaakov exercises caution, behaving like a man who is presenting tribute to a king. The narrative is brought full circle in vv.10 and 11, where “face” is once again highlighted and where Yaakov’s gift is termed a “token-of-blessing.” At last the tension of Yaakov’s early life seems resolved.
Many identify this tel as the northern Succoth, (For a compelling alternative identification of Succoth at Tall al-Khisas, see Burton Macdonald, East of the Jordan: Territories and Sites of the Hebrew Scriptures (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2000), 144.) established by Jacob to the north of the Jabbok River as it emptied into the Jordan after he parted from his brother Esau. In this place, he built himself a home and made booths for his cattle, (Genesis 33:17.) naming the location after the momentous event of establishing his presence in the region immediately after the anxiety-ridden confrontation with his hostile brother. Much later, the judge Gideon crossed the Jordan in pursuit of the kings of Midian and sought aid from people of Succoth; they refused him and were subsequently punished. (Judges 8:4–17.) The place was also referenced as the general area where Hiram of Tyre cast bronze vessels in earthen molds for Solomon’s Temple. (I Kings 7:46 and II Chronicles 4:17.) Indeed, excavations on the tel uncovered ample evidence of a metalworking industry. (David Kennedy and Robert Bewley, Ancient Jordan from the Air (London: The Council for British Research in the Levant, 2004), 101.) To our point, Succoth was gifted by Moses to the tribe of Gad as part of their inheritance. (Joshua 13:27.)
The Gemara continues: And it is written subsequently: “And Jacob journeyed to Succoth, and built himself a house” (Genesis 33:17). Rather than meeting Esau in Seir, Jacob traveled to the nearer location of Succoth. Telling a gentile that one is traveling to a farther destination might cause the gentile to defer his attack due to the assumption that he has a longer period of time to plan and execute it. As a result of the delay, the Jew has a better chance of reaching his true destination safely.
HALAKHAH: “The House of Shammai permit the co-wives to the brothers,” etc. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Yose in the name ofNehorai: The reason of the House of Shammai, “the outside wife of the deceased shall not belong to a strange man (Deut. 25:5. The verse reads לֹא־תִהְיָה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. In the masoretic text, הַחוּצָה is adverbial לֹא־תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר and therefore is stressed on the penultimate syllable. The House of Shammai read an unlikely adjective לֹא־תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. Following masoretic grammar, הַחוּצָה then should be stressed on the last syllable. As E. Y. Kutscher has shown in his study of the Isaiah scroll, one may assume that in the last century of the Jewish state the stress was penultimate irrespective of meaning. Therefore, in Mishnaic times there may not have been an audible difference between the two versions. The House of Shammai would translate: “The deceased man’s wife who is outside [the family of the levir] shall not be to a strange man,” implying that only the widow who already belongs to the levir’s family is free from the obligations of the levirate. The argument is quoted in the Babli, 13b.) ,” the “outer one” should not be another man’s. It turns out that the House of Shammai hold like those Samaritans who perform levirate with the betrothed but remove the married, for they explain “outside” as “the outer one (Having received qiddushin but not yet finally married, she is not yet part of the family. This interpretation avoids any appearance of conflict between Lev. 18:16, declaring relations with the brother’s wife incestuous, and Deut. 25:5, requiring marriage to the brother’s wife. In rabbinic Hebrew, ארוסה “the betrothed one”, is a seldom used synonym of מקודשת “who had received qiddushin”.) .” How do the House of Shammai (The commentators want to replace “House of Shammai” by “Samaritans”, but it was stated before that the House of Shammai accepts the reading of the Samaritans while giving it another interpretation.) confirm “when he has no child (Deut. 25:5. You do not expect a man to have a child before marriage.) ”? Rebbi Jacob the Southerner said before Rebbi Yose, “when he has no child” from the married one, “the outer one shall not belong outside to a strange man. (In this interpretation, the “outside” wife is the woman betrothed, legally a wife, but not married to live in her husband’s family. For them, a woman widowed after marriage is never subject to levirate, only one becoming a widow from betrothal to a childless man. This eliminates any conflict between Deut. 25:5 and Lev. 18:16. The practice of the Samaritans is confirmed in the Babli, Qiddušin 75b–76a.) ” He said to him, will not the Samaritans love you that you confirm their interpretations! Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar stated: I told the learned Samaritans, what did cause you to err? That you did not explain following Rebbi Neḥemiah, since it was stated in the name of Rebbi Neḥemiah: Anything which needs a ל as a prefix but did not get it, we give it a ה at the end, e. g., to the outside חוּצָה, to Se‘ir (Gen. 33:16.) שְׂעִירָה, to Succoth (Gen. 33:17.) סוּכּוֹתָה. They objected to Rebbi Neḥemiah, is it not written: “The wicked shall return to the pit לִשְׁאוֹלָה (Ps. 9:18; one of the two signs of direction is superfluous.) .” Rabba bar Zabda said, to the lowest living space (Greek δίαιτα.) in Sheol.
The Gemara raises an objection: But ultimately, Jacob was in Laban’s house for only twenty years. Why, then, is he faulted for being away from his father for twenty-two years? Rather, he was punished because on his journey back from Aram-naharaim he tarried another two years before returning home to his parents, as it is taught in a baraita: Jacob left Aram-naharaim and came to Sukkot, and spent eighteen months there, as it is stated: “And Jacob journeyed to Sukkot, built himself a house, and made booths [sukkot] for his cattle” (Genesis 33:17). The Gemara understands this verse to mean that first he made booths [Sukkot], to live in during the summer, and then he built a house in the winter, and afterward he again made booths [sukkot] during the next summer, indicating that he must have been there for eighteen months. He then was in Bethel for six months, and he brought offerings, totaling two years in all. In this way, all the various calculations of years are reconciled.
Yaakov traveled to Sukkos and built himself a house, and for his livestock he made shelters. He therefore named the place Sukkos.
And Jakob journeyed to Succoth, and sojourned there the twelve months of the year; and he builded in it a midrasha, and for his flocks he made booths; therefore he called the name of the place Succoth.
| וַיָּבֹא֩ יַעֲקֹ֨ב שָׁלֵ֜ם עִ֣יר שְׁכֶ֗ם אֲשֶׁר֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן בְּבֹא֖וֹ מִפַּדַּ֣ן אֲרָ֑ם וַיִּ֖חַן אֶת־פְּנֵ֥י הָעִֽיר׃ | 18 E R | Jacob arrived safe in the city of Shechem which is in the land of Canaan—having come thus from Paddan-aram—and he encamped before the city. |
This is what our Sages said: “And he graced the city’s countenance” (Genesis 33:18) —one says he struck a coin for them, and one says that he established bathhouses for them (Shabbat 33b). These are one and the same, they do not disagree. This is because Yaakov is the personification of truth, as in (Micah 7:20), “Give truth to Yaakov.” He also corresponds to the Light of the Face. And as soon as he arrived [in Shekhem], faith was rectified.
This is (Genesis 33:18), “Yaakov arrived ShaLeM (whole) in the city of SheKheM”—the concept of “to serve Him SheKheM echad (in unison)” is awakened through ShaLoM (peace). And peace comes through the aspect of Yaakov. He is the radiant countenance, corresponding to: The beauty of Yaakov resembled the beauty of Adam (Bava Metzia 84a). This is synonymous with (Psalms 24:6), “Those who search for Your countenance, Yaakov.”
“And Yaakov Avinu came to … Shchem, … and he graced the faces of the city ….” (Bereshit, 33:18) (Vayichan et p’nei ha’eer is normally translated, “and he camped before the city.”) “The faces of the city” means its honored citizens, and “the faces of the city” at that time were Shchem and Hamor. The term vayichan (meaning “pitched,” but also meaning “graced”) means that their grace was aroused in his sight (he liked them). This relates to what is found in the writings of the holy Ari”zal (Shaar haGilgulim, Ch. 50) that “Shchem was later reincarnated into Zimri ben Salu son of Dinah.” Therefore his soul desired her now also, as it said (Bereshit 34:8), “My son Shchem’s soul desired your daughter.” This means that he did not want to marry with the women of Canaan, only Dinah; and in this he found favor in the sight of Yaakov, for he was somewhat connected to Yaakov Avinu.
"And Yaakov arrived, complete, to Shechem and encamped facing the city" (Genesis 33:18). When Yaakov left Eretz Yisrael, the word ויצא (Vayetze) is used, indicating the loss felt by the place due to the tzadik's departure. Now, upon his return, Yaakov restored a new level of 'chein' (beauty) to the area, as suggested by the word ויחן (encamped), linked to 'chein.' The Midrash interprets the verse from Job 5:19, "He will deliver you from six troubles; in seven, no harm will touch you," as referring to the six days of the week preparing for Shabbat. One must work both physically and spiritually, through prayer, to receive Shabbat peacefully. Similarly, this world is preparation for the world to come. Yaakov's journey out of Eretz Yisrael was a preparation to return peacefully, symbolized by ויחן, which signifies beauty and the perfection he attained upon returning to Eretz Yisrael. Our forefathers' love for Eretz Yisrael, akin to Shabbat, is why we are given Shabbat, and we must guard it, ensuring that "in seven, no harm will touch you."
“Your name will no longer be Yaakov, but Yisrael, for you have fought with beings and people and prevailed” (Bereishis 32:29). These two names, Yaakov and Yisrael, represent the body and the soul. Yaakov represents the body, from wisdom (Yud) to the heel (Eikev), while Yisrael represents the soul, meaning "Li Rosh" (a head for me). A person must perfect the body so the soul's power is reflected, thus becoming "Yisrael." Yaakov's fight with the angel illustrates this. The human soul is greater than an angel's, but an angel's body surpasses a human's, as our bodies are bound to this world. However, Yaakov perfected his body to become a "Chariot" for Hashem, making his body as holy as his soul. Hence, he could fight the angel with his body, which had transcended its physical nature to become spiritual. This transformation is why Yaakov's name changed. His body, once called Yaakov, became spiritual like his soul, now called Yisrael. This is reflected in "And Yaakov came 'Shalem'" (Bereishis 33:18), meaning his body and soul achieved harmony, or Shalom. In each Jew, the body and soul conflict, and Shabbat represents this harmony, offering a taste of the world to come where bodies will be perfected like souls. On Shabbat, this harmony is achieved according to one's weekly preparation, meriting an "extra soul," signifying the soul's power spreading into the body.
The Midrash on the Pasuk “And Yaakov arrived safe (Shalem)...and he encamped before the city” (Bereishis 33:18) explains that he arrived on Erev Shabbos as the sun was setting. This is derived from the word ויחן (encamped), and the word שלם (safe) is connected to שלום (peace), which is associated with Shabbos. The idea is that Yaakov's journey out of Eretz Yisrael represents the work of the weekdays. Through his hard labor, he merited the perfection of Shabbos. This is the meaning of the Pasuk, “He will deliver you from six troubles; in seven, no harm will touch you” (Iyov 5:19). The suffering and challenges during the six days of the week lead to perfection and purity from negativity on Shabbos. Yaakov arriving as the sun set indicates his high spiritual level, akin to Hashem ceasing creation exactly at Shabbos. Yaakov perfected his physicality during the week, allowing him to enter Shabbos precisely at the right moment, symbolizing complete harmony and peace. This is learned from the word שלם, where שלום refers to Shabbos, indicating he arrived just as Shabbos began, similar to Hashem completing creation on the seventh day.
“And Yaakov sent messengers before him” (Genesis 32:4). The question arises: why did Yaakov send messengers ahead, potentially provoking Eisav by displaying his wealth? The answer is that Yaakov intended to draw Eisav out of Eretz Yisrael so that upon Yaakov's arrival, he would be complete, as stated, “And Yaakov arrived whole” (Genesis 33:18). Yaakov himself was not afraid, for upon entering Eretz Yisrael, he reached a high spiritual level, making Eisav powerless against him. However, Yaakov did this for the benefit of future generations, paving the way by confronting Eisav head-on and dealing with him through appeasement, gifts, and battle. This explains why he felt fear, as noted in the Zohar, because he was entering a dangerous situation for the sake of his descendants. To reassure himself, Yaakov recalled Hashem's promise, “I will surely do good to you and make your descendants as numerous as the sand of the sea.” When Yaakov says, “I have become small from all the kindnesses,” he acknowledges that all the salvations, goodness, and truth bestowed upon others come through him, though he felt unworthy. He acted according to Hashem's will because he understood that the world depended on him. By confronting these dangers, Yaakov prepared the path for future generations, ensuring their ability to cope with similar challenges.
The Midrash explains that when “Yaakov arrived שלם (complete) and camped outside the city” (Genesis 33:18), it was Erev Shabbat. After making all necessary preparations, Yaakov drew a new light from the upper worlds, symbolizing Shabbat—a day of rest and a taste of the world to come. His name change from Yaakov to Yisrael reflects the dual names each Jew bears for this world and the world to come. Yaakov achieved the higher name, Yisrael, indicating his spiritual elevation. Yaakov’s battles with Lavan and Eisav were under his first name, representing the physical aspect. Once resolved, he merited Shabbat’s spiritual energy and was called Yisrael. This concept extends to every Jew on Shabbat, where they can experience higher spirituality, encapsulated in “He spreads His Sukkah of Shalom on us.”
They returned complete and intact in body, possessions and Torah. (Shabbat 33b on Genesis 33:18. Cf. Rashi ad loc.) For in the Holy Land, the Rebbe was worthy of attaining a wondrously lofty perception, and his vision knew no bounds.
From " And Yaakov came complete to the town of Shechem etc." until "And Chamor, the father of Shechem came out" - Shechem is apparently the city that is close to Mamre Kiriat Arba, since behold when Yaakov was dwelling in Hevron that is Kiriat Arba his sons were sheparding the sheep in Shechem. And it is logical that there was between them a distance of a day maximum, and that is why Yaakov sends [Yosef] to see how the brothers are faring, and the sheep too, and this was when he is close to where his father was. Despite this, the place where Dina was subjugated was far away from Hevron, where Yitzchak was, and this is a question that remains, since Chazal said that Shechem was a place ready for punishment, since there they subjugated Dina and the tribes were damaged. And from this it appears to me that Shechem was the name of the entire place, and Chamor was the prince of all that land [Abarbanel goes to show where he thinks the connection between Shalem, Shechem and Hevron is]... and the issue with Dina happened in a town named Shalem at the beginning, and it is in a corner of the place called Shechem, and the sons of Yaakov were pasturing the sheep in a different corner, farther away from that area... And it is said that "Yaakov put his tent in front of the city" to explain that there were other reasons for this issue [of Dina] to happen: the first one is that Yaakov pitched [his encampment] close to the city, and because of this Dina went out to see the daughters of the land, and if he had pitched in a place farther away, closer to the place of pasturing and farther from the city, Dina would not have come out and what happened would not have happened. Second reason, Yaakov had bought the piece of land where her tent was pitched from Chamor the father of Shechem, and the scripture teaches this by saying that at first he set his tent on the field, and then after the owners complained, he bought that piece of the field, since he did not want to rent it. And since he purchased it from the hand of Chamor, the prince of the land, it makes sense that he paid good money for it, since a prince of the land will not sell parts of his estate to a stranger unless he gave a princely sum. And he did not buy it from the hand of the sons of Chamor, his advanced age prevented him himself to go, but his sons went to make the sale, and this is why they went to the tents of Yaakov, and saw Dina there, and there is no doubt that they spoke with her and the soul of Shechem desired her, and this too was the reason of the continuation [of what happened] when she went out to see the daughters of the land. And this answers the second question. And Ibn Ezra already explained that Yaakov stayed in this city for many years, since Dina was seven years old when she arrived there, and Shimon and Levi were lads. Since Yaakov had entered the holy land, it was for this reason that he bought a piece of the field and became property owner of holy land, and he acquired an altar to praise G-d, that in His great compassion and love brought him to His land and saved him from Lavan... [Abarbanel goes into a discussion on the nature of Judaism, the name E-l and more] And maybe even this altar was a reason for what happened, since once it was ready all his children came to eat from the sacrifices and Shechem and all the town came to see the inauguration of the altar, and saw Dina there, and desired her, and what happened happened once she went out to see the daughters of the land - and this explains the third question. The Torah does not bring the phrase "and Dina came out" to criticize Dina as a "self-exposing daughter of a self-exposer; like mother, like daughter" as Rashi z"l has. Leah was a modest woman, to the point that Yaakov did not see anything until the moment he came to her. And the "Leah went out" really means that she went out just to the door of her tent and she went out joyfully and with holy intent to greet her husband Yaakov and from that came the birth of Yissachar, the tribe of modest Torah teachers. Also, one cannot say that she is called "daughter of Leah" as a criticism of her nature being of "self-exposing", since Leah was taught to stay in the tents, and Rachel was the one out with the sheep. And from Yaakov himself was known to be a modest person, hiding in the tents of scholars, and if he was modest like this, all the more his daughter. The intent wasnot for anything bad, as the text says "daughters of the town" and not sons of the town. Dina had no sisters, being the only maiden in the house and so she went out to see how the girls of the town dressed and used jewelry, and this explains our fourth question. And there is no doubt that she did not went out by herself, without the company of a man or a woman, and this is implied, just as the scripture has regarding Moses, that he went out to meet his father-in-law, and obviously he did not go alone. The text describes that Shechem was "the son of Chamor the Hivite, the prince of the land" to make sure that we understand that being the prince of the land he used force, and had no fear of those who were with Dinah or of the sons of Yaakov. And the text goes on to say, like Rashi explains, that he lay with her in the usual fashion and afflicted her in the unusual fashion, and how can one describe his doing such a disgrace. And Ibn Ezra explains that her being a virgin, and he doing three things - seizing her by force while she was passing through the market, forcing her in the natural way and in the unnatural way.And even if you know about the second thing, why is the text bringing the first? Isn't it already included? This is to teach that even if he wanted to have relations with her due to his wanting her as a wife, one cannot do this by force. The second comes to teach that he destroyed her virginity. And why is it explaining that he afflicted her? To explain that she did not go by her own will, but he hoped that it would being by her being forced and end by her wanting it.[...]
ויבא יעשב שלם, “Yaakov arrived intact at Shalem; he arrived at a town named Shalem, a suburb of Sh’chem, named after the ruler of that region. We find similar examples of capitals being identified with the names of their respective rulers, such as in Numbers 21,26, Sichon and Cheshbon. A different interpretation: The place called Shalem was actually the city Sh’chem. As long as Yaakov had not suffered the indignity of Dinah’s rape, his return to the land of Canaan, had been shalem, perfect, without incident. The “Shalem” mentioned here is not the same as the one we have heard about in Genesis 14, i.e. Jerusalem, over which Malki Tzedek was king, because we never found that Sh’chem ruled over Jerusalem.
ויחן את פני העיר, “he encamped next to the city.” One reason was that he had too many possessions to be absorbed inside the city, and he did not feel comfortable about mingling with the inhabitants of that city.
AND JACOB CAME IN PEACE. Shalem (peace) is an adjective. (Shalem can be taken to be the name of a place, Salem. Hence I.E.’s comment.) The meaning of our clause is, Jacob came in peace to Shechem; i.e., no misfortune befell him on the way. Scripture notes this because it is about to tell of what happened to Dinah. (That is why Scripture notes that up to now no misfortune befell him.)
ויבא יעקב שלם, Jacob arrived intact. We need to examine the meaning of the word שלם in this context. The Talmud Shabbat 33 provides several homiletical explanations. We also have to know why the Torah has to mention the place where Jacob came from, i.e. Padan Aram. We all know that Jacob had been in Padan Aram. Rashi comments: כאדם האומר לחבירו יצא פלוני מבין שיני אריות ובא שלם, "it is just like a person who reports that someone had escaped from between the teeth of lions without suffering any harm." The problem with this commentary is that the Torah told us something we knew from previous accounts.
We feel that שלם means what we said earlier that Jacob's possessions were the same as when he set out from Padan Aram. G'd replenished the gift he had given to Esau so that he did not experience any loss. This then was the meaning of the blessing כל which Jacob had in mind when he described himself as having "כל."
ויבא יעקב שלם, “Yaakov arrived whole.” According to the plain meaning of the text the Torah tells us that Yaakov arrived at the border of the land of Canaan, a place called Salem. According to Onkelos and Rashi the word שלם is not the name of a town but describes a condition in which Yaakov arrived at Shechem. They say that Yaakov was whole both in spirit and in body and with all his possessions intact when he arrived in the land of Canaan. This view is based on Shabbat 33. Dinah left her father’s house while they resided at (near) Shechem. This is where she was raped. When the Torah writes in verse 19 that Yaakov acquired a plot of land from the people of Chamor (the inhabitants of Shechem) upon which he pitched his tent, this showed that he was unwilling to be a mere tourist in the neighbourhood, but wanted to establish rights of citizenship in that area. Although Yaakov had not planned it, it so happened that in the future when the Jewish people conquered the land under the leadership of Joshua, this was the first part of the country they took possession of even before they dispossessed the local inhabitants. Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra comments that the words: “he acquired a plot of land,” teach us that the land of Israel is so beloved that anyone who owns a piece of it is assured of his place in the hereafter.
ויבא יעקב שלם, meaning that he had not incurred any damage or loss as a result of his encounter with Esau. He had not suffered any deterioration during his entire journey from Aram Naharayim. The matter is underlined to show that now that he had returned to the land of Canaan, his homeland, he suffered the indignity of his daughter Dinah being raped. Seeing that this happened at Shechem, the Torah mentions that town instead of telling us that he was 100% o.k. until he came to Sukkot and built himself a house. The Midrash understands the word שלם as a state of being, i.e. similar to when he had said יש לי כל,“I am blessed with everything,” in response to Esau having said יש לי רוב. “I have lots.”
את פני העיר; in front of the town. The expression is parallel to Proverbs 17,24 את פני מבין חכמה, “wisdom is in front of (available) any discerning person.” Perhaps the town was small so that there was not enough room to accommodate Yaakov whose entourage consisted of two camps. His presence inside the town might have cramped their quarters. He therefore erected his tent outside the borders of the town on the piece of land he had bought. According to our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 79,6 the words ויחן את פני העיר mean that seeing he arrived on Friday evening shortly before the onset of the Sabbath, he made an Eiruv Techumim, delineating the area he could walk within freely on the Sabbath. We would learn from here that Yaakov observed the Sabbath legislation down to Rabbinic decrees before such a legislation was given to his descendants at Mount Sinai.
AND JACOB CAME IN PEACE … FROM PADDAN-ARAM. [This is stated here in the same manner] as a person says to his friend, “That man there has come from between the teeth of the lions and has arrived unhurt.” Similarly here, And Jacob came in peace, i.e., from Laban and from Esau. This is the language of Rashi. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained that the sense of the verse is that Jacob arrived in peace from his lengthy journey and nothing happened to him, as Scripture now begins to narrate the event of Dinah. In my opinion Scripture speaks thus since for the length of his sojourn in Succoth (Verse 17 here.) he was fearful of Esau. Succoth — if it be the one mentioned in the book of Joshua (Joshua 13:27.) — was east of the Jordan, in the kingdom of Sihon, and if it be another city by that name, it was nearer to Se’ir. Thus until he entered the land of Canaan Jacob did not feel safe, for only then did he know that Esau would not touch him for his father was nearby, or because the people of the land would help him as his father was a prince of G-d in their midst, or because the merit of having entered the land would save him. And therefore, Scripture now said that he came in peace into the land of his father’s sojourning (Further, 37:1. ) since G-d delivered him in his travels out of the hand of all his enemies. (II Samuel 22:1.) And the Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah (78:20.) that during all these months that our father Jacob stayed in Succoth he honored Esau with that present enumerated above (32:14-15.) by Scripture for he was afraid of him there, and monthly or annually he would send him a comparable present.
AND HE ENCAMPED BEFORE THE CITY. He did not wish to be a transient lodger in the city, but rather he wished that his inaugural entrance into the land should be into his own property. Therefore he encamped in the field and bought a place for the purpose of taking possession of the land. This action constituted a hint that this place will be conquered by him first (Further, 34:28.) before the dwellers of the land would be driven from before his seed, just as I have explained in the case of Abraham. (Above, 12:6.) And our Rabbis have said: (Bereshith Rabbah 79:7.) “He arrived on Friday close to sundown [and was therefore compelled to encamp before the city as there was no time left to enter the city], and he set Sabbath limits [while it was yet day.” The verse thus teaches us that Jacob observed the Sabbath before it was declared on Sinai]. Now according to this opinion of the Rabbis the act of Jacob encamping there first was unintentional. However, in any case, the event hinted to the future as we have said. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra however said that Scripture mentions this in order to inform us that there is great excellence to the Land of Israel, and he who owns a part thereof has it considered as a portion in the World to Come.
ויבא יעקב שלם, to the city named Shalem. The construction is similar to ותבאנה בית לחם, “they arrived at Bet Lechem.” (Ruth 1,19)
עיר שכם, the city of Shechem (who subsequently raped Dinah) The description parallels Numbers 21,26 where Cheshbon is described as the city of Sichon, King of the Emorites. Anyone who explains Shechem as being the name of the city errs. We do not find anywhere that a city is described in such terms, i.e. as עיר ציון, or as עיר ירושלים. Invariably such cities are described with the appropriate definitive article ה i.e. as the word העיר following the name of the city in question. Even assuming that the city under discussion was Shechem, the town may have been renamed in commemoration of the heroism displayed by the sons of Yaakov. We know that the town Luz was renamed Bet El by Yaakov. (28,19) We find the same construction in Joshua 19,7 when the Danites renamed a city “Dan” to honour their tribal father and the acts of heroism by the soldiers of the tribe in capturing the city. Already the first builder of a city, Kayin, is described in Genesis 4,14 as ויקרא שם העיר כשם בנו חנוך, “he named the city in accordance with the name of his son Enoch.” Even the sages of the Midrash who understand the word שלם as an attribute, adjective, describing Yaakov at that point as “whole” in body, spirit, and material wealth, did not catch the plain meaning of the text if that was their intention. It is simply not the style of the Scriptures to express itself in such terms. There is no need for this. Did the Torah have to tell us that Yaakov’s wealth was not impaired as a result of the lavish gift he sent to Esau?
שלם SAFELY (literally, whole, perfect, unimpaired) — unimpaired in body (health) because he was cured of his lameness; whole as regards his possessions for he was not short of anything even though he had given that gift (for his remaining cattle soon bore other young; cf. Rashi on Genesis 30:43); and perfect in his knowledge of the Torah for whilst he was in Laban’s house he had not forgotten what he had before learned (Shabbat 33b).
עיר שכם — the word עיר is equivalent to לעיר to the city of. Similarly we have (Ruth 1:19) “until they came בית לחם” — “to Bethlehem".
בבאו מפדן ארם WHEN HE CAME FROM PADAN-ARAM — This is stated here in the same way as a person says to his neighbour, “that man there has come from between the teeth of the lion and has returned unhurt”. Similarly here: he came whole from Padan-aram — from Laban and from Esau who had come to attack him on his journey.
שלם, völlig harmonischer, ungeschmälerter Ganzheit, nicht nur in materieller, sondern auch vor allem in sittlicher Beziehung mit Hinblick auf die sittlichen Gefahren, denen ein Mensch in dem notwendigsten Streben zur Erlangung materieller Selbständigkeit ausgesetzt ist. (Siehe zu Kap. 28, 20.) שם ist der Ausdruck der vollendeten Harmonie, insbesondere der vollkommenen Übereinstimmung des Äußern mit dem Innern. Daher verwandt mit צלם. Alle Erscheinungsformen der Dinge sind nicht bloß ein Äußeres, sondern sind vielmehr der höchste adäquate Ausdruck, in welchem sich das innere Wesen ausprägt: alle schöpferische Form ist die Überwältigung des äußeren Stoffes zur höchsten Vollkommenheit nach den von der Natur des Wesens gegebenen Bedingungen. Alle Vollkommenheit ist die harmonische Verwirklichung der Idee. Aller wahrhafter, des Namens שלום würdiger Friede ist, auch fürs bürgerliche Leben, nicht eine nach äußerer Schablone bewirkte, sondern nur von innen heraus dem Wesen und der Idee des bürgerlichen Lebens harmonisch gestaltete Ordnung der Dinge.
ויבא יעקב שלם עיר שכם, he reached the land of Israel unharmed. This was the fulfillment of the condition he had set in his vow in 28,21 ושבתי בשלום אל בית אבי, “and I will return in peace to the house of my father.” He did not wait until he had physically returned to the house of his father.
בבאו מפדן ארם, while he was still on the way to his father’s house. He began to fulfill the terms of his vow by building an altar This was in accordance with his promises והיה ה' לי לאלוקים. (the last words of his vow).
Safe in body, for he was healed from his lameness. [Rashi knows this] because it is written שלם, without specifying [in which way he was whole], implying he was whole in all ways. And [aside from lameness,] what is written in this vein? Before, it said he had property. And now it says, “He bought the part of the field,” implying he [still] had money. And whole in his Torah [knowledge] is learned from, “When he came from Padan Aram.” Why was this [phrase written]? To teach that even though he came from Padan Aram, which is utterly ignorant of Torah, he did not forget what he had learned. (Maharshal)
Jacob came unharmed and without losses to the city of Shekhem, which is in the land of Canaan, upon his arrival from Padan Aram. He intended to make Shekhem his permanent residence. And he encamped before the city; not inside, but close enough to form a relationship with the local residents.
ויבא יעקב שלם, “Yaakov arrived completely intact, etc.;” according to some commentators the word “Shalem” is the name of a place from which Yaakov proceeded to the city of Shechem, as we are told later that the men there were שלמים אתנו, the reference being to Yaakov and his sons as residing in “Shalem which is near us.” Ibn Ezra writes that the word שלם is an adjective, and describes Yaakov arriving there without mishap. The Torah mentions this as a prelude to the first major upset since he left Lavan, the rape of Dinah. Nachmanides writes that it would be too uncharacteristic for the Torah to report that Yaakov arrived somewhere without mishap, and that Shalem is another name for the city of Shechem. As long as he had remained in Sukkot, he was constantly afraid of Esau and his heart was not at peace. Once he had arrived in the land of Canaan he knew that he would shortly be reunited with his father and that he could enlist the help of his father or that the local people would help him out of respect for his father, and that the very merit of being back in the land of Israel, the Holy Land, would work in his favour. The G’d Who had protected him against all the dangers he had faced during his long journey home, would certainly continue to help while he was on the soil of Eretz Yisrael.
ויחן את פני העיר. “He encamped facing the city.” He had stayed there a while and acquired property, fields, vineyards, etc. He did not want to remain a guest anywhere again. His actions served to remind his descendants in the future that they should first conquer this city before moving on to dispossess the Canaanites of their land. Ibn Ezra explains that the whole verse was written to compliment the land of Israel, and to tell us that anyone owning property in the Land of Israel is as if he had already acquired a share in the world to come.
“Jacob arrived safe in the city of Shechem” [33:18]. Jacob came complete with his Torah that he had not forgotten in Laban’s house. He was also complete with his money. Even though he had given presents to Esau, yet he still had enough. He was whole in his body, even though the angel had displaced his hip; he was again healed when he came to the city of Shechem. (Rashi, Genesis, 33:18.)
Rabbi Ishmael the son of Rabbi Yosi asked those who lived in Babylonia, by what did they earn the right to call their living there “life.” (I.e., a successful life, since a life of sorrow cannot really be called “life.”) They replied, “by right of the Torah.” And for those in the land of Israel, by right of the tithes. And those outside of the Land, by what right? Because they honor the Sabbaths and the holidays. Rabbi Yohanan in the name of Rabbi Yosi b. Halafta said, “Abraham our father, about whom is not written that he observed the Sabbath, inherited the world within measurable limits, as it is said, ‘Up, walk about the land through its length and breadth.’ (Gen 13:17.) But Jacob, about whom it iswritten that he observed Shabbat, as it is said, ‘and he encamped in the city,’ he entered at morning twilight, and fixed boundaries while it was still day, (Gen 33:18. In other words, according to the midrash, Jacob made an eruv that allowed him to carry things in the city on Shabbat.) inherited the world without measurable limits, as it is said, ‘You shall spread out to the west and to the east, etc.’ (Gen 28:14.) Another interpretation: “God blessed the seventh day and declared it holy,” (Gen 2:3.) He blessed it by exempting it from being postponed. R. Samuel b. Nahmani said, ‘A festival is postponed; Shabbat is not postponed. (That is, unlike other holidays, which occasionally may be postponed a day, such as the first day of Rosh Hashanah so that it won’t fall on a Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday, which would create problems later on in the calendar. Shabbat always falls on the seventh day of the week (Chavel).) Another interpretation: He blessed it with a partner.
With regard to every man of Israel who was destined by Heaven to save Israel and gather in the exiles, Rabbi Eliyahu, the Vilna Gaon, knew well where his name was hinted at in the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings, each man according to his flag and the signs of his forefathers. All the Gaon’s knowledge which came to him through his holy spirit, are based on holy hints in the Bible and in the works of our Sages, in both what is revealed and what is concealed. Regarding himself, the Gaon said that his name is hinted at in the words: “‘a perfect and just stone [weight]” (this is at the end of parshat “Ki Tetzeh”). The words are a shortened form of (the name of the Gaon’s father was ! ). The following verse speaks of destroying Amalek, and is immediately followed by the verse:“when you come to the land, ” which refers to the ingathering of the exiles. This verse is comparable to “when you come to the land, you will plant, ” which means you must fulfill the commandments that depend on living in Eretz Israel. For the ingathering of the exiles depends on the blessings following the fulfillment of both verses according to our Sages in the Talmud (Megillah 17b; and Sanhedrin 98a) regarding the revealed end, and this was the Gaon’s great aspiration. Even in the haftarah [portion from the Prophets or Writings which is read weekly following the reading of the parshah]of parshat “Ki Tetzeh, ” the Gaon found his own name and his designation in the verse: “with abundant mercy I will gather you” which equals ! [606]. He also found that the verse “His tabernacle is in Shalem, and his dwelling in Zion” equals his own name plus his father’s and grandfather’s names ! [1200] {the word as written out in full in the text, and so counted accordingly). This means that Jacob is not whole except in Eretz Israel. As the verse states: [ Gen. 33:18] Jacob came to Shalem [double entendre: name of place, and meaning of wholeness]. Shalem is another name for Succota. The Vilna Gaon deemed his great mission to be connected with 999 in the light of Mashiach ben Yosef, as revealed by 999 in Yesod, that is 999 which is the highest number connected with Mashiach ben Yosef. For the Gaon considered that number hinted at in his name (that is, in his personal name as well as those of his forebears to four generations including his great-grandfather, R’ Elya the Hasid [' ' '] which altogether equal 999 in gematria). Other hints regarding his mission appear in the verses: [606, like ! ] ‘a time to gather, ’ and according to our Sages [606] ‘we raise to a holy level, ’ as well as in the verse: [479, like ] [Ps. 102:15] ‘they have favored her dirt.’ Many other hints were found by the Gaon in the Bible regarding his holy mission at the time of the beginning of the Redemption. The number of holy hints add up to [52]. Evey hint was great and holy in his eyes like the Urim v’Tumim.As our Sages said “the name causes, ” meaning that one’s mission from Heaven is revealed by his name.
When the tabernacle is completed with its ‘thigh’ (yerekh) , it is stated of Jacob: (Gen. 33:18) And Jacob arrived complete... And Jacob, specifically, is the image of the Middle Pillar, from the outside aspect. And behold Moses was there, but he was from the inside aspect – this one of the body, this one of the soul. And therefore, the two thighs of the Middle Pillar are complete, they are Netzaḥ and Hod.
At that time, when He is joined with Her, (Gen. 33:18) And Jacob arrived complete... At that time: the tabernacle (SUKaH) will be complete, composed of K-U (כ־ו) (26) H-S (ה־ס) (65) : Y-A-Q-D-V-N-Q-Y.
And of the Festival of Tabernacles: (Gen. 33:18) And Jacob came complete... – complete in his body, complete in his wealth (BT Shabbat 33b) – and he is surrounded by seven clouds of glory, like at first, when Israel went out of Egypt, to fulfil: (Mic. 7:15) Like the days when you went out of Egypt... etc.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥalafta: Abraham, in whose regard observance of Shabbat is not mentioned, inherited the world with a limited measure, as it is stated: “Arise, walk about in the land to its length and to its breadth, [as to you I will give it]” (Genesis 13:17). But Jacob, in whose regard observance of Shabbat is mentioned, as it is stated: “He encamped before the city” (Genesis 33:18) – he entered with the dimming of the sun and established Shabbat boundaries [for his camp] while it was still day – [he] inherited the world with no limited measure, as it is stated: “Your descendants will be as the dust of the earth, [and you shall spread out to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south]” (Genesis 28:14).
“Jacob arrived intact to the city of Shekhem, which is in the land of Canaan, upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and he encamped before the city” (Genesis 33:18). “Jacob arrived intact.” “In six troubles He will deliver you, and in seven, no harm will touch you” (Job 5:19); if they are six, I will withstand them, if they are seven, I will withstand them. “In famine, He redeems you from death” (Job 5:20) – “For these two years the famine is in the midst of the land” (Genesis 45:6). “And in war, from the sword” (Job 5:20) – “It is in my power to do you harm” (Genesis 31:29). “From the scourge of the tongue you will be hidden” (Job 5:21) – Rav Aḥa said: Evil speech is so egregious that the One who created it created a place in which it could be hidden. “And you will not fear pillage when it comes” (Job 5:21) – this is Esau and his chieftains. “At pillage and hunger you will laugh” (Job 5:22) – this is Laban, who came hungry for his [Jacob’s] wealth, to rob him. “For your covenant will be with the rocks of the field…” (Job 5:23) – “he took one of the stones from the place, and placed it beneath his head” (Genesis 28:11). “You will know that your tent is at peace” (Job 5:24) – the incident of Reuben and Bilha, (See Genesis 35:22.) the incident (See Genesis 38:1–30.) of Judah and Tamar. (See Sifrei Devarim ch. 31 which states that God told Jacob that Reuben had repented. In the case of Judah and Tamar, it is explicit in the verse that Judah admitted that he was at fault. Thus, despite the falls, Jacob's tent remained at peace (see the Peirush Maharzu on the midrash here).) “When you visit your abode, you will not be lacking” (Job 5:24) – our patriarch Jacob was eighty-four years old and had never seen a drop of seminal emission. (Even unintentionally.) “You shall know also that your descendants will be many, and your offspring like the grass of the earth” (Job 5:25) – Rabbi Yudan said: Our patriarch Jacob did not pass from the world until he saw six hundred thousand of his sons’ descendants. “You will come to the grave at the right time [bakelaḥ], like a grain pile at its time” (Job 5:26). Rabbi Yitzḥak and the Rabbis, Rabbi Yitzḥak said: You will come moist [laḥ] (This means full of vitality.) to your grave. The Rabbis say: You will come complete [bekhola] to the grave, full, lacking nothing, as it is stated: “Jacob arrived intact.”
“Jacob arrived intact.” “A song of ascents. Let Israel (This is expounded as a reference to Jacob, whose name was also Israel.) now say: From my youth, they have greatly afflicted me” (Psalms 129:1) – the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘And did they overcome you?’ He said to Him: “Yet they did not prevail against me” (Psalms 129:2) – “Jacob arrived intact.” “Many evils may afflict a righteous man…” (Psalms 34:20). “Many evils” – this is Esau and his chieftains; “a righteous man” – this is Jacob. “But the Lord delivers him from them all” (Psalms 34:20) – “Jacob arrived intact.” “The Lord will guard your going and your coming, from now until eternity” (Psalms 121:8). “Will guard your going [tzetekha]” – “Jacob departed [vayetze] from Beersheba” (Genesis 28:10); “And your coming [uvo’ekha]” – “Jacob arrived [vayavo] intact.”
“If you are pure and upright…He will restore the abode of your righteousness” (Job 8:6). “If you are pure and upright” – “if you were” is not written here, but rather, “you are.” But in the past, he was not a righteous man. “He will rouse Himself for you” (Job 8:6) – the Holy One blessed be He is destined to be roused in your regard, and reward you for all the acts of righteousness that you performed. Because it is written: “But Jacob was a simple man, abiding in tents” (Genesis 25:27); therefore: “Jacob arrived intact.” Rabbi Berekhya began: “You will decree, and He will fulfill it for you, and light will shine upon your ways” (Job 22:28). “You will decree, and He will fulfill it for you” – this is Jacob. “And light will shine upon your ways” – light will shine upon your two journeys. (The journey to Haran, and the journey back.) Because it is written: “If God will be with me…” (Genesis 28:20); “and behold I am with you, and will keep you” (Genesis 28:15): “and I return to my father’s house in peace” (Genesis 28:21), and it is written: “Jacob arrived intact.”
“Jacob arrived intact.” It is written: “Those who sow in tears, reap with joyous song” (Psalms 126:5). “Those who sow in tears” – this is our patriarch Jacob, who sowed the blessings in tears: “Perhaps my father will feel me” (Genesis 27:12). “Reap with joyous song” – “God will give you from the dew of the heavens and from the fat of the earth” (Genesis 27:28). “Though he walks weeping” (Psalms 126:6) – “he raised his voice and wept” (Genesis 29:11). “Bearing his sack of seed” (Psalms 126:6) – as he is drawn to the place that he is destined to procreate from there, as it is written: “Take a wife for you from there” (Genesis 28:2), “Isaac sent Jacob and he went to Padan Aram; to Laban, son of Betuel” (Genesis 28:5). “He returns in joyous song, bearing his sheaves [alumotav]” (Psalms 126:6) – he came bearing young men [uleimin] and young women [ve’uleimita].
“Jacob arrived intact” – intact in his body. Because it is written: “He was limping because of his hip” (Genesis 32:32); nevertheless, intact in his body. Intact in his children; because it is written in his regard: “If Esau will come upon the one camp, and smite it, the remaining camp will survive” (Genesis 32:9); nevertheless, here, intact in his children. Intact in his wealth; although, Rabbi Avun said in the name of Rav Aḥa: Our patriarch Jacob would give Esau that same gift (See Genesis 32:14–16.) for nine years; nevertheless, here, intact in his wealth. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Intact in his studies, but Joseph forgot, as it is stated: “As God has made me forget all my toil” (Genesis 41:51). Elsewhere it says: “The toiling soul toils for itself” (Proverbs 16:26). (The toil of the soul is Torah study.)
“And he encamped [vayiḥan] before the city” – he graced [ḥanan] the leadership of the city, he began sending them gifts. Another matter, “and he encamped [vayiḥan] before the city” – he began establishing markets and selling at low prices. That is what they say, that a person must show gratitude to a place from which he benefits. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai and Rabbi Elazar his son were hiding in a cave for thirteen years during the days of persecution. They would eat withered carobs until they broke out in sores. After thirteen years, he [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai] emerged and sat at the cave entrance. He saw a certain hunter standing and hunting birds. When Rabbi Shimon would hear a Divine Voice from Heaven: ‘Freedom, freedom,’ it would escape. But when he would hear a Divine Voice saying: ‘Killing,’ it would be hunted and trapped. He said: ‘Were it not for Heaven, a bird would not be hunted; the soul of a person, all the more so.’ He went out and found that matters were calm, and that the edict (The edict that Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai should be killed.) had been abrogated. They came and bathed in that heated bathhouse in Tiberias. His son said to him: ‘Tiberias has afforded us so much benefit, and we are not purifying it from the dead?’ (There were areas of Tiberias in which priests could not go because there unidentified graves there. Purifying Tiberias would allow the priests to go to those places.) He said: ‘We must perform an act of good just as our ancestors would, as they would establish markets and sell at low prices.’ He said: ‘We need to purify Tiberias.’ What did he do? He took a mandrake. He would cut the mandrake, cast the cuttings, and scatter them in the street. Every place where there was a corpse, it would rise, and they would move it and take it out of the city. And every place where there was no impurity, the mandrake would remain, and it would indicate which was a place of purity and which was a place of impurity until the time that they purified it from all the corpses. A certain Samaritan ignoramus saw him and said: ‘Will I not go and mock this Jewish elder?’ Some say it was in the wicker basket market, and some said it was the sack market. He took a corpse and concealed it in one of the streets that had been purified. In the morning, he went and said to them: ‘You said that ben Yoḥai had purified Tiberias. Come and see this corpse.’ Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai saw through the Divine spirit that he placed it there. (That the Samaritan had placed the corpse there.) He said: ‘I decree that the one who is above shall descend, and the one who is below shall ascend,’ and so it was. (The Samaritan who was above died and descended to the grave, and the corpse that he had buried came to life and rose from the grave.) He (Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai.) ascended and sat in his house. He passed by the Tower of Colors and heard the voice of Nakai the scribe. He said: ‘Did you not say that bar Yoḥai purified Tiberias? But they say that they found a corpse.’ He said: (Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai.) ‘Let him come to me, if I do not have at my disposal halakhot as numerous as the hair on my head regarding Tiberias, that it is pure, with the exception of this-and-that place. You were not with us in the quorum when it was purified. You breached the fence of the Sages, and in your regard it is written: “One who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him”’ (Ecclesiastes 10:8). He [Nakai the scribe] immediately became a pile of bones. He [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai] passed in the Beit Nekofa Valley. He saw a person standing and gathering the sefichin (Vegetables which grow during the Sabbatical year are called "sefichin." It is forbidden to eat sefichin.) of the Sabbatical year. He said to him: ‘Is this not the sefichin of the Sabbatical year?’ He said to him: ‘But is it not you who permitted it? Did we not learn: Rabbi Shimon says: All the sefichin are permitted except for the sefichin of cabbage, as there is nothing like it in the vegetables of the field.’ (Mishna Shvi'it 9:1.) He said to him: ‘But do my colleagues not disagree with me? You breached the fence of the Sages, and “one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him.”’ And so it was for him. Another matter, “and he encamped before the city” – he entered on Friday near sunset, while it was still day, and established Shabbat boundaries while it was still day. That is to say: Jacob observed Shabbat before it was given.
Our Rabbis taught: "There are three sorts of dropsy: thick swelling of flesh, resulting from sin; round and smooth [filled with water] due to hunger; and swelling [with a feeble appearance of the body] due to sorcery." Samuel the junior suffered [with dropsy]; he said: "Sovereign of the universe! Who can determine its cause? [And I may be judged wrongly]." Whereupon he became well. Abaye was afflicted with it, so Raba said to him: "I know perfectly well that Nachmeini does not eat sufficiently [and hunger is its cause]." Raba himself [also] suffered with it. Has not Raba said: "More numerous are those killed by the pot (by delay of discharge) than are those killed by starvation." [Hence it shows that with Raba it was caused by neither hunger nor the pot for he surely must have taken warning against it.] It is different with Raba because he was compelled to delay easing himself when he was lecturing and was not able to leave. Our Rabbis taught: "There are four signs [which disclose secrets]: Dropsy is a sign of sin; Jaundice is a sign of gratuitous hatred; Poverty is a sign of pride, and Croup is a sign of slander." Our Rabbis taught: "Croup comes upon the world as punishment (Ib. b.) for the sin of not giving tithes." R. Elazar the son of R. Jose says: "It comes as punishment for slander." Raba, and according to others, R. Joshua b. Levi, said: "What is the Biblical passage [that proves this]? But the king shall rejoice in God: everyone that sweareth by Him, shall be stopped (Ps. 63, 12). The following question was asked by the scholars: "Does R. Elazar the son of R. Jose intend to say Only for slander? [differing with his contemporary on the whole subject] or does he merely add slander to the previous one?" Come and listen to the following: When our Rabbi entered the academy of Jabnai, they found R. Juda, R. Elazar the son of R. Jose and R. Simon there. The following question was asked in their presence: "Why does this sickness (croup) begin with the bowels and end with the mouth?" Whereupon R. Juda the son of Elaye the chief speaker in every instance, answered and said: "Although the kidneys are the seat of deliberation and the heart understands and the tongue forms the sentence, nevertheless the mouth finishes (makes it irrevocable)." R. Elazar, the son of R. Jose answered, and said: "Because they eat unclean things [committed by the mouth]." How can we imagine that croup is the punishment for eating unclean things? We must therefore say: "Because they eat unprepared things [not having given the tithes thereof]." R. Simon answered and said: "For the sin of neglecting the study of the Torah." The Rabbis then said to him: "Women [who die of croup] prove the contrary." "Because," said R. Simon, "they cause their husbands [to neglect the Torah]." "Gentiles who die from it disprove your opinion." "Because they cause Israel [to neglect the study of the Torah]." "Infants who die of croup will prove the contrary." "Infants die of it because they interrupt their fathers [while studying the Torah]." They finally asked him: "Children attending school [and having no time to interrupt their fathers] who died of croup will prove the contrary to your opinion." "Such cases," replied R. Simon, "are as R. Gurion said; for R. Gurion, and according to others, R. Joseph b. Shemaye, said: 'As long as there are righteous people in a generation, they are seized for [the sin of] their generation; but if there are no righteous people then the children are seized for [the sin of] their generation.'" R. Isaac b. Zeira, and according to others, R. Simon b. Nezira, said: "What is the Biblical passage [that explains it]?" If thou knowest this not, O thou fairest of women, go but forth in the footsteps of the flock and feed thy kids around the shepherd's dwellings (Songs 1, 8.) And we are told that it means the kids that are pawned for the sins of the shepherds." We conclude from this that R. Elazar merely added slander. It is concluded. Why was he called the chief speaker in every place? For R. Juda, R. Jose, and R. Simon were once seated together, and Juda b. Gerim was seated near them. R. Juda opened the conversation by saying: "How beautiful are the works of this nation! (the Romans). They have established streets and markets, built bridges across the rivers and established baths." R. Jose listened to these remarks, but kept silent. R. Simon b. Jochai, however, replied, saying: "Everything they have established is for their own benefit. They have opened the markets that they may place harlots there; they have established baths for their own refreshment, and bridges [were built to enable them] to raise tolls." Juda b. Gerim thereupon went and disclosed their conversation, and it reached the ears of the government. Whereupon an edict was issued [to the effect] that R. Juda, who had praised [the works of the Romans] should be promoted; [consequently he became the chief speaker in every place]; that R. Jose who had remained silent, should he exiled to Sephoris; and that R. Simon who had censured [their works] should be executed. Thereupon R. Simon and his son hid themselves in a house of study. Every day his wife brought them bread and a cup of water, with which they maintained themselves. Then the decree became more severe [to discover the condemned]. R. Simon said to his son: "Behold! Women are easy-minded; the Romans may cause her pain and then she will disclose our hiding place." So they went away [from the academy, without telling even his wife] and hid themselves in a cave. There a miracle occurred and a carob-tree and a fountain of water were created for them. They took off their clothes and, absorbed in study, sat in the sand up to their necks the whole day. At the time of service they would put on their clothes, but after they were through with the service, they again took off their clothes so that they might not become worn out. After they had been sitting thus for twelve years in the cave, Elijah came, stopped at the door of the cave, and said: "Who will inform the son of Jochai that the King has died and his decree has been annulled?" Upon hearing this, they left the cave. When they noticed some people plowing and sowing, one of them exclaimed: "Behold, these people are neglecting eternal life and occupy themselves with the transient life!" Upon whatever they fixed their eyes, a fire came and devoured it instantly, until a Bath-Kol (heavenly voice) came forth and said to them: "What! Are ye come forth to destroy my world? Get ye back to your cave." Accordingly they returned to their cave and sat there twelve months more. They then pleaded, saying: "Even the judgment of the wicked in Gehenna lasts no longer than twelve months [and therefore it ought also to be sufficient for our crime ]." Upon which a Bath-Kol came forth and said: "Come ye forth from your cave." They finally came forth. Whatever R. Elazar struck [with his look] was healed by R. Simon [also with his look], until R. Simon said to his son: "My son, it is sufficient for the world that you and I are learning the Torah." One Friday afternoon they saw an old man hurrying along with two bunches of myrtle in his hand. "Why dost thou need these?" said they to the man. "[To enjoy the smell] in honor of the Sabbath," was his reply. "Would not one bunch," they remarked, "be enough for the purpose?" "Nay," the old man replied, "one is in honor of Zachor (remember) and one in honor of Shamor (keep)." Thereupon R. Simon remarked to his son: "Behold! How dear are the commandments to Israel." Upon hearing [that they had gone out of the cave], R. Phinias b. Yair, R. Simon's son-in-law, went out to meet him; he took him into a bath-house, washed his entire body and tried to soften his flesh [which had hardened through sitting so long in the sand]. While he was cleaning R. Simon's body, he noticed that his skin was blistered and cracked; R. Phinias began to weep, and the tears which fell upon R. Simon's wounded body caused him such severe pain that he also wept. "Woe unto me," said R. Phinias, "that I see you in such condition." "Happy art thou," said R. Simon unto him, "that thou seest me in such condition, because, hadst thou not seen me so, then would I not have been what I am." Before this incident, when R. Simon b. Jochai asked a question of R. Phinias b. Yair, the latter would reply to it in twelve different ways; but after this incident, when R. Phinias b. Yair asked any question, R. Simon b. Jochai replied to it in twenty-four different ways. R. Simon then said: "Since a miracle happened to me, I shall therefore improve something." For [thus we learn from Jacob, as] it is written (Gen. 33, 18.) And Jacob came safely, upon which Rab said, "Safe with the body, safe with his wealth and safe with his Torah"; And he encamped before the city. (Ib.) Rab said: "He invented a coin for them," and Samuel said: "He established streets for them." R. Jochanan said: "He established baths for them." "Have you anything which lacks [religious] improvement?" R. Simon inquired. "Yes," they answered, "there is a place which is considered doubtful [and] unclean, (Fol. 34a) and it causes the priests annoyance because they have to go around that place." He asked them: "Is there anyone who knows if that place ever had the status of levitical cleanliness?" An old man replied: "Here, I remember, b. Zakai plucked lupines of Terumah." Whereupon R. Simon did likewise. Wherever the ground was hard [showing that it was not dug] he declared it purified, and around the soft spots he made marks [so that priests should take heed not to cross them]. When he had finished, he heard the old man remark: "Ben Jochai purified cemeteries." "If thou wert not with us," said R. Simon, "or even hadst thou been with us but didst not agree, then thou mightst fairly say it, but now being one of us and having agreed, people will say, 'O since harlots paint one another [to look nice], how much more ought scholars [be regardful of one another's honor].'" Thereupon R. Simon fixed his eyes upon the old man and the latter died instantly. As R. Simon went out upon the street, he noticed Juda b. Gerim (the tale-bearer). "O," said he, "does this one still live and exist in the world?" R. Simon fixed his eyes upon him and Juda became instantly a heap of bones.
Another interpretation: “From people [mimtim] by Your hand” – who are these courageous men who took theirs from under the hand of God? And who was that? That was the generation of religious persecution. “From people [mimtim] by your hand” – killed [mumatim] by your hand. “From the world [meḥeled]” – those who had sores [ḥaludaot] arise in their flesh for the sanctification of Your name. Who were they? Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai and his son Rabbi Elazar, who went into hiding in a cave for thirteen years due to religious persecution until there arose sores in their flesh. They ate carobs and dates. At the end of thirteen years, Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai emerged and sat at the entrance to the cave. He saw a trapper spreading his trap to trap birds. He heard a divine voice say ‘freedom,’ and it was freed. A second time he heard a divine voice, it said ‘killing,’ and it was caught. He said: ‘Even a bird does not escape without a divine decree; that is all the more so true regarding us. Let us go and be healed in the hot springs of Tiberias.’ They went down and were healed in the hot springs of Tiberias. They said: ‘We must do good and benefit these residents of the place, just as Jacob our patriarch did, as it is stated: “He encamped [vayiḥan] before the city” (Genesis 33:18) – he established a market and sold to them at low prices. They established a market and sold to them at low prices. David said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the Universe, say that I have a place with them in the World to Come.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘David, is it not [written] “your hidden treasures will fill their bellies?” Their hidden treasures will fill your belly is not written here, but rather, “your hidden treasures will fill their bellies.” The entire people partakes of what is left over from your wealth.’ (David’s merit is the source of the benefit of the entire nation.) David received tidings that he had a portion in the World to Come. Moreover, he said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, these come based on Torah, mitzvot, and good deeds that they have to their credit, but I, “I shall see Your face in righteousness” (Psalms 17:15) forever.’
“One who digs a pit will fall into it; and one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him” (Ecclesiastes 10:8). “One who digs a pit will fall into it” – this is the wicked Pharaoh, who said: “Every son who is born [you shall cast him into the Nile]” (Exodus 1:22). “He will fall into it” – as it is stated: “He shook Pharaoh and his people in the Red Sea” (Psalms 136:15). Another matter: “One who digs a pit” – this is Haman, as it is stated: “To destroy, to kill, and to eliminate” (Esther 3:13). “Will fall into it” – as it is stated: “His wicked intentions will return […upon his head, and he and his sons should be hanged on the gallows]” (Esther 9:25). “One who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him” – this is Dina. When her father and her brothers were sitting in the study hall, she went out “to see the daughters of the land” (Genesis 34:1). She brought upon herself that Shekhem ben Ḥamor the Hivite, who is called a serpent, (Hivite is related to the Aramaic word ḥivya, which means serpent.) consorted with her and bit her, as it is written: “Shekhem ben Ḥamor saw her…” (Genesis 34:2). “He took her” (Genesis 34:2) – he seduced her with words, as it is stated: “Take words with you” (Hosea 14:3). “He lay with her” (Genesis 34:2) – with natural intercourse; “and he raped her” (Genesis 34:2) – with unnatural intercourse. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai and Rabbi Elazar his son went into hiding in a cave in Pekiin for thirteen years during a period of religious persecution. They would eat carobs and dates. At the conclusion of thirteen years, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai emerged and sat at the entrance to the cave. He saw a trapper placing his traps to trap birds. He heard a Divine Voice saying: ‘Success,’ and [a bird] was trapped. He heard a Divine Voice a second time, saying: ‘Failure,’ and [a bird] escaped. He said: Even a bird, without a divine decree, will not escape; all the more so the soul of a person. (Rabbi Shimon was saying: Since it is in God’s hands whether or not we will be caught, we do not need to continue hiding in the cave (Etz Yosef).) [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said to his son:] ‘Let us descend and be healed in the water of the hot springs of Tiberias.’ (Apparently conditions in the cave led them to suffer from skin ailments, and they hoped the hot springs would heal their skin (Etz Yosef).) They descended and were healed in the water of the hot springs of Tiberias. They said: We must do good, and benefit the residents of this place, just as Jacob our patriarch did, as it is stated: “He encamped [vayiḥan] (This is expounded as a reference to both market [ḥanut] and favor [ḥanina].) before the city” (Genesis 33:18), [indicating] that he established a market and sold to them at low prices. They established a market and sold to them at low prices. He said: We must purify Tiberias. (During the Roman conquest there were many casualties who were buried in unmarked graves, causing Tiberias to lose its presumptive status of purity.) What did he do? He took lupines and scattered them in the street, and any place that a corpse was buried, it rose. (It became visible on the surface of the ground.) A certain Samaritan saw him. He said: Am I not able to ridicule this Jewish elder? What did he do? He took a corpse and buried it in a street that they had purified. Some say it was [in the market] of the barrel makers and some say in the market of the sack makers. He came and said to [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai]: ‘Did you purify such and such street?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘And if I produce a corpse for you from it?’ He said: ‘Pull it out and show me.’ Immediately, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai saw through divine inspiration that he had buried it there; he said: ‘I decree that the one who is lying shall stand and that the one standing will lie.’ Some say [that he said]: ‘I decree that the one above will descend and the one below will ascend.’ And so it occurred to him. He departed and passed before that synagogue in Migdal and heard the voice of Nakai the scribe: ‘Did ben Yoḥai purify Tiberias?’ (He was mocking Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai because of the corpse found on the street he had already purified.) [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai] said: ‘ , let [such and such] come upon me if I do not have traditions as numerous as the hairs on my head that this [city of] Tiberias is destined to be purified and will be available to those who partake of teruma, with the exception of this and that.’ (Only these streets will remain impure.) He did not believe him. [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai] said to [Nakai]: ‘You have breached the fence of the Torah scholars, “and one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him,”’ and so it occurred to him. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai was passing by during the Sabbatical Year; he saw a certain person who was harvesting aftergrowths (These are grain and vegetables that grow on their own without cultivation.) of the Sabbatical Year. He said to him: ‘But is it not the Sabbatical Year?’ He said to him: ‘But is it not you who permits it? Did we not learn: [Rabbi Shimon says:] All aftergrowths are permitted except for the aftergrowths of cabbage, because there is nothing corresponding to them in the growths of the field?’ (Mishna Sheviit 9:1. Since cabbage does not grow wild in the field, one must assume that it was cultivated in violation of the laws of the Sabbatical Year.) [Rabbi Shimon] said to him: ‘But do my colleagues not disagree with me?’ (The Sages in the Mishna prohibit consumption of even uncultivated annual crops that grow during the Sabbatical Year.) He read in his regard: “And one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him,” and so it occurred to him.
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. This text is related (to Ps. 121:8): THE LORD WILL PRESERVE YOUR GOING FORTH AND YOUR COMING NOW AND FOREVER. (Gen. R. 79:2.) YOUR GOING FORTH: (According to Gen. 28:10) JACOB WENT FORTH. AND YOUR COMING: (According to Gen. 33:18) JACOB CAME.
< (Ibid.,cont.:) IF GOD IS WITH ME. > The Holy One said to him: You have testified concerning me that I have been with you, as stated (in Gen. 31:5): BUT THE GOD OF MY FATHER HAS BEEN WITH ME. (Gen. 28:20, cont.:) PROTECTS ME. So I protected you from Laban. (Ibid., cont.:) AND GIVES ME FOOD TO EAT. (Cf. Gen. 31:9:) THUS GOD HAS SEIZED YOUR FATHER'S CATTLE AND GIVEN THEM TO ME. (Gen. 28:20, cont.:) AND CLOTHING TO PUT ON. (Cf. Gen. 30:35:) BUT ON THAT DAY HE REMOVED THE SPECKLED AND SPOTTED HE-GOATS. (Gen. 28:20, cont.:) AND IF I RETURN SAFELY…. (Cf. Gen. 33:18) NOW JACOB CAME SAFELY.
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. Did he lack something? Indeed, when they said to him (in Gen. 32:7 [6]): MOREOVER HE (Esau) IS COMING TO MEET YOU, AND THERE ARE FOUR HUNDRED MEN WITH HIM; he arose and prepared a gift. (Gk.: doron.) (According to Gen. 32:15-16 [14-15]) he began by giving she-goats because they were tender. Afterwards < according to the text, there were > he-goats, ewes, rams, < and > THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS. [R. Levi said: If I went around among all the tents of Kedar (i.e., of the Ishmaelites) you would not have found THIRTY MILCH CAMELS WITH THEIR COLTS.] Look at Jacob's wealth! In addition (according to Gen. 32:16 [15]) he gave FORTY COWS AND TEN BULLS. R. Isaac said: < These did > not include precious stones and pearls. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 32:14 [13]): THEN HE TOOK FROM WHAT WAS IN HAND, < i.e., > things taken up in the hand. These would be precious stones and pearls. R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: All twelve months that he spent with him, he would so honor him (with gifts) on each day. In this regard Jacob said (in Deut. 16:19): FOR A GIFT BLINDS THE EYES OF THE (PRUDENT) [WISE]. < He reasoned > a fortiori, how much the more < would a gift blind > the wicked! Just consider this: I am honoring him so that he will not touch me.
Esau said: How long will I trouble my brother? He arose and went away, as stated (in Gen. 36:6): THEN ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES…. < AND WENT INTO A LAND AWAY FROM HIS BROTHER JACOB >. What did Jacob do? When his children and his flocks had crossed over into the land of Israel, he arose and sold all that he had brought with him from outside of the land. Then he made it into piles of gold. He said to Esau: You have a share with me in the cave of Machpelah. Now what do you want, to receive these piles of gold or to share < the cave > with me? Esau began by saying: What do I want with < a share > of this cave? This gold is what I want. Now where is it shown that Jacob sold all that he had brought from outside of the land and that Esau took it? Where Joseph said so (in Gen. 50:5): MY FATHER HAD ME SWEAR, SAYING: SEE, I AM DYING. IN MY GRAVE WHICH I DUG < IN THE LAND OF CANAAN, THERE YOU SHALL BURY ME >. R. Huna b. R. Abbin the Priest said: When Jacob wanted to come to the land of Israel, what is written (in Gen. 31:18)? AND HE DROVE ALL HIS LIVESTOCK < AND ALL HIS GOODS THAT HE HAD ACQUIRED … IN PADDAN-ARAM >. Now, when he wanted to go down into Egypt, what is written (in Gen. 46:6)? AND THEY TOOK ALONG THEIR LIVESTOCK AND ALL THEIR GOODS, WHICH THEY HAD ACQUIRED IN THE LAND OF CANAAN. Now, in regard to what he had brought from the land of Aram-Naharaim, where was that? You simply learn from here that Jacob had sold it and given it to Esau. (For an alternative explanation of the same tradition, see Gen. R. 100:5; Exod. R. 31:17; Rashi on Gen. 50:5.) Then would you say that something was lacking? The Holy One simply filled his loss and restored everything to him immediately, as stated (in Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE.
What is written above on the matter (in Gen. 33:18)? NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. < When > he had come from Paddan-Aram under conditions that the Holy One had set with him, he did not lessen him in any respect. What did Jacob do? He began opening bazaars. (On this word, see above, 8:19, and the note there.) The Holy One said to him: Have you forgotten what you vowed to me? And did you not say this (in Gen. 28:20): IF GOD IS WITH ME, so that I do not commit idolatry, (ibid., cont.:) AND PROTECTS ME, from bloodshed, (ibid., cont.:) ON THE WAY, from unchastity, as stated (in Prov. 30:20): SUCH IS THE WAY OF AN ADULTERESS: SHE EATS, WIPES HER MOUTH, AND SAYS: I HAVE DONE NO WRONG. The Holy One did protect him, for it so states (in Gen. 28:15): AND I WILL PROTECT YOU WHEREVER YOU GO. Jacob said (in Gen. 28:22): [AND] OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME, I WILL SURELY SET ASIDE A TITHE FOR YOU. As soon as he came to the land of Israel, he forgot this vow. The Holy One said: By your life, through the very things which you said you would observe, through them you shall come to grief. Where is it shown in regard to idolatry? Where it is stated (in Gen. 35:4): THEN THEY GAVE UNTO JACOB ALL THE ALIEN GODS THAT THEY HAD…. Where is it shown in regard to bloodshed? Where it is stated (in Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … [AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. Where is it shown in regard to unchastity? From Dinah, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:2-3): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < … > AND HIS SOUL CLUNG TO JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH. R. Abbahu said: We have learned things from putrid secretion (i.e., mere mortals): (“Putrid secretion” can denote semen or, as here, the mere mortals like Pharaoh, who were produced by it.) (Gen. 41:44:) PHARAOH SAID TO JOSEPH: I AM PHARAOH. (Gen. R. 90:2.) I have said that you shall be king. The Holy One said to Israel concerning each and every commandment which they do: I AM THE LORD (e.g., in Lev. 19:3, 4, 10, 12, 14, 16, etc.). I am the one who is going to repay each and everyone with his reward. Now, just as in the case of flesh and blood, when it said: I AM PHARAOH, it raised him to great dignity; so much the more so with me when I say something. And just as you said (in Gen. 41:40): ONLY WITH RESPECT TO THE THRONE SHALL I BE GREATER THAN YOU, < so > has the Holy One said to Israel (in Deut. 28:13): AND YOU ONLY SHALL BE AT THE TOP. Just as an "only" from flesh and blood (i.e., from Pharaoh) magnified Joseph, so much the more so in the case of an "only" from the Holy One.
(Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE < TO THE CITY OF SHECHEM >. Let our master instruct us: What is meant by "saying something (DBR) superfluous on the Sabbath"? Thus have our masters taught (in Shab. 24:5): VOWS MAY BE QUESTIONED (with a view to annulment) WHEN NECESSARY FOR THE SABBATH. (Note that the wording differs somewhat from modern editions of the Mishnah.) Ergo: Something (DBR) which is not necessary for the Sabbath is not < to be > questioned. (See Shab. 157a.) And needless to say, it is forbidden to multiply < superfluous > things (DBR) on the Sabbath. R. Huna said: If someone is corrupted by a transgression, angels of destruction immediately denounce him. It is so stated (in Job 33:22): HIS SOUL DRAWS NEAR TO THE GRAVE. What should one do? Let him be engaged in < the study of > the Torah and be preserved. And, if he does not know how to recite < oral tradition >, let him read < Scripture >. And if he does not know how to read < Scripture >, let him take hold of the Torah and live, as stated (in Prov. 3:18): < WISDOM > IS A TREE OF LIFE TO THOSE WHO TAKE HOLD OF IT. Thus, if one is not a Torah scholar, let him be one who takes hold of a Bible teacher and a Mishnah teacher so that they may instruct him in Torah. Then he will merit living, as stated (ibid.): < WISDOM > IS A TREE OF LIFE TO THOSE WHO TAKE HOLD OF IT. But, if he is a Torah scholar, the Torah will heal him from every evil and from all suffering. Thus it is stated (in Prov. 15:4): A HEALING TONGUE IS A TREE OF LIFE…. This is the Torah. There is no one who would labor at the Torah as our ancestor Jacob < did >. It is just as you say (in Gen. 25:27): BUT JACOB WAS A PERFECT MAN DWELLING IN TENTS. "Dwelling in a tent" is not written here but DWELLING IN TENTS. He would go out from the academy (bet midrash) of Shem and enter the academy of Eber. Then < he would go > from the academy of Eber to the academy of Abraham. Therefore, when he had wrestled with the angel < and when > he was limping on his thigh, as stated (in Gen. 32:32 [31]): THE SUN ROSE UPON HIM … AND HE WAS LIMPING ON HIS THIGH, the Holy One immediately appeared to him, healed him, and brought him whole to the city of Shechem. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Gen. 33:18): NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE < TO THE CITY OF SHECHEM >.
This does not preclude a change in the future. Jacob was אוחז בעקב "holding on to the "heel" (Genesis 25,26) i.e. to humility already from the moment he was born. This is also the mystical dimension of ויבא יעקב שלם, that "Jacob attained perfection" (Genesis 33,18). When Jacob was called ישראל because he prevailed in a struggle with the Divine, this is an allusion to the World to Come, a domain even closer to G–d than the domain of the angels. This is alluded to in Numbers 23,23 by Bileam who said: כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל מה פעל א-ל. "Jacob is told at once, Yea, Israel, what G–d has planned." [The author tries to demonstrate that when manipulating the spelling of the name יעקב the name ישרון which is the name used to describe the Jewish people on their highest spiritual level, can be obtained. When one omits the first letter of a "word" representing the "full" spelling of a letter such as the letter י being spelled יוד, this is called a concealed way of spelling the word, נעלם. In our example, if you spell the word יעקב "full" i.e י"וד-ע"ין-ק"וף ב"ית, and you then omit the letters I have highlighted i.e. י-ע-ק-ב, you will be left with ו"ד-י"ן-ו",-י"ת. The numerical value of the last 8 letters is 566, the same as the numerical value of ישרון. Ed.]. This is the mystical aspect of Isaiah 40,4: והיה העקוב למישור, "and the crooked will become straight," an allusion to the perception of Jacob as devious and engaging in deception as claimed by Esau. The "concealed" spelling of these names is a hint of the great good in store for the Jewish people. The three names יעקב-ישראל-ישרון correspond to the שלמות of Jacob in three areas: his body, גוף, his relationship with the material goods of this world, ממון, and his spiritual life, נפש (cf. Rashi on Genesis 33,18). These three areas are the subject of the manner in which we are to relate to G–d with love, i.e. "בכל לבבך, ובכל נפשך, ובכל מאדך. The body will be as much part of an everlasting life in the future we speak of as is the soul in our times. All the Kabbalists are agreed that this is so because the body has been created בצלם אלוקים, in the image of G–d. The names ישראל and ישרון allude to this dual "perfection" of body and soul, i.e. that both will gain everlasting life. The name ישרון symbolizes ישר, that G–d has created man ישר, upright, honest. He could not have done otherwise for ישרים דרכי ה', "the ways of the Lord are upright" (Hosea 14,10). It is relatively easy for a soul, רוח, to return to the Celestial Regions it has come from. When we speak about שלימות ממונו, the Torah means אלוהי כסף ואלוהי זהב לא תעשו (Exodus 20,23), that one must not elevate the value one places on silver and gold as something akin to a deity.
The two arms of man correspond to the emanations חסד and גבורה. The two legs correspond to the emanations נצח and הוד. The male reproductive organ within which all the forces of the body coalesce and form his seed and by means of which he unites with his wife, corresponds to the emanation מלכות. After the Torah had described the union of man and wife [i.e. man in the plural i.e. אותם, Ed.], it mentions that G–d blessed them (Genesis 1,28). He called their combined name אדם. Man had not become whole until joined by his wife as a separate entity. When this occurred Man's soul wore garments of distinction [i.e. the body. Ed.] Man's essence is his "interior," his body is merely his "clothing." This "clothing" was snow white, as if he were wearing clothing made of "light," i.e. כתנות אור. Man's body then could be described as illuminating both his soul and itself. This provided man with three different kinds of wholeness or "perfections." They are alluded to in the acronym מגן (usually understood as shield, protection). The three letters forming that acronym are the first letters of each of the words ממון, money, גוף, body, and נשמה, soul. This is what is meant when the beauty of Jacob is described by our sages as comparable to the beauty of Adam. The Torah refers to it when it describes the mental and physical state of Jacob/Israel shortly after his encounter with Samael. We read in Genesis 33,18: ויבא יעקב שלם, "Jacob arrived whole." We are told in Shabbat 33b, that the word "whole" comprised the three aspects we have mentioned as the perfection of Adam. The Talmud described one of the aspects in which Jacob was "whole,” שלם, as תורתו; this refers, of course, to the state of his נשמה, his soul, since it is Torah which illuminates our soul. Adam the whole was not deficient in any area that is part of life. He did not have any needs since he already found himself at home in גן עדן, in an ideal environment. His food was derived from the trees of גן עדן. He did not have to work for a living and was therefore free to directly devote all his time to the service of G–d. The Torah describes that Adam was placed in גן עדן in order לעבדה ולשמרו, was placed in such an undemanding environment in order to enable him to serve G–d without hindrance and impediment. Our sages interpret the word לעבדה as referring to the performance of positive commandments, whereas the word לשמרה refers to the care taken not to transgress negative commandments. Adam performed all six hundred and thirteen commandments in a theoretical, spiritual fashion. All of this is explained in Pardes Rimonim chapter הנשמה, and I have elaborated on this elsewhere (מסכת חולין item 104, new edition of של"ה השלם by Rabbi Meir Katz). Man unfortunately did not even manage to spend a single night in גן עדן before he sinned. (cf. Psalms 49,13). His "jewelry" was removed as a result of his seduction by the serpent. This brought in its wake that instead of wearing "garments" which illuminated his soul as well as his body, he had to wear garments made of the hide of flesh, i.e. animals which did not represent anything spiritual. Ever since, new generations of man are the product of the smelly drop of semen, i.e. semen which is polluted by the residual pollutant of the original serpent. Once Eve had become defiled through sexual union with the serpent, the defiled party had to leave the holy site, i.e. גן עדן, just as in the desert anyone who was ritually impure could not remain within the holy precincts of the מחנה שכינה, the camp hosting the Presence of G–d. The immediate result of this was the toil involved in securing his sustenance, his clothing and his shelter. This is what the Torah meant when it describes that G–d told Adam: "You will eat bread in the sweat of your brow" (Genesis 3,19). Because man was constructed from parts of nature, מטבע, he has a tendency to pursue money, matbei'a, as symbolized by the word מטבע. He uses this money, מטבע, to secure his needs.
The words השכל וידוע אותי in that verse, mean that "when these attributes originate with Me, then they are something worth boasting about." The fact that the prophet seems to repeat himself by saying השכל וידוע, may be an allusion to the perfection of these attributes personified by our patriarch Jacob, of whom the Torah testified in Genesis 33,18, that he arrived at the city of Shechem שלם, perfect, which Rashi there interprets as whole in body, i.e. physical prowess, גבורה; whole in money, i.e. he was well satisfied with his lot, i.e. עשיר; and finally, whole in his Torah, i.e. he was a חכם. These three kinds of perfection or wholeness, are also described in Deut. 6,5, which tells us how to love G–d, i.e. בכל לבבך, ובכל נפשך, ובכל מאדך. The heart represents physical life, and it was Yehudah ben Teima who when he said "be mighty like the lion," referred to performing G–d's commandments with all the power of one's heart, according to the introduction of Tur Orach Chayim. When the Torah continues: “בכל נפשך,” the reference is to the abstract life-force, the mind. This means that the mind, which normally craves recognition, should be put at the disposal of G–d's commands. The expression "ובכל מאדך," refers to one's financial wealth, i.e. putting that which is normally subject to one's greed at G–d's disposal. We find that these attributes can be employed in one's relationship with G–d, since many of the commandments of religious ritual require the expenditure of money, such as contributions to Temple maintenance, purchase of communal sacrifices, etc. Other commandments require that one exerts one's body, such as all the laws involving forbidden foods. Still other commandments can be performed only if one uses one's mental faculties.
We must strive to attain perfection in the following areas: 1) perfection of one's soul; 2) perfection of one's body; 3) perfection of one's belongings, money matters. Regarding these three areas, the Torah says: "You shall love the Lord your G–d with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might" (Deut 6,5). The life of the body depends on the heart. The word נפש, refers to the נשמה, soul. When we speak about someone as being שלם בגופו, שלם בתורתו, שלם בממונו see Rashi's commentary on Genesis 33,18, we view תורה as well as study and achievements (in study) as elements the soul depends on.
ויחן את פני העיר . Two scholars, Rav and Shemuel, opine in Shabbat 33a, that Jacob introduced coinage in the district. The other scholar, Shmuel, holds that Jacob introduced the concept of "markets," (concentrated shopping opportunities). Rabbi Yochanan said that Jacob established public baths. The difference in the opinions expressed stems from the meaning of the word Vayichan. One sage related that word to the root Cheyn, grace, something aesthetically appealing. As a result, he believed that public baths are what Jacob instituted. The other Rabbi concentrated on the expression Peney. The Midrash Hagadol on Genesis 41,56 in which the Torah describes the famine as: והרעב היה על פני כל הארץ, "The famine was on the face of the whole land," comments that the extra word פני teaches that the famine began with the rich who are called פנים. This is the reason that Rav interpreted that Jacob introduced coinage as a sign of his appreciation of being able to settle in the land. Shmuel, who explained that Jacob introduced a new marketing technique by arranging fairs, took his cue from the word העיר. What we learn from the above is that if someone claims to be a G–d-fearing individual, he needs to demonstrate this in three different areas of life, just as Jacob did.
Another peculiarity is found when the angel tells Jacob that in the future (at Bet El in 35, 9) he will be known as "Israel," suggesting that at this time he was still only "Jacob" (32, 29). We find, however, that in 33, 20 and 34,7 Jacob is already described as ישראל. Rashi comments on the former, that the name ישראל did not refer to the altar he had built, but that he employed this name as being his own. He built the altar to the G–d א-ל who had named him ישראל. This is strange since the Torah did not yet report G–d as having changed Jacob's name. This commentary does not take into consideration that the Torah reports the change of Jacob's name to be effective only after chapter 35, 10. If we accept the interpretation of the Talmud in Megillah 18, that we learn from this verse that G–d i.e. אל-הי ישראל, called Jacob “א-ל,” we have no problem: Jacob had already been renamed at the time the Torah was recorded in writing. We have to solve the difficulty in Rashi's commentary by saying that when the Torah reported Jacob as arriving שגם, "whole" in body, spirit and economic strength in 33, 18, that his thigh joint had healed, that he was free from both Esau and Laban, which were the troubles that Samael had referred to when he acknowledged that Jacob had fought man and G–d and prevailed When Jacob assumed the title "Israel" for himself, this was not an act of arrogance on his part, but on the contrary, it was an acknowledgment to G–d that his achievements were not due to his righteousness and physical prowess but to the blessing he had received from the angel (who represented Samael and who at one time had been the agent of forces called קליפה). Having said all this, this still leaves us with the problem why Jacob was referred to as ישראל, in connection with the rape of Dinah in 34, 7 where the foul deed was described as something that must not be perpetrated "in Israel."
FOR HE SAW A RESTING-PLACE THAT IT WAS GOOD. When Issachar saw that his land and resting-place were pleasant, he, as an ass, bowed his shoulder to bear any and all burdens and became as a servant that pays levies. Scripture says this concerning Issachar because this tribe did not consist of warriors and its men did not want to leave their homes to go to war. Moses similarly said concerning Issachar, Rejoice…Issachar, in thy tents (Deut. 33:18). The levy mentioned in our verse may refer to Issachar’s payment of a money levy to the king in Israel in lieu of furnishing soldiers for his army, or it may refer to a payment of money to foreign nations that they should not attack them. (Vat. Ebr. 38 reads, “or to foreign nations who attacked them.” The point is that the tribe of Issachar were as servants (mas oved) because they paid a levy either to the king of Israel or to foreign nations.)
It is also possible to interpret this verse as a promise for the future. G’d is saying: “if you do what is right in the eyes of the Lord there will not be any murders of innocent people.” This in turn will serve to hasten the arrival of a period when murder, warfare, etc., will be banished from this earth. At that time the prophecy of Isaiah 2,4: ”and they beat their swords into plowshares,” will be fulfilled. People will no longer teach the art of warfare; no nation will raise a hand against its neighbor. There will be an abundance of peace and serenity, as alluded to in Song of Songs 7,1. People will offer their sacrifices to the attribute Hashem which is also known as שלום as we know from Genesis 32,18 ויבא יעקב שלם. The author cites a few more verses implying that G’d’s name is שלום.
AND THE ANGELS OF G-D MET HIM. Rashi comments: “The angels who minister in the Land of Israel came to meet him. And he called the name of that place Mahanaim: the plural form implies two camps, one consisting of the angels ministering outside of the Land of Israel who had accompanied him thus far, the other consisting of those ministering in the Land of Israel who had come forth to meet him.” But I wonder at this, for Jacob had not yet reached the Land of Israel and was still distant from there for he sent messengers to Esau from afar. And then it says there, And he passed over the ford of the Jabbok, (Further, 32:23.) which is the river Jabbok which is the border of the children of Ammon. (Deuteronomy 3:16.) This is to the southeast of the Land of Israel, and he still had to pass the boundary of the children of Ammon and Moab, and then the land of Edom, and his first entry into the Land was at Shechem, as it is said, And Jacob came in peace to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. (Further 33:18. This poses a difficulty to Rashi’s interpretation of “Mahanaim.”) Instead, we must say this vision came to Jacob as he arrived in enemy territory in order to inform him that “they that are with him are more than they that are with them.” (See II Kings 6:16.) And the name of the place was called “Mahanaim” in the plural, for such is the way of Scripture with names. (For a single event or person, a plural name is given, as for example, “Mitzraim”.) It may be that “Mahanaim” refers to His camp and the camp of the higher beings, (In that case the plural in the word Mahanaim is naturally justified.) that is to say that His camp on earth is as the camp of the angels, all of them being camps of G-d, blessing Him and confessing His Unity, may His name be blessed forever. Vayishlach This section was written in order to inform us that the Holy One, blessed be He, delivered His servant, and He redeemed him from the hand of him that is stronger than he, (Jeremiah 31:11.) and he sent an angel (Numbers 20:16.) and saved him, and in order to further teach us that Jacob did not place his trust in his righteousness and that he strove for delivery with all his might. There is yet in this section a hint for future generations, for everything that happened to our father with his brother Esau will constantly occur to us with Esau’s children, and it is proper for us to adhere to the way of the righteous (See Job 17:9.) by preparing ourselves in the three things for which he prepared himself: for prayer, for giving him a present, and for rescue by methods of warfare, to flee and to be saved. Our Rabbis have already derived this hint from this section, as I shall mention.
Twelve years had passed since Joseph’s birth, (Seder Olam 2.) and since Jacob emerged shalem, (Genesis 33:18.) complete, from the dangers of Laban and Esau. His house was built; he was named Israel by God. (Genesis 35:10.) The birth of Joseph marked a critical juncture for Jacob. Joseph was his ben zekunim, (Genesis 37:3.) the beloved child of his old age, (R. Saadiya Gaon, Rashi, Ramban, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra on Genesis 37:3.) who seemed to round out the patriarch’s household. (“These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph was seventeen years old… ” Genesis 37:2.) And yet, Jacob was not done, and his house was not truly complete, for Rachel had not yet given everything that she could to Beit Yisrael. Upon the birth of Joseph, she recognized instantly that this must not be her final act – that “God should grant me another son” (yosif Hashem li ben aĥer), and even named Joseph in that hope. Only with Benjamin, who resembled her more purely than did Joseph, was the family of Israel to be whole.
Rabbi Shimon said: Since a miracle transpired for me, I will go and repair something for the sake of others in gratitude for God’s kindness, as it is written: “And Jacob came whole to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Paddan-aram; and he graced the countenance of the city” (Genesis 33:18). Rav said, the meaning of: And Jacob came whole, is: Whole in his body, whole in his money, whole in his Torah. And what did he do? And he graced the countenance of the city; he performed gracious acts to benefit the city. Rav said: Jacob established a currency for them. And Shmuel said: He established marketplaces for them. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He established bathhouses for them. In any event, clearly one for whom a miracle transpires should perform an act of kindness for his neighbors as a sign of gratitude. He said: Is there something that needs repair? They said to him: There is a place where there is uncertainty with regard to ritual impurity
Yaakov arrived safely at the city of Shechem, which is in the Land of Canaan, when he came from Padan Aram. He encamped before the city.
Then came Jakob in peace with all that he had to the city of Shekem, in the land of Kenaan, in his Coming from Padan Aram; and he dwelt near the city,
| וַיִּ֜קֶן אֶת־חֶלְקַ֣ת הַשָּׂדֶ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר נָֽטָה־שָׁם֙ אׇהֳל֔וֹ מִיַּ֥ד בְּנֵֽי־חֲמ֖וֹר אֲבִ֣י שְׁכֶ֑ם בְּמֵאָ֖ה קְשִׂיטָֽה׃ | 19 E | The parcel of land where he pitched his tent he purchased from the kin of Hamor, Shechem’s father, for a hundred kesitahs. (kesitahs Heb. qesiṭah, a unit of unknown value.) |
THE PARCEL OF GROUND. A portion in the field. (I.E. explains that Jacob did not buy the parcel of ground where he had spread his tent. He rather bought a portion in the field where he had spread his tent.) Scripture mentions this (That Jacob bought, not rented, a parcel of land.) to inform us of the greatness of the land of Israel. Whosoever has a portion in it is as though he had a portion in the world to come.
Heb. qesit·ah, a unit of unknown value.
ויקן ...מיד בני חמור, the Torah does not write “from Chamor,” but from “the sons of Chamor” who was the father of Shechem, as perhaps the land had belonged to the sons and not to him.
אבי שכם, seeing that the son was so distinguished the father is identified by reference to his son.
במאה קשיטה, silver coins. According to our sages in Rosh Hashanah 26 Rabbi Akiva once reported that while he walked in a place called Arabia he heard that the local people called a certain coin equivalent to a מעה in the land of Israel a קשיטה. According to Onkelos the meaning of קשיטה may be חורפן, “young lambs.” He translated it as such also in 21,28
קשיטה, a coin by that name.
קשיטה is a Meah (a certain coin) — Rabbi Akiba said, “When I visited the coast-towns I found that they called a Meah a Kesittah (Rosh Hashanah 26a). In the Targum it is rendered by חורפן good ones, current everywhere: the same idea as (23:16) “current with the merchant.
ויקן את חלקת השדה, ויצב שם מזבח. A reminder of Psalms 137,4 “how can we sing the Lord’s songs on alien soil?”
Since this was a populated area, it would have been inappropriate for Jacob to establish his residence on land that he did not own. Therefore, upon his arrival he purchased a tract of the field where he had pitched his tent, from the possession of the children of Hamor, father of Shekhem, who was the mayor of the city of Shekhem, for one hundred kesita, a certain sum of money. 7 Alternatively, kesita means sheep and the like.
“The parcel of land where he pitched his tent” [33:19]. Jacob bought a field in Shechem and built an altar to God.
The claim of the community of Israel to the Land of Israel in its entirety as its historic homeland is predicated upon God's covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15:7-21). However, with regard to three specific geographic areas—the Cave of Machpelah, the Temple Mount and Shechem—title to the land is based upon more conventional grounds. These particular sites are described in Scripture as having become the property of our ancestors by right of purchase long before they acquired title to the rest of the Land of Canaan. The uniqueness of these areas is underscored by the sages of the Midrash. (Bereshit Rabbah 79:7.) Why, impliedly queries the Midrash, is the narrative concerning Abraham's purchase of the sepulchre in the field of Machpelah spelled out in such minute detail (Genesis 23:3-17)? Why does the Bible so carefully identify the individual from whom David purchased the Temple Mount (II Samuel 24:18-25)? Why does the Torah relate that Jacob pitched his tent in Shechem and that he purchased the plot of land upon which he pitched his tent for the sum of 100 kesita (Genesis 33:19)? Answers the Midrash: "So that the nations of the world will not be able to taunt Israel saying, 'These [lands] are in your possession by virtue of theft.' " These historical facts are recorded for a specific purpose, viz., so that for all of posterity the gentile nations will never be in the position of being able to taunt the community of Israel with the claim that Israel lacks clear title to those historic sites.
“He purchased the tract of the field where he had pitched his tent from the possession of the children of Hamor, father of Shekhem, for one hundred kesita” (Genesis 33:19). “He purchased the tract of the field where he had pitched his tent…for one hundred kesita” (Kesita is the name of a coin.) – Rabbi Yudan bar Simon said: This is one of three places that the nations of the world cannot deride Israel and say: ‘They are stolen [property] in your hands,’ and these are: The Cave of Makhpela, the Temple, and Joseph’s tomb. The Cave of Makhpela, as it is written: “Abraham heeded Efron, and Abraham weighed for Efron [the money…]” (Genesis 23:16). The Temple, as it is written: “David gave to Ornan for the place [six hundred shekels worth of gold]” (I Chronicles 21:25). Joseph’s tomb – “he purchased the tract of the field” (Genesis 33:19); Jacob purchased Shekhem. Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba, Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi, and Rabbi Shimon bar Ḥalafta forgot words from the Targum, and they came to a certain Arabian merchant to learn it from there. (To learn the meaning of words in the Targum from the language spoken by the Arabian.) He heard his voice that he said to another: ‘Lift this yahava upon me.’ We understand from him that yahava is a burden, as it is stated: “Cast your burden [yehavekha] upon the Lord, and He will sustain you” (Psalms 55:23). In addition, he heard the voice of an Arabian who said to another: ‘Why are you mekhaseh me,’ but he wished to say: ‘Why are you me’aseh me,’ as it is written: “You will crush [ve’asotem] the wicked, for they will be ashes” (Malachi 3:21). In addition, they heard that a woman said to another: ‘Come to the bathhouse.’ She answered: “I am bereaved and lonely [vegalmuda]” (Isaiah 49:21). Galmuda – I am a menstruant. In addition, he heard another woman saying to another: ‘Lend me your broom,’ and she said: ‘Lend me metatekh,’ as it is stated: “I will sweep it with the broom [metateh] of destruction, the utterance of the Lord of hosts” (Isaiah 14:23). [They heard women say to another woman:] ‘We came to arouse lelivyatakh’ (We came to wail with you.) – “Who prepare for rousing their wailing [livyatan]” (Job 3:8). [And they heard:] ‘Lend me your diamond [kesitatekh].’ [And they heard:] ‘Take this lamb [kesita] out to the pasture.’ (The price of one hundred kesita that Jacob paid could have been one hundred jewels or one hundred lambs.) “For one hundred kesita.” Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: One hundred precious stones, one hundred sheep, one hundred sela. Rabbi Simon said: Kof – kamilia [jewel], samekh (The letter samekh and the letter sin are interchangeable.) – sela’im, tet – terayon [valuable coins]. Yod heh, what are they doing here? Rabbi Yehuda of Sikhnin in the name of Rabbi Levi: These are gold pendants and emeralds that are typically placed in nose rings. Who writes the writ of sale? Rabbi Berekhya said: The Lord [Ya] writes the writ of sale. Who attests to the writ of sale? The Lord [Ya] attests to the writ of sale. That is the yod heh of kesita. That is what is written: “There the tribes went up, the tribes of the Lord [Ya], a testimony for Israel, to give thanks to the name of the Lord” (Psalms 122:4) – Ya attests on their behalf that they are the sons of their fathers. Here, too, He testified.
(Devarim 1:8) "which the L-rd swore to your fathers": Why need it be mentioned (in addition to this) "to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob"? (To stress that) each one was worthy of this in himself. An analogy: A king gives his servant one field as a gift, as it is. The servant goes and improves it, not leaving it as it is, but planting a vineyard and bequeaths it to his son — who does not leave it as it is, but improves it and bequeaths it to his son — who does not leave it as it is, but improves it. Thus, when the Holy One Blessed be He gave the land to our father Abraham, He gave it to him only as it was, viz. (Bereshith 13:17) "Arise, walk in the land in its length and its breadth, for to you shall I give it." Abraham arose and improved it, viz. (Ibid. 21:33) "And he planted a fruit grove in Beersheva." Isaac arose and improved it, viz. (Ibid. 26:12) "And Isaac sowed in that land and he found in that year a hundredfold." Jacob arose and improved it, viz. (Ibid. 33:19) "And he bought the part of the field where he had pitched his tent." If so, why need "to your fathers" be written? If in respect to the oath to the fathers, this is already written. This refers to the covenant with the tribes, viz. (Habakkuk 3:9) "the oaths to the tribes, an enduring word."
MADE HE. Va-yiven (made me) is a hifil conjugation. (This comment is difficult. Va-yiven is a kal conjugation. Krinsky and Weiser suggest deleting it. Indeed, some versions do. If it is retained then it must be explained as follows: Va-yiven (from the root bet, nun, heh) is short for va-yivneh. I.E. notes that this type of short form of a lamed heh root is found in the hifil and in the kal (Weiser). Vat. Ebr. 38 reads, va-yiven is a kal, as is va-yifen. This appears to be the correct reading.) We find similar instances with the kal conjugation in va-yifen (and he turned) (Ex. 7:23) and va-yiken (and he bought) (Gen. 33:19).
Our prescient sages in Bereshit Rabbah 58,8 have already foreseen such spurious counterclaims when they wrote: “how much ink has been spilled, how many styluses have been broken merely in order to write the words בני חת, ‘the Hittites.’” Ten times did the Torah repeat its reference to the Hittites. The Torah did so in order that anyone who acknowledges our title to the cave of Machpelah be considered as if he had observed the Ten Commandments.” We find similarly excessive sounding verbiage in Chronicles I chapter 21 where David’s purchase of the threshing ground of Arnon the Jebusite is described by Ezra Hasofer. The word Arnon appears no fewer than ten times in that report! One of the moral lessons to be derived from our chapter is that even if man may conquer the whole of the inhabited part of the earth during his lifetime, in the end, when it is time to be buried, all he will own are the four cubits where he has been laid to rest. Avraham had been given the entire earth as a gift from G’d and what he had acquired by paying for it was only the cave of Machpelah in the “city of four, i.e. in Chevron.” Even though the Israelites conquered the whole of the land of Canaan by the sword, we find that three locations in that country are distinguished especially. This was so because they had not been acquired by force of arms but by legal tender, the previous owners having willingly forfeited their claim to these properties. They are Chevron, Mount Gerizim and Mout Eyval, and Mount Moriah. The Torah has documented our claim to Chevron in this portion. Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval were the mountains where G’d concluded a covenant with the Jewish people (the generation which had not been of age or had not been born at the time of the Exodus). This area had already been bought by Yaakov when the Torah reported in Genesis 33,19: “Yaakov bought the piece of land, etc.” Mount Moriah’s purchase has been documented in Chronicles I chapter 21,.
ויזר, same as ויפזר, “he scattered.” The construction from the root פזר is parallel to vayiken, from the root kanah, (compare Genesis 33,19) Compare also the root זרה which would be vayizer as here. We find the word in this sense in Numbers 17,2 ואת האש זרה הלאה, “and throw the fire (flame) away.”
ויבז, the word is equivalent to Numbers 15,31 ויבזה from את דבר ה' בזה, the construction being parallel to ויקן as a form of the past tense קנה, “he bought, he acquired” (Genesis 33,19)
וגם הקמתי וגו׳ ALSO I SET UP [MY COVENANT WITH THEM TO GIVE THEM THE LAND OF CANAAN], and yet when Abraham wished to bury Sarah he could not obtain a grave until he purchased one at a high price. So, too, in the case of Isaac, people strove with him for possession of the wells which he had dug. Similarly, of Jacob it is stated, (Genesis 33:19) “He purchased a parcel of field,” in which to pitch his tent. Yet none of them criticised My dealings with them, whilst you say “Wherefore hast Thou done so evil [to this people!]” — But this Midrashic exposition does not fit in with the text for several reasons. Firstly, because Scripture does not state “And they did not ask of Me regarding my Name, the Lord”. And if you say in refutation of my objection that they did not mean that ושמי ה' לא נודעתי actually signifies that they did not ask what is My Name, but it means “He did not tell them that this was His Name and yet they did not ask Him what it was”, then I reply that these words cannot mean that He did not tell them His name, for at the very first when He revealed Himself to Abraham at the Covenant “between the pieces’’ it is said, (Genesis 15:7) “I am the Lord (אני ה׳) who brought thee out from Ur of the Chaldees”. Further (secondly), how does the context run on to the statements which Scripture places after the above verses, viz., “And I have also heard etc.” and “Wherefore say unto the children of Israel etc.”? Therefore I say: let Scripture be explained in its literal sense so that each statement fits into its proper setting, but the Midrashic exposition may also be given, if you like, as it is said (Jeremiah 23:29) “Is not my word like as fire, saith the Lord, and like a hammer which, by the force of its own blow, the rock at which it strikes shatters in pieces”.
כברת הארץ A KIBRATH OF LAND — Menachem ben Seruk explains the word כברת to have the meaning of כביר “much” and that the phrase means a great distance. A Midrashic explanation is: at the time when the ground was full of holes and was riddled like a sieve (כברה) (cf. Rashi on Genesis 48:7) — when there was plenty of ploughed ground; the winter was passed, but the dry season had not yet come. This, however, cannot be the literal sense of the verse, for in the case of Naaman we find (2 Kings 5:19) “So he departed from him כברת ארץ” (which cannot possibly have this meaning). I think that it is a name for a measure of land, the distance of a Parsa or more, just as you say (Isaiah 5:10) “acres (צמדי) of vineyard” and (33:19) “the parcel (חלקת) of field”: In the same way in reference to a man’s journey Scripture mentions the name of a measure — viz., a כברת ארץ, a כברה of land.
He established (tikken): These are things of grace (chen) and giving (based on the word, vayichan). But it appears that it is from [the next verse, Genesis 33:19], vayiken, which is an expression of establishing (tikkun).
Recall that the shevatim, angry and jealous of Joseph, set out from Hebron to Shechem, a distance of more than a hundred kilometers (over sixty miles). Their stated purpose? To shepherd their flocks. Perhaps they traveled so far north to attend to their father’s land holdings in the area, (Genesis 33:19.) or perhaps they sought to distance themselves significantly from Joseph. What is particularly strange is that they did not end their journey there, but traveled even farther north, up to Dothan. As Joseph set out to find them, he had an unusual encounter:
The Gemara records a series of similar statements: And Rabbi Akiva said: When I went to Galia, I heard that they called a menstruating woman galmuda, and this clarifies the meaning of that word in Scripture. It should be understood as follows: What does galmuda mean? She is separated [gemula da] from her husband, as all physical contact between a menstruating woman and her husband is forbidden. And Rabbi Akiva said: When I went to Africa, I heard that they called a ma’a, which is a certain coin, kesita. The Gemara asks: What is the practical significance of this? The Gemara answers: To explain that the words in the Torah relating to Jacob’s purchase of his field near Shechem: “And he bought the parcel of ground where he had spread his tent, from the sons of Hamor for a hundred kesita” (Genesis 33:19), denote a hundred dankei, i.e., a hundred ma’a.
The bones of Joseph, which the Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem, in the piece of ground that Jacob had bought for a hundred kesitahs (kesitahs See note at Gen. 33.19.) from the children of Hamor, Shechem’s father, and which had become a heritage of the Josephites.
He bought the part [possession] of the field where he had spread his tent, from the sons of Chamor, father of Shechem, for one hundred kesitahs [sheep].
and bought the possession of a field where lie spread his tent from the hand of the sons of Hamor father of Shekem, for a hundred pearls.
| וַיַּצֶּב־שָׁ֖ם מִזְבֵּ֑חַ וַיִּ֨קְרָא־ל֔וֹ אֵ֖ל אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ | 20 E | He set up an altar there, and called it El-elohe-yisrael. (El-elohe-yisrael “El, God of Israel.”) |
3D. This : El HaVaYaH is in the World of Yetzirah (Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar HaZemirot 5, p.150). El is the aspect of truth, as in “El (the Omnipotent One) is not a man, that He should be false” (Numbers 23:19). This is the aspect of Yaakov, as our Sages, of blessed memory, said: How do we know that God called Yaakov El? Because it is written (Genesis 33:20), “and called him El, the God of [Israel]” (Megillah 18a). Yaakov is the aspect of truth, as explained above. And this truth, which is the aspect of the World to Come, is contingent on livelihood. When a person has a living and is not dependent on other human beings, he is capable of praying honestly, as explained above.
El corresponds to prayer. This is because El connotes strength; that [God] is powerful and omnipotent. And through prayer, Israel is called “El, ” as in: How do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Yaakov “El ”? It is stated (Genesis 33:20), “and called him El.” (Megillah 18a). Through prayer we take God’s strength for ourselves, as it were, and so can nullify His decrees. This shows that we have strength. The Jewish people are therefore called “El, ” on account of prayer, which signifies strength.
However, the idea is, as it is written about Jacob: “And he called Him E-l, G–d of Israel.” (Genesis 33:20; commentaries, ad loc.) The meaning of this is as follows. In truth, G–d, as His Name is, so is He. (For He and His Name are entirely one (see below, note 9). G–d’s appellates are His attributes. The Divine attributes are of the Divine essence, and G–d is absolutely one with His essence. Cf. Likkutei Amarim, Part II, ch. 8 ff. See also Kuzari 2:2 and Moreh Nevuchim 1:51 ff.) Though He permeates all the upper and lower worlds, from the peak of all levels to this lowly physical world [as it is written: “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth,” (Jeremiah 23:24.) I Myself, indeed, meaning, His Being and His Essence, as it were, and not only His glory], even so, He is kadosh (holy) (Denoting separateness; cf. Mechilta, Yitro, s.v. Bachodesh, ch. 2 (on Exodus 19:6), and Sifra, beg. of Kedoshim (on Leviticus 19:2).) and distinct from the upper and nether worlds, and is not at all contained in them, Heaven forfend, in the way, for example, that the soul of man is contained in the body, as explained elsewhere at length. (Cf. Likkutei Amarim, Part I, ch. 42.)
ויקרא לו, He called it אל, the construction is similar to Genesis 20 13: אמרי לי אחי הוא, “say, concerning me, that he is my brother.” The word לו here may be understood as if it had been עלי, “on it,” in other words: he proclaimed the altar as dedicated the G-d Who is the G-d of Israel. This is also how Onkelos translates it. Rashi emphasises that it was not the altar that was called: “the G-d of Israel,” by the nations of the world, but that Yaakov called it by a name that symbolised the special relationship between G-d and Israel on account of all the miracles He had performed for him. It is not so different from when he called the site where he had the dream with the ladder 34 years earlier, Beyt El (Genesis 5,7), after he erected an altar there. We find a similar construction in Judges 6,24 where Gideon built an altar in honour of G-d, and named it: ה' שלום. This is also how we understand the name Moses gave the altar he built after having fought off the Amalekites in Exodus 17,17 which became known as ה' נסי, “the Lord is my Banner.”
[AND CALLED IT EL-ELOHE-ISRAEL.] (God, the God of Israel.) Saadiah explained that and called it El-elohe-Israel means, He called to the Lord, “El-elohe-Israel.” (The word lo can mean either it or him. Saadiah had difficulty in accepting that Jacob called the altar God, the God of Israel. Hence he did not interpret lo as meaning it, i.e., the altar, but rather as Him, i.e., God. He interprets our verse as: And called to Him, God, God of Israel (Krinsky). For a slightly different interpretation see Cherez.) However, the correct interpretation is that he called the altar El-elohe-Israel (God, the God of Israel). Moses similarly called the altar he erected Adonai-nissi (the Lord is my banner) (Ex. 17:15) because of the miracle God performed in that place. Similarly, when the Divine Presence will once again return to Jerusalem, the city will be called Adonai-shammah (the Lord is there) (Ezek. 48:35). Jacob similarly called the altar whereupon he served the Lord, El-elohe-Israel (God, the God of Israel) because God came to his aid. The name El (God) means the One who is powerful and mighty. (God thereby demonstrated His might Therefore, Jacob called him El, mighty and powerful.)
ELOHE-ISRAEL. He saved him on the way and ensured his safe arrival in Canaan, where Succoth (Verse 17.) and Shechem are located. (Where Jacob now camped.) I believe that Jacob spent many years in the city of Shechem, for at the time of Jacob’s arrival in Shechem, Dinah was less than seven years old and also Simeon and Levi were yet small children. (Jacob stayed in Laban’s house for 20 years. He married Leah and Rachel after seven years, and with the exception of Benjamin, all of his children were born in the next seven years (cf. I.E. on Gen. 30:23). Reuben, his eldest, was a little over 12. Simeon and Levi, the next two in order, a bit younger. Dinah, who was born in the 14th year of Jacob’s service to Laban, had to be under seven. The question thus arises, could what is described in Chapter 34 apply to such a little girl? Dinah is described as a young lady of age. Furthermore, could children of Simeon and Levi’s age, preadolescents, overcome and slay a city? Could pre-adolescents act and talk the way Jacob’s sons are described as doing in Chapter 34? I.E. thus suggests that many years passed between the end of Chapter 33 and Chapter 34. During these years Jacob’s children had grown. It should be noted that in putting forth this interpretation I.E. is taking issue with the Midrash which states that Simeon and Levi were 13 when they destroyed Shechem. Cf. Bereshit Rabbah 80.)
“El, God of Israel.”
ויצב שם מזבח ויקרא לו אל אלוהי ישראל , “he set up an altar there and he called it G’d, G’d the Lord of Israel.” The plain meaning of these words is that Yaakov named the altar after the G’d who had performed a miracle for him at that site. Moses did something similar as the Torah reports in Exodus 17,16 after Israel had warded off the attack by Amalek “Moses built an altar and called it: ‘G’d is My banner.’” A kabbalistic approach: the G’d of Israel called Yaakov “EL.” This is also what our sages have said in Bereshit Rabbah 79,8. The wording there is that G’d said to Israel: “I am G’d in heaven whereas you are “EL” on earth.” This would reflect what we have quoted repeatedly that Yaakov’s likeness is engraved on the throne of G’d. The meaning of these strange words in the Midrash is that the שכינה resides in the land of Israel. This would account for Bileam having said in Numbers 23,8 “how can I curse when “EL” has not cursed?” He referred to Yaakov when he said “EL.” [The wording in my edition is quite different, i.e. Israel speaking in those terms to G‘d. The Midrash adds that Yaakov spoke out of turn and that G’d criticised him and the rape of Dinah was a result of his overbearing statement. Ed.]
ויצב שם, considering that the Torah used the word ויצב instead of ויבן, he built, it is probable that this altar consisted of only one large lab of stone. He placed this stone in the appropriate position to serve as an altar upon which to offer his sacrifice.
ויקרא לו א-ל אלו-הי ישראל, he named the altar thus in commemoration of the fact that G’d had saved him while he was en route, and had sent an angel to accomplish that, and had also changed his name to Yisrael. It is possible that he placed the stone at the site where he had the nocturnal encounter with the angel. We find a parallel to this in Exodus 17,15 where Moses called the altar he had built ה' נסי, “G’d is my miracle,” in commemoration of the miracle G’d had performed for the Israelites enabling them to defeat the Amalekites. Another similar example of the name of G’d being linked to the salvation He brings to the Jewish people, albeit in the future, is found in Jeremiah 23,6, זה שמו אשר יקראו ה' צדקנו. A similar verse occurs in Jeremiah 33,17, whereas in Ezekiel 48,35 we found a city (the new Jerusalem) being named after an event (the redemption), the new name meaning: “the Lord is there.”
AND HE CALLED ‘LO’ (IT) E-IL-ELOKEI-ISRAEL. It does not mean that the altar was called “The G-d of Israel,” but because the Holy One, blessed be He, had been with him to deliver him, he named the altar in honor of the miracle so that the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He, would be recalled when people referred to the altar. Thus it would mean, “He Who is E-il is the G-d of me whose name is Israel.” Similarly we find in the case of Moses: And he called its [the altar’s] name Adonai-nissi. (Exodus 17:15.) It is not that the altar was called by the Divine Name Adonai but rather that he named the altar in honor of the miracle so that the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He, might be mentioned: “G-d — He is my banner.” Our Rabbis expounded that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob eil (a great and mighty man). [According to this, the verse should be interpreted as follows: “And the G-d of Israel called Jacob eil].” The words of the Torah are thus as a hammer splitting the rock into many different pieces, admitting many different explanations. I, however, make it my aim to render the plain sense of Scripture. All of this is the language of Rashi. Now the words of the Rabbi [Rashi] are correct as regards the plain sense of Scripture. And the meaning of the word lo will then be [not “it,” which would refer to the altar, but “him,” which refers to Jacob], just as is the meaning of the same word in the verses: And his father called ‘lo’ (him) Benjamin; (Genesis, 35:18.) ‘Vekarei lecha’ (and thou shalt be called) The repairer of the breach. (Isaiah 58:12.) Know that it was the custom in Israel that names be called which are indicative of the praises of G-d, such as Zuriel (Numbers 3:35.) (G-d is my rock), Zurishaddai (Ibid., 7:36.) (The Almighty is my rock), for the one who calls that name declares that G-d is his rock and the Almighty is his rock. Likewise, Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14.) (G-d is with us). And so also the name of the Messiah, who will be called, The Eternal is our righteousness, (Jeremiah 23:6.) and the name of Jerusalem will be, The Eternal is there. (Ezekiel 48:35.) And so did they do with the names of the angels: Gabriel (Daniel 8:16.) (G-d is my strength), Michael (Ibid., 10:13.) (Who is like unto G-d?), for because of their great power they proclaim with their very name that the strength belongs to G-d and who is like unto Him! Onkelos however said: “And he worshipped on it before G-d, the G-d of Israel.” In that case the meaning of the word lo will be as bo (“in it” or “on it”), in the same manner as: That thou hast chosen ‘l’ben’ (the son) of Jesse; (I Samuel 20:30.) And he took hold ‘lo’ (of him); (II Samuel 15:5.) ‘L’mei’ (In the waters) of Meribah. (Numbers 20:24.) It may be that Scripture is saying, “And he called Him G-d, the G-d of Israel,” and the meaning of the word lo is similar to the usage in these verses: I will get me unto the great men; (Jeremiah 5:5.) Get thee out of thy country. (Above, 12:1.) And by way of the Truth, [that is, the mystic lore of the Cabala, the verse is to be understood] as being in accord with the Midrash which the Rabbis have expounded in Tractate Megillah: (18a.) “Whence do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob eil? It is said, And He — the G-d of Israel — called him ‘eil.’ “ There is in this matter a great secret, which the Sages have additionally mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah (79:10.) in another way: “Jacob said to G-d, ‘Thou art the G-d of those on high, and I am the master of those down below.’” The Sages thereby alluded to that which they constantly say: the likeness of Jacob is engraved in the Heavenly Throne. (Tanchuma Numbers 19.) The intent [of Jacob’s statement quoted in the Midrash — “I am the master of those down below”] — is that the Divine Glory rests in the Land of Israel. The student learned in the mystic lore of the Cabala will understand.
א-ל אלו-הי ישראל, Who has saved me from Lavan as well as from Esau. The wording means that the same G’d Who had been the G’d of someone called Yaakov, continued in His role as the G’d of Yisrael. Just as people who are called Eliezer (G’s is my help) are also called Immanuel, seeing that the meaning is identical, so also the comparison between the G’d of Yaakov and the G’d of Yisrael. I believe this is the plain meaning of our verse.
ויקרא לו אל אלהי ישראל AND HE CALLED IT EL-ELOHE ISRAEL — It does not mean that the altar was named “The God of Israel” thus bearing a Divine Name, but because the Holy One blessed be He, had been with him and delivered him he called the name of the altar by a term that had an allusion to the miracle, so that the praise of God might be mentioned when people called it by its name. Thus it would mean: He who is El, God — viz, the Holy One, blessed be He — is the God of me whose name is Israel. We find something similar in the case of Moses (Exodus 17:15): “And he called its (the altar’s) name Adonai-Nissi. Not that the altar was called by the Divine Name Adonai, but he named the altar thus, to mention the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He: “The Lord — He is my banner!" Our Rabbis, of blessed memory, expounded it thus: that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob by the name El. The verse therefore should be translated “and the God of Israel called him (Jacob) El” (Megillah 18a). And in reference to all these different explanations it may be said that the words of the Torah — just as a hammer splits the rock into many different pieces (Shabbat 88b) — may be given many different explanations. I however make it my aim to give the plain sense of Scripture.
ויצב שם מזבח ויקרא לו וגו׳, beides ungewöhnlich. Das Errichten eines מזבה heißt sonst: עשה ,בנה, nie aber: הציב. Ferner lesen wir sonst von den Vätern nach dem Bauen des Altars ויקרא בשם ד׳, hier aber ויקרא לו א׳ א׳ י׳. Schon oben Kap.28. V. 10, haben wir das Verhältnis von מצבה (worauf ויצב hinweist) und מזבה zu einander angedeutet. מצבה, der einzelne, von der Natur gereichte Stein, entspricht dem Erinnerungsdenkmal an das, was Gott an uns getan, und war daher אהובה לאבות, die Gott vor allem erst in seinem Walten, in Natur und Geschichte, zu erkennen und zu lehren hatten. Die Menschentat offenbarte mehr den Menschen als Gott, der noch nicht durch die תרי"ג Mizwot seines Gesetzes die Entfaltung eines ganzen, in seinem Dienste zu vollbringenden Menschen- und Volkslebens zur Offenbarung seines Willens und Waltens geweiht hatte. Bei den אבות hatte daher die מצבה neben dem die Hingebung der Menschentätigkeit an Gott ausdrückenden מזבח ihre vollberechtigte Geltung. Dem entsprechend war auch die מצבה vorzugsweise zu נסכים, zur Anerkennung der von Gott erhaltenen Segensspenden, מזבח aber zu קרבנות, zur Hingebung des ganzen lebendigen Wesens bestimmt. Mit מתן תורה tritt nicht nur מזבח in den Vordergrund, sondern es geht מצבה völlig in ihn auf: die Huldigung Gottes in dem uns von seinen Händen werdenden Geschicke durch מצבה, getrennt von der Dahingebung der ganzen Tätigkeit unseres inneren und äußeren Lebens an die Vollbringung seines Willens, wird sündhaft. Denn nicht mehr in dem, was von Ihm uns, sondern in dem, was von uns Ihm wird, nicht mehr in der Beherrschung des Himmels und der Erde, sondern in der Beherrschung des Menschenlebens, nicht mehr in unserem Geschicke, sondern in unserer Tat will Gott geschaut und offenbar werden, nicht mehr soll unser Tun ein Produkt unseres Geschickes, sondern unser Geschick, unser Wohl und Weh selbst, eine Schöpfung unseres Tuns und Lassens, von ihm bedingt, uns ihm hervorgehend sein; — מצבה schwindet und מזבח allein wird für עולה ומנחה, für זבה ונסכים, die gemeinsame Stätte, die durch ihre Konstruktion und Bedeutung die Aufgabe verkündet: durch die Gottes Gesetz vollbringende Menschentätigkeit die Erde zu einem הרא, zu einem "Gottesberg" zu erheben, auf welchem das alles überwältigende Feuer des Gesetzes — das אש דת als אריא — die weithin leuchtende Offenbarung Gottes auf Erden zu sein bestimmt ist.15 Mit dem Eintritt Jakobs auf den künftigen Boden dieses Gesetzes bezeichnete Jakob vorbereitend diesen Wendepunkt, indem er ויצב שם מזבח, indem er dort einen מזבח als מצבה, als Denkmal errichtete, damit aussprechend, daß hier, auf diesem Boden, das "von Menschen zu Bauende" das "Gottesoffenbarungs-Denkmal" werden, Gott aus dem Menschenleben hervorleuchten solle, es hier nicht gelte, nur Wohl und Wehe dankend oder ergeben aus Gottes Händen hinzunehmen, sondern mit allem und in allem alles Irdische zum göttlichen Wohlgefallen in Vollbringung seines Willens zu umwandeln.
Daher auch — ויקרא לו, er verkündete sich und den Seinen. Die Väter קראו בשם ד׳ riefen nach außen im Namen Gottes, riefen die Menschen im Namen Gottes, riefen sie zu dem Bewusstsein, daß Gott nicht nur der ist, der die Welt vor Jahrtausenden erschaffen, sondern der ist, der noch Himmel und Erde trägt und von dem noch unmittelbar jeder gegenwärtige und kommende Moment stammt. Was aber Jakob mit diesem als מצבה errichteten מזבח verkünden wollte, das hatte er nicht nach außen, das hatte er zunächst erst sich und den Seinen zu verkünden: daß אל, daß die Allmacht, von der alles stammt im Himmel und auf Erden, daß sie אלקי ישראל sein und werden wolle, Israels Gesetzgeber, Richter und Gott, sichtbar nicht nur in Israels Geschick, sondern vor allem sichtbar in Israels Tat.
Ist ja dieser Gedanke bis auf den heutigen Tag noch zunächst Erbteil der Jakobsfamilie geblieben und hat noch erst seine Arbeit auch an uns zur vollen Verwirklichung zu bringen. "Glaube und Hoffnung", "Tröstung und Stärkung" diese מצבה-Gedanken sind außer dem jüdischen Kreise das, was vor allem von der "Religion"; von der Beziehung der Menschen zu Gott erwartet wird, und feiert diese daher vorzüglich ihre Siege als Retterin der Menschen im Schiffbruch des Geschickes. Aber die volle Unterwerfung des ganzen vollkräftigen Lebens unter den göttlichen Willen, die Pflegung des Gesetzes als des alleinigen "Baumes des Lebens" für den einzelnen wie die Gesamtheit, die volle und ganze Beherrschung des Lebens in allen Beziehungen und Fügen durch die geoffenbarte Norm des göttlichen Willens, kurz, das Gesetz und der ihm entsprechende freie, freudige Gehorsam, diese Gestaltung des ganzen Menschenlebens zu einem Denkmal der Gottesoffenbarung, das ist dennoch der von Jakobs Haus allein gepflegte Schatz, und erst am Ende der Tage werden die Völker sprechen: ויורנו מדרכיו ונלכה בארחתיו. —
Nach der Ansicht ׳רי יהודה ׳s, daß גיד הנשה nicht bloß נכתב במקומו, sondern schon sofort nach dem Ereignis, — נוהג בבני נח — selbst vor מתן תורה von Jakobs Nachkommen beobachtet worden war, erhielte alles Obige noch die tiefere Begründung, daß ja sodann mit גיד הנשה der Anfang gemacht war, den Gottesgedanken nicht mehr nur durch den toten מצבה-Stein, sondern durch die lebendige, das ganze Leben beglückende מצוה-Tat zu verewigen. Um so prägnanter wäre dann das: ויצב שם מזבח וגו׳. —
ויקרא לו א-ל אלו-הי ישראל. When he prayed he referred to G’d as the G’d Who is the אלו-הי ישראל, corresponding to his vow that והיה ה' לי לאלו-הים, “G’d the merciful will be accepted by me as the G’d of Justice.” This standard of being judged by the attribute of Justice commenced only at the time when Yaakov had qualified for this level of righteousness having been given the additional name of Yisrael.
Our Sages interpret that it was God who called Yaakov... It is as if it said ויקרא אלקי ישראל ליעקב אל. I.e., Hashem is the Almighty above, and so is Yaakov below. Why? Because the Divine Presence rests on earth because of Yaakov — thus it is considered as if he was the Almighty.
He established there an altar, and called it El Elohei Israel, meaning the Strong God of Israel. 8 Naming an altar in this manner was not unusual, as they were not treated as mere instrumental structures, but were anthropomorphized, given a name and identity. The commentaries note that Moses similarly named an altar “The Lord Is My Standard” 9 and Jerusalem was called “The Lord Is There.” 10
The distinction between such terms as nefesh, ruach, and neshamah respectively is found already in Zohar on Parshat Acharey. We have discussed it in detail in Chapter six, where we described nefesh as equivalent to a primeval life force, an outgrowth of the body, yet abstract in nature. What is meant is man's ability to think, feel, perceive in a cognitive manner. Ruach, on the other hand is the spiritual force supplied by G-d. Neshamah is the synthesis created by nefesh and ruach together, through a righteous mode of life. Nefesh has then attached itself ever more firmly to ruach. It thus loses its erstwhile subservience to its physical master, its body. When Abigail said to David (Samuel I 25,29), "May the life force of my master be bound in the bundle of immortal life with the Lord your G-d," she did not use the term neshamah, but she said nefesh. This bears out our interpretation of the word nefesh and its loftiest destiny. In Jacob we find for the first time someone among the patriarchs who had achieved all three stages. He achieved the attachment of nefesh to ruach that results in neshamah. He became a spiritual personality that had absorbed and completely sublimated the purely physical nefesh. This is why we find Jacob called by three different names on three different occasions: 1) Jacob 2) Israel 3) Eyl (compare Genesis 33,20). The latter term is the name for his neshamah. This is a spiritual state achieved only by a select few in our national history. Rabbi Yochanan said wisely, "Our father Jacob did not die, since he had been able to convert even that which had an exclusively physical base into a spiritual force. The derivation from the verse "Do not fear My servant Jacob, do not be afraid Israel," then uses the first two names of Jacob to tell us that just as his descendants are alive, so is he himself alive. This, of course, is something that can be achieved by the masses, and they can thus assure themselves of immortality. This is the normal way with tzaddikim. Their prime life force is welded to their ruach so that it survives the demise of the body it once inhabited. Frequently such a synthethis is not achieved and demonstrated until the body does indeed decay. Rare indeed is the person of whom it can be said during his lifetime on earth that he has already achieved this degree of saintliness. When G-d gave Jacob the appellation Eyl on his return to the holy land, this was one of these few occasions. Because the listener had understood the gist of Rabbi Yochanan's remarks, he asked, "If so, what was the purpose of the eulogy and the elaborate embalming which seem to demonstrate that Jacob's death was no different from any other death?" On the contrary, instead of eulogizing him they should have composed hymns of thanksgiving! Concerning this problem, Aristotle already has stated that anything repeated often enough by enough people assumes a dimension of truth that is impossible to uproot. This is why King Saul was so upset about the praises sung about David, "Saul slew thousands, but David tens of thousands" (Samuel I 18,7). Therefore, Rabbi Yitzchak stated that he could prove from scripture something which for psychological reasons could not be demonstrated by human behavior. This verse is more authoritative concerning what happened to Jacob than the report about how his survivors treated his body after it had ceased to function. The manifestation of death observed by Joseph's brothers is not surprising, since the death of the bodies of even the most saintly people is a phenomenon that is inescapable, due to four basic causes. When the Talmud in Sukkah 29 describes four causes for the eclipse of the sun, it may refer not to the sun in our solar system, but may describe four reasons that cause the death of the bodies of those people whose spiritual light illuminates our lives just as the sun illuminates and gives warmth to the earth. The Talmud describes people as suns on several occasions, such as in Yuma 38, when the verse "And the sun shines and the sun sets," in Kohelet 1,5, is applied to the birth of potential Jewish leaders preceding the death of the existing Jewish leaders of the last generation. So, for instance, the prophet Samuel's light began to shine before the light of the High Priest Eli was eclipsed. Death itself is hinted as being due to the following four causes: 1) Failure to adequately eulogize leading Torah scholars. This is considered equivalent to removing vital juices from the body. This cause of death is the most serious one, since one does not relate the effect to the cause, not noticing the absence of the vital juices until it is too late. 2) The practice of sodomy. This shows that a person whose function in life is to be active, to initiate, is instead content to remain merely passive. When man becomes merely an object rather than a subject, the functions of his body have been usurped; therefore, death of such a person will not be long delayed. 3) Failure of the digestive system, something beyond man's control once he has ingested the food. The fact that this food is not converted into life sustaining energy, additions to the bloodstream etc., causes death. 4) The natural tendency of the soul to return to its father in Heaven, and to escape imprisonment in a body. This is expressed symbolically as being like a betrothed girl who is raped in broad daylight, and whose cries for help have gone unanswered. The body is helpless to resist the soul's efforts to return to Heaven. The prophet Elijah, who did not die a natural death, and the significance of stories in the Talmud about Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi, are discussed in Chapter 105.
The author now proceeds to explain the thirteen attributes in the traditional way, including their use by G-d with the earlier generations, i.e. ever since Abraham until the time of the exile in Egypt, since Egypt up to that point, and their use in the future. The first use of the four lettered name expresses the essence of G-d as the Creator, the only existence prior to and subsequent to the existence of the universe. From this, the Rabbis in Berachot 60, deduce that this name is the source of mercy since He is the father of all creatures, and we ask Him to "have mercy such as a father has on his children." Psalms 103, 13, mentions that G-d "exercises mercy on all those who revere Him." It was this attribute of G-d that Abraham proclaimed in his time to his contemporaries. Whenever we read in the Torah "He proclaimed in the name of the Lord," (using the four lettered name) this is the message that Abraham conveyed to his listeners. It was this attribute that G-d used in His dealings with Abraham, except on the occasion of the akeydah, when He commanded him to offer up his son. On that occasion, G-d employed the attribute of elokim. The second time the four lettered name is used in the thirteen attributes, it reflects the ongoing supervision of history as well as individual fates that G-d employs. Also, the fact that He relates to His creatures either with pleasure or displeasure, according to their deeds. This is why we find on occasion a combination of the four lettered name with the name elokim .(Deut. 3,24) By using the four lettered name, He excercises mercy on the sinner when the latter repents. Since no man is totally free from sin, our sages in Rosh Hashanah 17, express this in the words "I, the four lettered attribute, am the same before the sin as I am after man sinned and repented." In the words of David, "G-d has mercy on those who revere Him, since He knows our urges, our inner psyche." (Psalms 103, 13) The message then is that although man has sinned, G-d does not necessarily change His attitude to such a person. This is also the meaning of Samuel II 12, 13 "G-d has removed your sin from you." G-d employed this attribute with Isaac when the latter was lying bound on the altar. In the blessing that Isaac bestowed on Jacob, he used both attributes, to teach his sons that G-d employs both attributes in His dealings with man. The third attribute "keyl,” is an attribute denoting strength, such as when we read about eyle ha-aretz, (Kings II 24, 15); it also represents a form of the attribute of mercy, as we read "the Lord your G-d is an eyl of mercy." The same meaning is used in Psalms 22,2, "my eyl my eyl, why have You forsaken me?" This term is employed when G-d needs to employ the attribute of mercy in order to suppress the attribute of justice that seems to be called for. It would be used either to assist those who have not sinned, or those who have sinned and repented. This was the attribute G-d used with Jacob on a regular basis. G-d also used it when He blessed Jacob. (Genesis 31, 13) "I am the eyl of Beyt El, or (Genesis 33,20) "He called Him the keyl, Lord of Israel." The fourth attribute, that of rachum, merciful, is used when a person or group of people have expressed incomplete repentance. This attribute was employed in Egypt, when the Jews had not completely repented their former way of life. When David describes G-d as having extended this kind of mercy to the Jewish people who had erred so frequently, this was also before they had repented fully. (Psalms 106,46) When G-d responded to the first outcry of the Jewish people in Egypt, and the Torah states "G-d knew," that refers to the loving kindness implied in mercy. (Targum Exodus 2,25) We find that meaning of "He knew" also, in Ruth 2, 1, and other places. The fifth attribute, chanun, gracious, is used by G-d on people who have nothing to commend them. Our sages say that G-d showed Moses three treasures. Moses asked "why do You need three treasures?" G-d replied "one is for those who study Torah and perform the commandments. The second is for those who perform deeds of loving kindness. The third is for those who perform neither the one nor the other, to whom however, I wish to give an undeserved gift." This is the meaning of "I shall be gracious to whomsoever I shall be gracious to." (Midrash Rabbah Song of Songs 45) The Midrash in Parshat Va-etchanan says that "righteous people, though they may possess all kinds of merits, ask G-d for free gifts." This attribute was employed by G-d when the Jews were promised great wealth upon leaving Egypt. G-d had said "I will give the grace of these people in the eyes of Egypt." (Exodus 3, 21) Again, in chapter 12, 36, we read "and G-d had given the grace of the people in the eyes of the Egyptians, and they lent to them." In the Haggadah of Passover, in the paragraph known as dayeynu, we thank G-d for all the favours He had performed for us, seeing that they were totally undeserved. The sixth attribute is erech apayim, long delayed anger, and refers to G-d’s relationship with unrepentant sinners suffering from heavy burdens of sins. If G-d were to treat them according to the principle of justice, their punishment would result in their utter destruction. G-d therefore exacts the punishment only a little at a time, even when He does employ a measure of the attribute of justice. He hopes that in this way, such sinners may eventually repent the sins they have committed. The reason the word apayim appears in the plural, is that it may refer both to tzaddikim and wicked people. (Baba Kama 50) Both have errors to account for. Or, it may refer to both reward and punishment, the former sometimes being parcelled out sparingly, so that it may be saved up for the world to come. This attribute was employed in dealing with Pharaoh as well as with Israel, whenever either acted rebelliously in Egypt, at the sea, or in the desert. An expression of G-d using this attribute can be found in His exclamation "how long will this nation refuse to obey My commandments!" ((Exodus 16, 28) The seventh attribute is rav chessed, favouring kind deeds, allowing them to be weighty. This concerns the treatment of people whose merits and demerits are in balance, and who require a tipping of the scales in their favour. This can be accomplished by weighing down the merits which would raise the demerit side, or vice versa. (Rosh Hashanah 17) The logic is discussed in Midrash shocher tov on Psalms 62. Rabbi Nehoray is quoted as saying that since wickedness is sterile by definition, does not produce growth by itself, whereas goodness is dynamic, productive by definition, the latter when in balance with the former, will eventually outweigh the former. The eighth attribute, emet, truth ,refers to the truthfulness and reliability of fulfilling promises made. We read in Chabakuk 2,3, "if He tarries, wait for HIM, He will surely come, He will not be late." The Talmud Berachot 7, states that a promise of something good, even if given conditionally has never been withdrawn, as we know from Moses. One must realise, however, that this is based on the assumption that the recipient of such a promise has not meanwhile forfeited it through a change in his own behaviour. Proof can be found in Jeremiah 19. See also the discussion on this in chapter thirteen of this volume. G-d employed this attribute at the time the Torah was given to Israel, making good promises He had given to the ancestors and Moses. The ninth attribute is "He preserves His kindness to thousands of generations." Just as the children of the wealthy, if not enterprising themselves, would starve or die were it not for their parental inheritance, so man, if devoid of the accumulated merits of his forefathers, would not have any spiritual capital to draw on, and would quickly forfeit his claim to continued existence. David expresses this thought in Psalms 17, 14 "they will have lots of children and leave their abundance to their offspring." This attribute needed to be employed during the episode of the golden calf, when the attribute of "slow to anger" did not suffice, and Moses proceeded to invoke the merits of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Immediately he had done so, we read "G-d reconsidered." This is beautifully illustrated in Shemot Rabbah 44. "Moses asked G-d for permission to speak, which permission was granted. He said that if the Jewish people had violated the first half of YOUR commandment, will YOU violate the second half also?" Moses referred to the "you must not have any other deities," which had been violated by the Jewish people. He asked G-d "will You now violate Your commandment of "doing kindness for thousands of generations" (in the same commandment)? The tenth, eleventh and twelfth attributes "nosseh avon, va- fesha, ve-chata-ah," i.e. commuting various types of sins to levels that deserve less severe punishment, is usually understood as follows. avon is the sin committed deliberately, pesha is the sin that is committed to show one's rebellion against G-d’s legislation, whereas chata-ah is a sin committed unintentionally. During the episode of the golden calf, all three kinds of sin were committed. At any rate, G-d did not employ these attributes to forgive, merely to delay the punishment due for those sins, i.e. nosse, "carries." The punishment was meted out at another place at another time. It is important therefore to recite these sins in the proper order at the time one confesses them, i.e. vidduy. Accordingly, the plain meaning is that G-d tolerates not only deliberate sins, but even sins representing rebellion against Him. Naturally, He tolerates unintentional sin. The Midrash says that if repentance is forthcoming, the first two categories will be considered as if they had been like the third category, i.e. inadvertent. In other words, He raises them to the level of mere chet. This is the translation of Yonatan ben Uzziel in Chabakuk on the word al shigegotay, for my unintentional sins. However, in the Shulchan Aruch (Tur Or Hachayim 621), the ruling is that the confession is to be recited in the reverse order, commencing with the chet, the most minor category of sin, and to proceed progressively to the most major, the most serious. Each group of sin requires an additional attribute to save the sinner from the total consequences of each misdemeanour. Moses employed these attributes after the sin of the spies, when he said "as You have elevated the sins of the people ever since they came out of Egypt until now." (Numbers 14, 19) (7) The thirteenth attribute, venakkeh lo yenakkeh, He will consider innocent and yet not consider innocent. In our prayers, we separate the expression by a comma. There are serious doubts if that is the correct interpretation, however. We feel that there should not be a comma, that the whole expression is a single attribute, which is used in conjunction with any of the attributes ten, eleven or twelve. It means that G-d tolerates certain sins from time to time, without granting total forgiveness, since true pardon cannot take place without simultaneous repentance. Baba Kama 50, states that he who claims that G-d overlooks things, (ignores a sin completely) will cause his own life to be ignored. Psalms 25,8,states that "G-d is good and straightforward," meaning that He teaches the ways of repentance to sinners even after they have sinned. The explanation of how one can reconcile the apparent contradiction in "He visits the sins of the parents on the children," with the fact that G-d then not only punishes the perpetrators of the sins but also succeeding generations, lies in the delayed nature of the punishment. G-d waits until the fourth generation for actions that would give Him a reason to diminish the original punishment due the one who had perpetrated the sin. Therefore, this attribute is also one of mercy. This is why Moses mentions it at the time of the crisis with the spies. He asks: "are You going to kill this whole nation simultaneously, at once?" He continues "and now, let the power of G-d be great," (Numbers 14, 17) invoking this attribute revealed to him at Mount Sinai. Accordingly, we find G-d responding "I have forgiven according to your words." This means that by the time the land of Israel will have been entered, the punishment will have been exacted. The children suffered part of the punishment, having to wander in the desert for forty years. As the Torah states "and they will have to bear your harlotry." (Numbers 14,33) This means that the children will have to suffer the infidelity of the parents' generation. Concerning the question if the attribute of "visiting the sins on the children" is a "good" attribute or a "negative" attribute, there is a dispute between Nachmanides and Ibn Ezra. The author tends to agree with the view of the Tosephta in Sotah chapter 4, seeing that it is being contrasted with the attribute of extending the reward for up to two thousand generations. If one considers this a "good" attribute, then it is number thirteen, and the nakkeh ve-lo yenakkeh prior to it, must be understood merely as an adjective applicable to attributes ten, eleven and twelve, respectively. This cocludes the thirteen attributes which reveal the manner in which G-d relates to man in His dealings with him. At the time of this revelation, the "who elevates sins to a lesser level" had to be invoked to insure survival of the people after the golden calf. (8) Why then did Moses suddenly switch to the name of Adon, when he said to G-d "if I have found favour in Your eyes my Master, (adonay ) please walk in our midst" This is a name for G-d not mentioned in this whole Parshah! The sages of the Kabbalah teach us that this is the name which is the gateway to G-d, as we read in the shirat hayam the Jewish people offered as thanksgiving after having crossed the sea and seeing that the Egyptians had been drowned. "The temple of my Master, (adonay ) Your hands have firmly established." (Exodus 15, 17) The portal to the presence of G-d, the shechinah on earth, is via this appellation of G-d. This is why we preface the central prayer, the amidah with the words "my Master, please open my lips!" All supplicants enter via this name, this description of G-d. Sometimes the euphemism kol, all, is employed to describe G-d. This is to indicate that all is to be found within Him, that nothing is lacking. When Moses was told about the angel that would guide Israel towards the holy land in Parshat Mishpatim, the Torah says of that angel "for My name is within him," and the reference is to that name adon, the name by which he is nearest to us, easiest to be reached by the worshipper. So, when Moses prayed concerning his own personal plea to be allowed to enter the holy land in Parshat Va-etchanan, he also uses that name. "My Master, O Lord, You have begun to show Your servant ..." (Deut. 3,24.) Daniel in chapter nine, also uses that name on several occasions. It would appear that by using that appellation, forgiveness can be obtained, as proven from the quote in Daniel and also Psalms 86,3, and 15. After this new found knowledge, Moses asks G-d for His personal Providence, using the proper channels that had been revealed to him. He underlines the fact that the Jewish people are "a stiffnecked people," saying that because of this nosse avon, elevating their sin to a less serious level is not enough, that they require a complete pardon. An indication that Moses refers to this pardon is found in the request "forgive our sins, (of rebellion) our intentional sins, and let us take possession of Your inheritance." (34,9) The emphasis on this inheritance implies total and unconditional survival while in possession of the original promise of the land of Canaan. It was at this point that Moses had realised that the original angel was G-d Himself, in His function as elokim, attribute of justice. He realised that when G-d had said in Mishpatim 23,21, "be careful of this angel, listen to his voice, do not rebel against him, for he will not elevate your sins to a lesser degree of seriousness for My name is within him," that G-d had meant to tell him to be careful not to upset this method of Personal guidance by G-d, the attribute of not only elevating sin but the capacity to grant forgiveness. For this reason, during the episode of the sin of the spies, Moses said "let the power of the four lettered name be great," meaning "restore that kind of hashgachah to us!" If Moses says at the same time "and elevate the sin of this nation as You have done thus far," when he appears to refer only to G-d’s "weaker" attribute, he has in mind only the older generation of the Jewish people. For the younger generation he pleads for total forgiveness. G-d responds therefore by saying "I have forgiven, in accordance with your own words (request)." Moses’s further request, namely that G-d go with them, was because he wanted visible evidence that G-d had indeed forgiven them. This would be demonstrated by "Your walking with us." (33, 16) We find something similar when Abraham prayed for Sodom. When G-d responds that if fifty righteous people are found, He would save the town, the term "I will elevate" is used to describe suspension of judgment. G-d Himself appears as the four lettered name. He had not said "I will not do anything, but ve-nassati. When Abraham presses further, in the case of the forty five people, he omits reference to "will You not at least elevate," but simply asks "are You going to destroy?" At that point, G-d reassures Abraham without qualification "I will not do it." It is significant that Abraham had switched to the use of the adnut term for addressing G-d. In other words, Abraham wanted forgiveness not mere suspension of the penalty. G-d responded positively. When finally, at the end of the conversation, G-d departs from Abraham, the Torah describes the departure as the departure of the four lettered name, i.e. the attribute of mercy departing. This means that under the prevailing condition, the weaker attribute of mercy could no longer fulfil any function. Exodus Rabbah 32, quotes G-d as having said when He announced the appointment of the angel in Parshat Mishpatim "He who looked after the fathers, is now looking after the children." Similarly, Abraham had reassured Eliezer on his mission to Padan Aarm, that the G-d who had looked after him would also look out for Eliezer. (Genesis 24, 7) Further examples are quoted to show that all the authors of the various Midrashim are agreed in their understanding of the function of the angel mentioned in Parshat Mishpatim. (9) The "covenant" mentioned in 34, 10 was, that an appeal to the thirteen attributes of G-d now revealed to Moses would not remain unanswered. "I will perform miracles," as you Moses have asked. The Talmud Berachot 7, states that this implies that other nations will not have prophets to assist them. There are also many hints in this verse that future miracles that would be performed by men such as Joshua, who could arrest the orbits of the sun and the moon, would have the origin of their power in this authority granted Moses as a result of his prayer. See details in chapter thirteen. (10) Just as the name anee, I is used sometimes as a euphemism, kinnuy for "G-d," so G-d reassures Moses here that the same personal supervision that the Jewish people enjoyed prior to the sin of the golden calf, (the angel of Mishpatim) will be active in accomplishing the expulsion of the seven tribes residing in the land of Canaan. To make sure that this point is understood, we have a review here of the same duties that had already been spelled out in Parshat Mishpatim when we first encounter the angel. This is also why the paragraph ends with the injunction "do not make a cast image, a deity," as if to say "what is done is done, the episode has come to an end." The additional legislation of the peter rechem, the laws about the first born, relates to the new situation created after the firstborn had failed in their normal duties at the sin of the golden calf. The redemption of such firstborn is now required in lieu of their appearance in front of G-d performing their duties. (Zevachim 115) (11) We are told by this legislation that although the situation had returned to normal, they were not exactly as they had been, when after the sacrificial rites had been performed, the atzilim could have visions of G-d, or at least His entourage. Now they no longer possessed the power to behold even the rays of light emanating from the face of Moses. Numbers Rabbah 11, illustrates this point. "Behold the power of sin! As long as Israel had not sinned, the shechinah, though described as being "like a consuming fire," did not bother or frighten the people. As soon as they had committed the sin of the golden calf however, they were frightened even of Moses’s appearance. The "rays of glory" are the wisdom. This is true in even greater measure of a person who has communicated with G-d in a "face to face" manner. Solomon says already in Kohelet 8, 1, "a person's wisdom lights up his face." The Talmud Baba Batra 75, describes the face of Moses as resembling the face of the sun.
One need only remember that the absence of a harmful substance by no means implies the presence of a beneficial substance. If one does not feel hot, it does not follow that one feels cold. On the other hand, it is true that the more extreme the description of a virtue or failing respectively, the more extreme will be its opposite. It follows then that some "opposites" are much closer to one another than others. The opposite of a moderately sinful individual, would be a moderately pious one. The opposite of a thoroughly depraved individual, would be a person who is pious and saintly in the extreme. We understand then that just as sinful conduct occurs in varying degrees of extremes, so all attempts at pious conduct are found in corresponding degrees of intensity. When the Torah lists a string of depravities at the end of the last Parshah, it is natural that the call for holiness comes hard on its heels. The Torah lists a variety of commandments, which while representing abstinence from sinful conduct, are not yet the height of saintly conduct either. The more extreme the description of a negative trait in a human being, the more superior is its counterpart as a positive virtue. Achievement of holiness and purity then, are the opposites of all the negative traits listed. The categories of unsatisfactory conduct can be classified as follows: a) sinful conduct, i.e. violation of ritual laws; b) wicked conduct, i.e. anti social behaviour; c) immoral, immodest conduct, i.e. violation of the laws of incest, sodomy and bestiality. The opposite of the above categories would then be: a) piety; b) social responsibility; c) G'dliness. The middle category, i.e. socially acceptable human conduct, is not yet G'dliness. Not acting in the worst way of bestiality is still a long way from becoming saintly, holy.
You made him but slightly less than the angels. This [phrase] refers to Yaakov, with whom is associated the verse, (Bereishis 33:20.) “And he called it, ‘God, the God of Israel.’” Our Sages (Megillah 18a.) interpreted this verse as, “The God of Israel called him [i.e., Yaakov] God.” [This verse uses the names א-ל, E-l, and א-להים, E-lohim to refer to God.] God’s name א-ל derives from His name א-להים; it is only that א-ל is lacking [the last three letters of] א-להים. That lack is merely marginal (“slightly less”) because the additional dimension added to E-lohim is not of primary importance, since the main part of [the name E-lohim] is E-l… This pattern is reflected whenever there is a tosefes, an “additional element,” as in tosefes Shabbos, the additional time added to Shabbos, or tosefes sheviis, the additional time added to the Sabbatical year – [the laws governing] these additional times are not as strict [as those governing the Shabbos or the Sabbatical year themselves. Similarly, the additional dimension added to א-להים is not fundamental.] [This verse continues,] and You crowned him with honor and splendor, referring to David who was granted the honor of kingship and was crowned with (This is reflected by the fact that א-ל and א-להים share the same root letters.) “the diadem of their king on his head.” (II Shmuel 12:30.)
Similarly we will explain for His being called (in scripture) "the G-d of the Hebrews" (Ex. 3:18), "the G-d of Yisrael" (Gen. 33:20), as the verse says "not like these is the portion of Yaakov for He is the Creator of all" (Yirmiya 10:16).
We have already explained that wherever it is written, "He called," (without saying to whom), it is the lower grade, (the Nukvah) as it is written, "And called Moses" (Vayikra 1:1). (the Nukvah called Moses). And here it is written, "and he called his name 'Jacob'" (Gen. 25:26). For no man even named Jacob, as it is written elsewhere, "And called it (lit. 'him') El the Elohim Yisrael" (Gen. 33:20). This is the Holy One, blessed be He, who called Jacob 'El'. He said to him: 'I am El among the upper, and you are El among the lower.'
“He established there an altar, and called it El, God of Israel” (Genesis 33:20). “He established there an altar, and called it [vayikra lo] El” – Reish Lakish said: “And called it El, God of Israel” – he said: ‘You are God of the heavenly, and I am the ruler of the earthly.’ (He called himself, “Israel,” by the name El.) Rav Huna said in the name of Reish Lakish: Even the beadle in a synagogue does not assume authority on his own, but you (Jacob.) assume authority on your own? Tomorrow, your daughter will go out and be violated. That is what is written: “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out” (Genesis 34:1).
Beyond these Eighteen Benedictions one must not tell the praises of the Holy One, praised be He! for R. Elazar said: "What is the meaning of the passage (Ps. 106, 2) Who can utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Who can publish all His praise? This means, Who is fit to utter? He who can publish all His praise; [and as no one can do so, only the prayers that have been ordained should be said]." Rabba b. Ghana said in the name of R. Jochanan: "He who speaks too much in praise of God will be removed from the world, as it is said (Job 37, 20) Can all be related of Him when I speak? Or if a man talk even till he be swallowed up?" R. Juda, of the village Geboriah, according to others of Gibor-Chail, taught: "What is the meaning of the passage (Ps. 65, 2) For Thee praise is silent. This means that silence is the cure of everything." When R. Dima came from the land of Israel he said that in the West they say: "A word is worth a sela and silence two." R. Acha said in the name of R. Elazar: "Whence do we learn that God called Jacob El? (similar to God's name). It is said (Gen. 33, 20) And he erected there an altar and called it El the God of Israel. How can one possibly think that Jacob called the altar El? If so, it ought then be written And Jacob called it El (not him). We must therefore say that this means and Jacob was called El. Who called him so? The God of Israel."
Ergo (in Job 22:28): WHEN YOU DECREE SOMETHING, IT SHALL COME TO PASS FOR YOU; AND LIGHT SHALL SHINE UPON YOUR WAYS. < The plural, WAYS, signifies > two times. Thus the Holy One caused the sun to go down ahead of time when he wanted to go forth and when he wanted to speak with him. (Gen. 28:12:) AND JACOB SET OUT FROM BEERSHEBA. What is written there (in vs. 13)? AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD OVER HIM (on Jacob's ladder)…. (According to Gen. R. 68:10, God caused the sun to set prematurely in order to speak with Jacob in privacy.) Also, when he came < back >, he made the sun rise for him ahead of time (according to Gen. 32:32 [31]): THE SUN ROSE FOR HIM. Now did the sun rise, not over the whole world, but over Jacob alone? < It > merely < rose > in order to heal him (from his lameness). (Sanh. 95b; Rashi on Gen. 32:32.) Thus it is stated (in Mal. 3:20 [4:2]): BUT FOR YOU WHO FEAR MY NAME A SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS SHALL ARISE < WITH HEALING IN ITS WINGS >. R. Berekhyah the Priest said: What is the meaning of (Gen. 32:32 [31]): THE SUN ROSE FOR HIM? That he made the sun rise for him [three hours] ahead of time just as it had set for him ahead of time. Jacob said: On five things did the Holy One make agreements with me (in Gen. 28:20-21) and carry them out. As for me, should I not on my part carry out what I said, now that I have returned < safely unto my father's house > (in accordance with Gen. 28:21)? Immediately (according to Gen. 33:20), HE ERECTED AN ALTAR THERE AND CALLED IT EL, THE GOD OF ISRAEL. When Israel endured (as a people), the Holy One said to Moses: Moses, the five things that I did with Jacob I have done for his children.
Then afterwards < Jacob > took his kingdom (i.e., the kingdom of the Holy One) upon himself, as stated (in Gen. 33:20): HE ERECTED AN ALTAR THERE < AND CALLED IT EL, THE GOD OF ISRAEL >. So also did < the people > take his kingdom upon themselves. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 20:2): I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD. What did they say < in reply > ? All of them answered with one accord; AND (according to Exod. 24:7) THEY SAID: ALL THAT THE LORD HAS SPOKEN WE WILL DO AND OBEY. Ergo (in Job 22:28): WHEN YOU DECREE SOMETHING, IT SHALL COME TO PASS FOR YOU.
Isaac slowed the expansion of the influence of the tree of knowledge by means of the birth of the twins Jacob and Esau. This was an indication that even evil can be rehabilitated. Our sages phrased it thus: Esau's head reposes within the lap of Isaac; such is the mystery of how evil can be rehabilitated. The secret of how this happens was alluded to by our sages' explanation that the reason the pig is called חזיר, (from the root חזר to return) is that in the future it will restore the crown to its Master, as we know from Ovadiah 1,21 ועלו מושיעין בהר ציון … והיתה לה' המלוכה, "For the saviours will march up Mount Zion… and the kingdom will be G–d's." (cf. details in Kohelet Rabbah end section 1). All of these events will occur at the time when G–d will "slaughter" the angel of death. This is the plain meaning of Isaiah 25,8 בלע המות לנצח, "He will destroy death forever." This angel of death will then remain as a regular angel, since all the negative forces we know as קליפות are after all an outgrowth of a holy source. This is what was alluded to in the quote that the head of Esau reposes in Isaac's lap. When the head expands it becomes a symbol of impurity. The very name סמ-אל Samael, (Satan) reflects the dual nature of evil. On the one hand the name א-ל, G–d, is part of that definition, on the other hand the word סם represents the סם המות, lethal poison. In such a future the סם aspect of Satan/ Samael will be abolished. We, the Jewish nation however, are called by the name of G–d. Our sages interpreted Genesis 33,20 ויקרא לו א-ל א-לוהי ישראל, "He (G–d) called him (Jacob) El the G–d of Israel" (Megillah 18a, proving that the word לו could not refer to the altar Jacob had built). We have an allusion to this in Genesis 11,10 אלה תולדת שם, suggesting that we, his descendants, are all a "full name," not half a name such as סמא-ל.
A slightly different version in Shemot Rabbah 42,6 attributes the reason that G–d used the term "your people" when speaking to Moses to the fact that it was the mixed multitude who initiated the sin of the golden calf. Moses had taken those people out of Egypt without having consulted G–d. When G–d spoke about wiping out the people in 32,10, He had these people in mind. Thereupon Moses began pleading with G–d in 32,11 asking G–d why He would be angry at the people of Israel, i.e. "Your people whom You have taken out of Egypt?" Moses implied that G–d did indeed have reason to be extremely angry at the mixed multitude, i.e. Moses' people. G–d then admitted that Moses had a point, and this is the meaning of 32,14 that G–d renounced His plans to punish His own people so severely. After reading both versions of the Midrashim it is clear that the Jewish people were still regarded as G–d's people even after they had participated in the sin of the golden calf. Not only that, but they bear the imprint of G–d's "seal" upon themselves as did their patriarch Jacob whom G–d had called “א-ל אלוקי ישראל, "the Lord of Israel called him א-ל." Moses, by contrast, was called א-לוהים. This whole reciprocal attachment, דבקות, is due to the intermediary Torah. It was the Torah which cleansed Israel from the residual pollutant of the original serpent when the Israelites stood at Mount Sinai.
Having sexual intercourse with two sisters [while they are both alive, Ed.] is perceived as equivalent to damaging the equilibrium in the domain הוד ומלכות. Only our patriarch Jacob, whom G–d Himself had called "אל" a celestial being (Genesis 33,20, cf. Megillah 18a), attained a level of spiritual perfection that permitted him to use the sceptre normally only used by the "King" in the Celestial Regions. In connection with the prohibition to marry two sisters simultaneously, the Torah (18,18) uses the expression לצרור לגלות ערותה, which we may provisionally translate as "as a rival." Rabbi Abraham Saba, in his Tzror Hamor understands the word as "creating a knot," i.e. tying up Celestial conduits and preventing them from exerting their beneficial influence on their respective partners in the domains of the emanations, and through them on this world. [This comment of the Tzror Hamor is not found in his commentary on this chapter in our פרשה. Ed.]
"There he praised the Almighty G–d of Israel." According to the view of Rabbi Eleazar in Megillah 18, this verse tells us that G–d called Jacob “א-ל”; his reasoning is as follows: – If this were an appellation Jacob had given, then the Torah should have written ויקרא לו יעקב א-ל אלוקי ישראל. The Torah wanted to go on record that Jacob represents only the “א-ל” part of “סמאל” . When we view the struggle between יעקב, who was all א-ל, and Samael, who was only partially א-ל, it is natural that Jacob should have prevailed, i.e. כי שרית עם אלוקים ועם אנשים ותוכל, "You have contended with G–d and with men and have prevailed." This description of a dual encounter refers to the struggle with the terrestrial force of Esau on the one hand, and with the Celestial forces of Esau, i.e. Samael, on the other. The name ישראל fittingly reflects this dual struggle. It is a name conferred upon Jacob by Samael himself, an acknowledgment that Jacob was the bearer of Isaac's blessings.
…It would have been fitting, on this account, for him to have been called Saul (Heb. Sha’ul), and the commentators have not given a correct reason for this (incongruity) …I think, in this connection, that one of three alternatives (must be adopted).either she intended (to convey) by this name that God (‘El’) put him (Heb. samo) in the world – hence she called him ‘Sh’muel’ as though to say that God placed him (there); and she said ‘For I have requested him from the Lord’,… and He placed him inside me; or she intended (to convey) by this name that Sh’muel was from God Almighty, blessed be He… ‘Sh’muel’ being equivalent to ‘she-me’El’ (the one who was from God)…or it is also possible to say that ‘Sh’muel’ is equivalent to ‘she’mo El’ (his name is God) – since all divine things are called by the name of the Holy One… as (we find that Jacob) called the altar he made ‘El-Elohe-Yisrael’ (God, the God of Israel); and the prophet (Isaiah) said (in reference to King Ahaz’s son) “And his name shall be called Pele-joez-El-Gibbor” (Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God), etc…
ויקרא את שמר: ה' נסי, “he named it: “Hashem is My banner.” According to Rabbi Eliezer hamoda-i, the subject of the words “he named it” was the Lord Himself. Rashi points out that we know of something similar from Genesis 33,20: In that verse we read that Yaakov, after being the first Jew to be able to buy a piece of land in the Holy Land (apart from the tomb of Sarah) built an altar and when the Torah reports that that altar was called: א-ל אלוקי ישראל, that was the name given to this altar by Hashem.
This statement is brought here only because it was stated by R. Aha in the name of R. Elazar. Genesis 33:20 states, “And [Jacob] placed there an altar, and he called it God (El) the God of Israel.” The simple reading of the verse is probably that Jacob called the altar “God, God of Israel.” But this reading is unacceptable to R. Aha, so he rereads the verse as if God jumps in. Jacob sets up the altar, and in return God calls Jacob, “El (God).” We should note there are a series of midrashim that accord God-like qualities to Jacob, mostly that he and God look exactly alike. This brief midrash may be part of this larger idea.
והיה ה׳ לי לאלוקים. "Then Hashem will be my Lord." This sounds, G'd forbid, as if until now Hashem had not been Jacob's G'd. Rashi explains that Jacob meant that G'd would not find any of his children as morally unfit. I do not know where such a thought is alluded to in Jacob's words. [actually Rashi quotes a Sifri in Parshat Va-Etchanan section 31. Ed.] Besides such a promise, i.e. that his children would be morally fit, is at best a conditional promise [seeing that the matter lies within the will-power of the children, Ed.]. When would the stone then be able to serve as a monument for this encounter Jacob experienced during his dream? The proper explanation of what Jacob said is that he was prepared to conduct himself in such a way that G'd would consent to associate His name with him even during his lifetime. He had previously done this with Abraham after the latter's death and with Isaac only after he had become blind and therefore beyond the reach of the evil urge (compare verse 13). The words לי לאלוקים are clear evidence of Jacob's intention. This was a tremendous undertaking by Jacob. You will find in Genesis 33,20 that G'd reminded him of that undertaking and that Jacob then fulfilled this vow by erecting a monument in G'd's honour.
It is possible to explain the choice of Bileam’s words מה אקב לא קבה א-ל as a reference to Yaakov who had been called א-ל by G’d Himself (Genesis 33,20). How could one curse someone who was characterised by G’d Himself as possessing divine attributes? Even when Yaakov had been angry (at his sons Shimon and Levi) and he had cursed (Genesis 49,7), he did not curse the two sons but only their anger, אפם. When Bileam continued: “how can I be wrathful when Hashem has not been wrathful?” He meant that during all these 40 years G’d had not been sufficiently angry at them. His own wisdom was only effective if G’d had first been sufficiently angry at the people (Berachot 7).
A kabbalistic approach: the words “they came to Eylim where there were twelve springs of water and seventy date-palms“ mean that when the Israelites now arrived at this site they attained a certain spiritual level called “elohim” (play on the word אלימה with the letters re-arranged). The 12 fountains are a simile for 12 angels, three from each of the four directions. Each group of three angels was accompanied by an army of minor angels so that between them all they represented the מחנה שכינה, the camp of the Divine presence supported at four corners with its celestial entourage. The seventy date-palms represent the seventy angels who surround the throne of G’d’s glory and who are assigned, one each, as the celestial representatives of the 70 nations of the world. You find this confirmed in the Sefer Habahir items 165-6. The author there asks: “what was the significance of the twelve fountains? First G’d gave the Israelites 12 fountains. These were exchanged later when the Jewish people crossed the Jordan into the twelve stones Joshua erected there (Joshua 4,9). The reason is that originally the Torah was likened to life-giving water seeing the Torah, i.e. its bearers were on the move, just like the waters issuing from fountains are on the move, their waters constantly flowing. Once the Israelites crossed the Jordan and began to conquer the Holy Land Torah found a permanent home, was stationary. As far as the 70 date-palms are concerned, this is a symbol for seventy different קומות, conduits, by means of which G’d dispenses His largess. These draw their input from twelve of the “simple” letters in the alpha-bet. Just as these waters are ordinary waters (of terrestrial origin), so the seventy nations are essentially terrestrial in nature. Whence do we know that a date-palm may be equated with a קומה? We base this on Song of Songs 7,8 זאת קומתך דמתה לתמר, “such is your stature, likened to a towering palm tree.” Not only that but there are 70 different species of palm trees; this is meant by our verse speaking about seventy palm trees. The words ושבעים תמרים mean that each one was different from the other and the fruit they produced were different from one another, each tasting differently. So far Sefer Habahir. [Levush Orah by R' Mordechai Jaffe, in his super-commentary on Rashi, and Menachem Rekanati explain many of these concepts in greater depth. Ed.] It is important to remember that each date-palm had been assigned its task in nature and each had to contribute according to its specific task. It was not in order for them to be grafted one to another to produce new mutations. The entire phenomenon is reminiscent of Yaakov and his twelve sons and the seventy descendants who arrived in Egypt. They were likened to towering palm trees due to their spiritual stature. At the same time they drew their inspiration from Yaakov’s twelve sons who in turn drew theirs from their patriarch-father. The 12 tribes were divided into four camps of three tribes each, encamped in the four directions of the globe enclosing (protecting) the encampment of the Shechinah. This made them carriers of the Divine Presence, Shechinah. This is all reflected in the fact that the patriarch Yaakov himself was called א-ל אלו-הי ישראל, (Genesis 33,20) which line is explained in Megillah 18 as “who called him א-ל? None other than the אלו-הי ישראל, the G’d of Israel.” All of the foregoing only serves the purpose of giving us an inkling of the spiritual stature of our patriarchs.
והיה כל מבקש ה' יצא אל אוהל מועד אשר מחוץ למחנה, “and whoever sought Hashem would go out to the Tent of Meeting.” This teaches that the Shechinah was no longer resident within the camp of the people. Actually, we would have expected the Torah to write: “whoever wanted to seek out Moses, etc.” The fact that the Torah does not use this syntax indicates that seeking out Moses was equated with seeking out G’d’s presence. Moses was described by the Torah as “Hashem” in this regard. We find that our patriarch Yaakov was also accorded the title “G’d” in Genesis 33,20 where the Torah wrote: ויקרא לו אל אלו-הי ישראל. I have explained all this in connection with that verse. [seeing that every judge is called אלוהים in the Torah, this is not as mind-boggling as it appears at first. It is simply an extension of the principle that the messenger is equipped with the status of the sender, a well-known principle in the Talmud. Ed.] When Rivkah experienced an unusual pregnancy, the fetuses struggling within her womb, the Torah describes her as inquiring from G’d what all this meant. The words used by the Torah are ותלך לדרוש את ה'. The meaning there is that she went to a representative of G’d to ask the meaning of her experience. There too the person whom she inquired from is described as Hashem (Genesis 25,22). There are numerous other examples of the same thing throughout the Bible. We learn from Rivkah’s experience that when the Torah wrote ויאמר ה' לה, that she did not experience a revelation or direct message from G’d, but that she received the word of G’d by means of a person designated by G’d to tell her that she would give birth to twins, etc. We find that both the Messiah and the city of Jerusalem have been accorded the title “G’d” on occasion, such as in Jeremiah 23,6 and Ezekiel 48,34. In the latter instance the word שמה must be read with the vowels קמץ twice instead of a שוא under the letter ש. In all the instances mentioned the rule is simply that the messenger adopts the name of the Sender.
And he repaired the altar of Adonoy that had been broken down. He built an altar (A ‘ח’ and an ‘ע’ are both guttural letters and are therefore interchangeable.) and reminded Yisroel that God’s altar should enter their thoughts and should be oft mentioned, for it was torn down and destroyed, and its name and its mention had ceased from the mouth of all the ten tribes. Thus I heard is its plain interpretation. (Although once the Beis Hamikdosh was built private altars were not permitted, however, extraordinary circumstances allow for the suspension of certain laws in cases of dire necessity, such as this. See Maseches Sanhedrin 89b and Tosafos there. Also see footnote on v. 36 below.) And its Midrashic interpretation I heard, is that Shaul built an altar on Mount Carmel, and that is what it states, “Shaul came to Carmel, and is setting up a place for himself,” (Alternatively, as a result of the miracle on Mount Carmel, many people repented and went to Yerusholayim to offer sacrifices in the Beis Hamikdosh. Thus he reactivated [וירפא] the altar which had been dormant [ההרוס].—Radak) and there it states, “and he erected an altar there.” (I Shmuel 15:12.) But the kings of Yisroel tore down all the altars and high places in their land that were made in the Name of Heaven, and Eliyahu built this altar of Shaul that had been torn down.
To whom the word of Adonoy had come, saying, “Yisroel will be your name.” Why is this stated here? Because on the day that the Divine Presence was revealed to Yaakov in Beis Eil and named him Yisroel, on that day He said to him, “A nation and a community of nations will come from you,” (Bereishis 33:20.) i.e., your children are destined to congregate like other nations and build an altar upon which to burn sacrifices during the period of the prohibition [of offering sacrifices on] the high places. Nevertheless, I will consent to it. [Thus is stated] in Bereishis Rabboh. (Bereishis 35:11.)
את שבעת המזבחות — “Seven altars I have set in order” is not written here, but “THE SEVEN ALTARS”. He said to Him: The ancestors of these people together built before Thee seven altars, but I alone have built altars equal to all of them. — Abraham built four: (Genesis 12:7) “And he built there an altar to the Lord who had appeared to him”; (Genesis 12:8) “And he removed thence unto the mount… [and he built there an altar]; (Genesis 13:18) “And Abraham moved his tent … [and built there an altar]”; and one he built on Mount Moriah (Genesis 22:9). Isaac built one: (Genesis 26:25) “And he built there an altar”. Jacob built two, one at Shechem and one at Bethel (Genesis 33:20 and Genesis 35:7);
אלוקי אבי, a reference to the “G’d of Yaakov” who had spoken of א-ל אלוקי ישראל, in Genesis 33,20. Yaakov had meant that G’d is great in His awesomeness, His supervision of the individual fates of His creatures. He had named G’d thus to indicate that G’d combines within Himself both the attribute of love and the attribute of Justice.
Apropos statements in this line of tradition, the Gemara adds: And Rabbi Aḥa further said that Rabbi Elazar said: From where is it derived that the Holy One, Blessed be He, called Jacob El, meaning God? As it is stated: “And he erected there an altar, and he called it El, God of Israel” (Genesis 33:20). It is also possible to translate this as: And He, i.e., the God of Israel, called him, Jacob, El. Indeed, it must be understood this way, as if it enters your mind to say that the verse should be understood as saying that Jacob called the altar El, it should have specified the subject of the verb and written: And Jacob called it El. But since the verse is not written this way, the verse must be understood as follows: He called Jacob El; and who called him El? The God of Israel.
He erected an altar there and called it [worshiped upon it before] the Almighty is [the] God of Yisrael.
And he raised there an altar, and there he gave the tithes which he had set apart of all that he had before God, the God of Israel.
| וַתֵּצֵ֤א דִינָה֙ בַּת־לֵאָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָלְדָ֖ה לְיַעֲקֹ֑ב לִרְא֖וֹת בִּבְנ֥וֹת הָאָֽרֶץ׃ | 1 J | Now Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the daughters of the land. |
And Dinah,, etc. to see in the daughters of the land. The expression, in the daughters of the land, needs to be understood; it should have said, "to see the daughters of the land." And that which appears [correct] is that, behold the Sages, may their memory be blessed, said (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayishlach 7:1), "Scripture associates her name with Leah. Leah’s daughter loved to go out just as her mother did. How do we know this about Leah? It is written: And Leah went out to meet him (Genesis 30:16), etc." And at first glance, this is a wonder! Did it not know their, may their memory be blessed, saying (Pesachim 3a) that Scripture did not even speak in disgrace of an impure animal? Why would Scripture write with the intention of showing the disgrace of that righteous woman [Leah]? All the more so, since it is known that she truly intended [it] for the sake of the Heavens, since she desired and strove to establish the tribes of God. And it is like their statement, may their memory be blessed (Bereishit Rabbah 72:5).
In fact, it is just the opposite. The Sages, may their memory be blessed, came to say that Scripture associates her with Leah, to say just like the mother, so too is the daughter. This means that just like her mother certainly intended [it] for the sake of the Heavens, so too did the daughter intend [it] for the sake of the Heavens. For their statement, may their memory be blessed, about the verse: and the souls that they made in Haran (Genesis 12:5), "Abraham would convert the men, and Sarah would convert the women (Bereishit Rabbah 39:14) is well-known. Hence she also wanted to grasp onto the ways of her holy forbears, to convert converts from the daughters of the land, in order to bring them under the beneficence of the wings of the divine presence. And that is why Scripture stated, And Dinah, the daughter of Leah, went out. Meaning that she was truly the daughter of Leah in this going out, acting like her mother for the sake of the Heavens. And that is why she went to see in the daughters of the land. That is to say, to see inside them and the internality of their hearts. For even in the nations of the world, there are some souls that are prepared to accept purity and want to cling to the Jewish people, as is well-known from Ruth and the other righteous converts, who, even when they are still gentiles, accompany and seek out the Children of Israel, because of the holiness within them. And it is because of this that Scripture is recounting Dinah's praise. As she went specifically to see, and not to show herself, her beauty before the eyes of the nations and the princes, since she was beautiful (alluding to Esther 1:11). And also specifically to see in the daughters of the land, and not, God forbid, in the sons of the land. For she had the righteousness of her holy forbears in her, from tip to toe, without budging to the right or the left. So Jacob's bed [the propriety of his family] was complete.
Genesis 34,1. “Dinah, Leah’s daughter left her house unaccompanied;” Bereshit Rabbah 79,1comments on this: “like mother like daughter;” this is a reference to the forwardness of Leah when she informed her husband Yaakov that it was her turn to host him, on account of the mandrakes of her son Reuven, etc. (Genesis 30,16). According to Rashi quoting B’rachot 60, the fetus from which Dinah was born was originally meant to produce a male child. Leah’s prayer was intended to prevent her sister from being put to shame, as if the fetus in Leah’s womb would be born as a male, Rachel would wind up with fewer sons than even Yaakov’s hand maids. As a result of her prayer Dinah, i.e. a female, was born בת לאה, these words, that on the face of it do not tell us anything we did not know, allude to this hidden aspect of Leah’s pregnancy on this occasion. It was her prayer that resulted in Dinah being born as a female. When the Torah continues with: וירא אותה שכם וגו', ”Shechem ,son of Chamor saw her, etc;” this is an allusion to the fact that if Leah had not prayed for this child to be a daughter, the whole incident of the rape would have been prevented as Shechem would not have had an opportunity to set eyes on a daughter of Yaakov.
Deenah went out. Since Yaakov lived outside of town the verse should have said that she “came in.” However, Scripture wanted to hint that she “went out” of the guidelines of proper behavior by going to watch the locals dance and make merry.
AND DINAH WENT OUT. Of her own accord. (She did not ask her parents’ permission (Krinsky). Filwarg asks, “How does I.E. know this?”)
ותצא דנה בת לאה, Dinah, Leah's daughter went out, etc. The reason that the Torah emphasises that Dinah was Leah's daughter (something that we are well aware of) is in order to facilitate understanding of the causes underlying Dinah's excursion into town. There were three reasons for this. 1) Dinah was Leah's daughter. Had she been Rachel's daughter she would never have made such an unchaperoned excursion. Her mother Leah had "gone out" to meet her husband (30,15), something that was uncharacteristic of Jewish women. Bereshit Rabbah 80,1 claims that at the time Leah adorned herself with all her jewelry. Her daughter copied her mother, giving the impression that she was a harlot. 2) A second cause for Dinah's excursion was the fact that as an only daughter she had no female playmates; she went in search of suitable company. Inasmuch as she was a daughter of Jacob she had already acquired the reputation of being a distinguished person, something that provoked Shechem as we shall explain later. 3) לראות בבנות הארץ, "she went to take a look at the daughters of the land." According to Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 38 Shechem had brought the girls of the neighbourhood to play music around the tent of Jacob. This then was a third reason for Dinah venturing outside. From all the above you may surmise that unless Shechem had already been aware of the existence of Dinah, a daughter of the famous Jacob, even before she left her house he would not have committed the rape.
ותצא דינה בת לאה, “Dinah, Leah’s daughter went out, etc.” What happened to Dinah was a punishment for Yaakov for several misdemeanours. Firstly, he had said to Lavan (30,33) “let my integrity testify for me in the future.” Secondly, he was punished for denying Esau a glimpse of Dinah, for maybe she could have exercised a beneficial influence on him if he had married her. Thirdly, he was arrogant in assuming authority on earth as indicated by the name he gave the altar. According to Bereshit Rabbah, G’d told him: “never praise yourself with something that is in the future.” You have said: “let my integrity testify for me in the future. Tomorrow your daughter will leave her house and she will be raped.” [The implication is that if he had seen to it that she was properly chaperoned this could not have happened. Ed.] Furthermore, the Torah had reported (32,23) “he took his two wives and his maid-servants and his eleven children and presented them to Esau.” Where was Dinah? The report in the Torah alerts us to the fact that Yaakov had hidden Dinah in a box so that Esau would not become aware of her. G’d said to Yaakov: “because you did not make an effort for her to be married to a circumcised male she will become married to an uncircumcised male. Not only that, but she will be raped first.” Another criticism of Yaakov mentioned in the Midrash in the name of G’d is the fact that he had assigned G’d sovereignty in the heavens whereas arrogating to himself something parallel in the terrestrial spheres as we explained in connection with his naming the altar. G’d said to him: “even the reader in the synagogue does not arrogate to himself the right to act on behalf of the congregants. He waits for an invitation by the congregation to act on their behalf. Tomorrow your daughter will be raped.” The reason this punishment followed the misdemeanour so promptly was because Yaakov had spoken to G’d in a somewhat provocative manner. The reason the Torah describes Dinah as ”Dinah the daughter of Leah went out,” when we all know she was Leah’s daughter is because she was trying to attract attention to herself; she had bedecked herself (Bereshit Rabbah 80,1). She proved to be a true daughter of her mother who had also attracted attention to herself by leaving her tent as we have been told in 30,16. Scripture is critical of women who leave the security and modest environment of their homes unnecessarily. Solomon wrote in Proverbs 7,11-12 “She is loud and rebellious, her feet would not stay home. Now outside, now in the streets, she lurks at every corner.” David had written about a woman who stays at home. that “the true measure of a princess is found in the fact that she remains indoors.” (Psalms 45,14) When the angels asked Avraham where Sarah was, he answered: “here she is in the tent (Genesis 18,9).”
A Midrashic approach: the word לראות, “to see,” means “to see and to be seen.” We read in verse six: ויצא חמור אבי שכם אל יעקב לדבר אתו, Chamor the father of Shechem went out to Yaakov to speak with him.” About this the Tanchuma 7 Vayishlach writes: He said to him: ‘I know that your grandfather Avraham was a prince as the Hittites had acclaimed him as: “you are a prince in our midst” (23,6). I, however, am a prince in the land also. Give the daughter of a prince to a prince (my son) as a wife.” Upon hearing this Yaakov replied: “The title ‘prince’ is applicable only to a שור, ox” (not to a donkey, meaning of the name Chamor.) The Torah had written that Avraham ran to the cattle, (ox) (18,7) and it is written in Proverbs 14,4: ורב תבואות בכח שור, “a bountiful harvest is due to the strength of the ox.” An ox and a donkey cannot mate together. The Torah writes expressly: “you shall not plough with an ox and a donkey together.” In the Book of Prophets (Kings II 14,9) we find the following statement: “The thistle in Lebanon sent the following message to the cedar in Lebanon. ‘give your daughter to my son in marriage.’ But a wild beast in Lebanon went by and trampled down the thistle.” The wild beasts in that parable are the sons of Yaakov who have been compared to wild beasts. In the blessings bestowed on Yaakov’s sons by their father, Yehudah is compared to a lion (49,9); Dan is compared to a snake (49,17); Binyamin is compared to a wolf (49,27); Naftali to a gazelle (49,21). When the Book of Kings spoke about the wild beasts trampling the thistle, the reference was to the sons of Yaakov Shimon and Levi killing the male inhabitants of Shechem. The prophet Hoseah also complains about a similar occurrence in Hoseah 6,9 where he wrote about what would happen to the people of Shechem in his own time because they encouraged depravity. The people would be murdered because they had been guilty of sexual misconduct.
The Midrash explains in that connection that a woman who remains within the confines of her home confers forgiveness upon the members of her house by her very presence therein, just as the altar in the Temple conferred forgiveness on the Jewish people. We have an allusion to this in Scripture when David wrote (Psalms 128,3) “your wife shall be like a fruitful vine within your house;” the inside of the house is called ירכתי ביתך in that verse. We also have a verse concerning the function of the altar in which a similar point is made when the Torah wrote (Leviticus 1,11) ושחט אותו על ירך המזבח, “he is to slaughter it on the ירך, ‘the side’ of the altar. The word ירך also describes the function of the woman to bear children. The altar and woman have something vital in common. If woman fulfills here role of presiding first and foremost within the confines of her home, she will have the kind of children who will be anointed with the oil of anointing (the oil with which the High Priest was anointed) compare Psalms 128,3 “your sons will be like olive saplings.” Our sages in Yuma 16 have also said that there was a woman by the name of Kimchit who lived to see all her seven sons anointed as High Priest at one time or another. In response to the question how it was possible that she enjoyed such a singular distinction, she replied that the ceiling in her house had never seen the plaits of the hair on her head. The reason the psalmist chose to compare the fertility of a model wife to the vine (“your wife shall be like a fruitful vine“, Psalms 128,3) is that vines are planted inside the rear of the house. As they grow, its branches find the sun through holes in the walls. In other words, this is the only tree whose trunk grows inside whereas its branches develop outside. This tree is therefore an appropriate simile for the kind of woman we have discussed. Such a woman not only stays inside her house but she is not near the entrance of her house where she would be exposed to everyone’s view. This is what Solomon criticized about the foolish woman whom he described as sitting at the entrance to her house (Proverbs 9,14). Seeing the mother takes care of everything within the house, her sons go out to the field to do their various kinds of work. These sons are compared to olive saplings. The reason David chose this simile is that unlike other trees which are receptive to the practice of grafting, the olive tree rejects grafts (Jerusalem Talmud Kilayim 1:7),[much like the human body has a tendency to reject even organs from another human being. Ed.] Similarly, the paternity of the sons of such a chaste woman will never be questioned. Another reason for comparing the children of such a woman to olive saplings is that the fruit of the olive tree matures after nine months similar to the fruit of woman. Such a woman does not experience miscarriages and all her children are born after a full pregnancy of nine months. We have been taught in Bechorot 8 that the pure domestic animals of the beef variety carry their young for nine months. You are no doubt aware that the Levites sang 15 psalms commencing with the words שיר למעלות, “song of the steps” on the Temple steps corresponding to the 15 steps which led up to the level of the Sanctuary from the antechamber. The song from which the above-mentioned verse is taken is the ninth in that series (compare Psalms 120-134). The words סביב לשלחנך “all around your table,” in the verse above mean that the sons are all assembled at the table to serve their mother at meal-time. Furthermore, it is a well known fact that all trees have a “heart” which becomes exposed when you cut down the trunk. The only exception to this rule is the olive tree. Perhaps this is the reason why eating olives led to the person who has consumed them forgetting the Torah he has studied, his heart becoming dull and unresponsive to learning. Our sages have distinguished between the effect of eating olives and consuming olive oil. The former has a negative effect even on matters one has studied for seventy years whereas the latter has a beneficial effect, restoring to one’s memory what one had forgotten for a long time. (Horiot 13) An additional explanation of the words אשתך כגפן פוריה, “your wife shall be as fruitful as a vine,” is a reference to the time when the woman menstruates and observes blood oozing from her insides. The additional words בירכתי ביתך, “in the innermost part of your house,” are a hint that during her period of menstruation her husband has to keep his distance from her. The psalmist assures such a woman that if she does observe this legislation meticulously, then “your sons will be like olive saplings.” The reason that the psalmist spelled the word אשתך with the vowel segol under the letter א instead of the vowel chirik which we would have expected, [making the word sound like “your fire”, Ed.] is that during the period in question he is to stay away from from her as if from fire. When she conducts herself in accordance with Jewish norms her sons will not display any character blemishes. לראות בבנות הארץ, “to look around amongst the daughters of the land.” She wanted to watch the girls perform dances. We find a similar expression in Judges 21,21 וראיתם והנה אם-ילאו בנות שילה לחול במחולות, “as soon as you see the girls of Shiloh coming out to join the dances, etc.”
ותצא דינה בת לאה, she went forth from her mother’s tent, her father also not being at home, and she came into the town to get acquainted with other girls in the town. The reason why the Torah underscored that she was the daughter of Leah, a fact we are all familiar with, was to remind us “like mother like daughter.” Her mother had been described in 30,16 by the words ותצא לאה לקראתו, “Leah went forth to meet her husband,” suggesting that she took an initiative which was not common for her. The reason the Torah added another fact that we knew already, i.e. אשר ילדה ליעקב, “whom she had born for Yaakov,” is to alert us to the fact that what happened to her was a punishment for her father (as we explained in 32,23).
THE DAUGHTER OF LEAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE UNTO JACOB. The reason [Scripture specifies the daughter of Leah] is to state that she was the sister of Simeon and Levi, who were envious for her sake and avenged her cause. And Scripture mentions further, whom she had borne unto Jacob, in order to allude to the fact that all the brothers were envious for her.
ותצא דינה, because Yaakov had pitched his tent outside the city limits of Shechem. She left that compound to enter the town.
בת לאה THE DAUGHTER OF LEAH — so Scripture calls her. Why not the daughter of Jacob? But just because she “went out” she is called Leah’s daughter, since she, too, was fond “of going out” (Genesis Rabbah 80:1), as it is said (30:16) “and Leah went out to meet him”. With an allusion to her they formulated the proverb: “Like mother, like daughter”.
Leas Tochter: ebenso ein Kind Leas wie der größte Teil aller künftigen jüdischen Männer; und sie war dem Jakob geboren: es lebte ebenso in ihr Jakobs Geist. Und wenn sie auch misshandelt worden, und dazu vielleicht durch ihr "Hinausgehen" aus dem väterlichen Kreis in die Mitte der Fremden Veranlassung gegeben, so war sie gleichwohl durch und durch eine Jakobstochter. Sie ging hinaus sich umzusehen unter den Töchtern des Landes, die fremden Mädchen einmal kennen zu lernen, wie לראות באבי הנחל (Cant. 6, 11). Sie war ein junges Mädchen und neugierig.
Since Jacob and his family were residing near the city of Shekhem, Dina, the young daughter of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. Having lived until that point mostly as a nomad in the desert, Dina became acquainted for the first time with an urban environment, and she socialized with the local girls.
ותצא דינה בת לאה, “Dinah, daughter of Leah went out, etc.” The Torah first mentioned that Dinah was a daughter of Leah, seeing that this made her a full sister to Shimon and Levi, who avenged her disgrace. The Torah continues writing that she had been born for Yaakov, in order to tell us that her other brothers and half-brothers were also jealous on her behalf.
“Dinah, the daughter of Leah, went out” [34:1]. Rashi asks a question. Why does it not say, the daughter of Jacob? The explanation is that the verse shows us that Dinah went out, taking after her mother, Leah, who also went out. She went toward Jacob and said: I have rented you to sleep with me. (Rashi, Genesis, 34:1.) Dinah went out to see the daughters of the nations. Hamor the son of Shechem came and took Dinah by force and slept with her. Bahya writes. Jacob caused this by sinning, by not giving Dinah to Esau. Perhaps Dinah might have made Esau pious. Jacob had hidden Dinah in a chest from Esau. The Holy One said: you did not want to give Dinah to one who observed circumcision, then you will give her to one who was not circumcised, to Shechem, the son of Hamor, as the verse says here. The Midrash writes. (Tanhuma, Vayishlach, 6.) Whenever a woman is in her house, she atones for the sins of the whole household, just like the altar forgives the whole world, as the verse says, “your wife shall be like a fruitful vine within your house; your sons, like olive saplings around your table” [Psalms 128:3]. This means, the wife should be like a grapevine. The root of the grapevine is in the house and the grapes grow and extend out of the house. So too is the woman. She should sit in her house and should have children who will go out into the world to study Torah. That is why the verse says, “like olive saplings” [Psalms 128:3]. The children will be worthy to anoint themselves with oil that is holy. That is why the verse compared the children to olives. All the trees in the world, when they begin to mate with other trees, an apple trees mates with a pear tree and similar other trees. However, the olive tree does not accept other branches to mate. So too should the wife be with modesty. She should not speak much with strange men. Another explanation is, just like the olive tree had fruit in nine months, so too a woman who is modest carries her children for nine months and the child she has is healthy. Therefore, the verse compares the children to olives. Olives are bitter at first, bitter with great pain day and night. Afterwards, whomever God gives is sweet like the good oil. (Bahya, Genesis, 34:1.)
Rabbi Hershler, apparently unaware of this earlier discussion, cites Targum Yonatan as establishing that maternal identity is established by parturition and, indeed, it may be noted that Genesis 34:1 does speak of "Dinah the daughter of Leah." An identical conclusion based upon the comments of Targum Yonatan was earlier reached by R. Zevi Hirsch Friedling, Ha-Be'er, VI (5691), no. 3; and by R. Betzalel Ze'ev Safran, as reported by his son in Ha-Be'er, VII (5692), no. 2, and reprinted in Teshuvot ha-Rabaz, I (Jerusalem, 5722), Teshuvot mi-Ben ha-Meḥaber, no. 5. The diverse conclusions reached on the basis of the same narrative illustrates the cogency of the position of R. Joshua Feigenbaum, author of Teshuvot Meshiv Shalom, expressed in a contribution to Sha'arei Torah, vol. XV, no. 4. In disagreeing with Sha'ar Menasheh, Rabbi Feigenbaum points out that halakhic principles are not derivable from aggadic sources. (Maternal identity is also discussed by R. Judah Gershuni, Or ha-Mizraḥ, Nisan-Tammuz 5738, reprinted in Rabbi Gershuni’s collected essays, Kol Ẓofai-yikh (Jerusalem, 5740), pp. 361–367; and by R. Moshe Soloveichik, Or ha-Mizraḥ, Tishri-Tevet 5741 (Gilyon ha-Me’ah), pp. 122–128. See also the unpublished responsum of R. Ovadiah Yosef cited by R. Moshe Drori in Teḥumin, I (Winter, 5740), 287ff.)
And Dinah went out There are those who expounded from this verse, "like mother, like daughter"; and there are those who expounded from this verse, "like father, like daughter." Like mother, as it is stated: and Leah went out to greet him (Genesis 30:16). Just like this one went out to greet her husband for the matter of a commandment, so too did that one go out for matchmaking. Like father, as it is stated:And Jacob went out (Genesis 28:10). Just like this went out on account of his brother, Esau, so too did that one go out on account of her brothers, to find herself a place.
A man and his household, his partner, and his children, went down to Egypt. And only Dinah was isolated, without a husband and without children. And her brothers could not speak to her in peace [alluding to Genesis 37:4]. They did not speak with her in her youth. Hence, And Dinah went out to see the daughters of the land (Genesis 34:1).
Maimonides was most likely correct in ascribing the woman’s secluded place in the home to “the dignity and honor of a king’s daughter.” Considering the social practices of his time, it was indeed not proper for a respectable woman to roam the streets and the marketplaces; it was improper and occasionally quite dangerous. Yet the seclusion of women was also a form of control exercised by their husbands that turned the home for them very nearly into a “prison.” At least one midrashic opinion attempts to find a basis for such control in the Torah itself. When God created Adam, through him He blessed the future male race and said: “Multiply and fill the earth and subdue it.”45 (Genesis 1:28.) If the word in the Hebrew original, kivshuha, were to stand by itself it may be understood as “subdue her,” i.e., the woman. On it follows the explanation: “The man subdues [i.e., controls] his wife, so that she should not walk around the marketplaces [i.e., outside the home] and not fall into disgrace [or sin], as happened to Dinah, the daughter of Leah, the wife of Jacob.”46 (Genesis 34:1.) For this reason she has to be kept back from public life. In Rabbi Meir’s opinion, the generally accepted attitude towards the wife’s withdrawal from society was: “She talks to her brothers and relatives and the husband does not object.”47 (Gittin 90a.)
Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Vayaven is written (The letters of vayiven can also be read vayaven, He acted with thought.) – He contemplated [hitbonen] from where to create her. He said: I will not create her from [Adam’s] head, so she should not hold her head high [in arrogance]; nor from the eye, so she should not be too curious; nor from the ear, so she should not be an eavesdropper; nor from the mouth, so she should not be a chatterer; nor from the heart, so she should not be envious; nor from the hand, so she should not be one who touches everything; nor from the foot, so she should not walk off. But rather, [I will create her] from a place that is covered up in man, (The Midrash here follows the opinion found in Devarim Rabba (6:11), that Eve was created from the inside of Adam’s thigh.) as even when a person stands naked, that place is covered. Regarding each and every limb that He created for her, he said to her: ‘Be a modest woman, a modest woman.’ Nevertheless, [what happened was,] “You neglected all my counsel” (Proverbs 1:25). I did not create her from the head, yet she holds her head high, as it is stated: “They walk with outstretched necks” (Isaiah 3:16). Nor from the eye, yet she is excessively curious, as it is stated: “And they went with curious eyes” (Isaiah 3:16). Nor from the ear, yet she is an eavesdropper, as it is stated: “Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent” (Genesis 18:10). Nor from the heart, yet she is envious, as it is stated: “Rachel was jealous of her sister” (Genesis 30:1). Nor from the hand, yet she touches everything, as it is stated: “Rachel stole the household idols” (Genesis 31:19). Nor from the foot, yet she walks off, as it is stated: “Dina went out [to see the daughters of the land]” (Genesis 34:1).
“Sarai said to Abram: The injustice done to me is on you. I gave my maidservant into your bosom and she saw that she conceived and I was diminished in her eyes; May the Lord judge between me and you” (Genesis 16:5). “Sarai said to Abram: The injustice done to me [ḥamasi] is on you” – Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon: You are committing an injustice of words against me, as you hear my humiliation (From Hagar.) and remain silent. Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana: [Sarah said:] ‘I have a grievance against you.’ This is analogous to two men incarcerated in prison. Once it happened that the king passed by. One of them said to him: ‘Take up my cause for the wrong done to me.’ He said [to the jailers]: ‘Free him.’ His counterpart (The other prisoner.) said to him: ‘I have a grievance against you. Had you said: Take up our cause for the wrong done to us, just as he freed you, he would have freed me. Now that you said: Take up my cause for the wrong done to me, he freed you and did not free me.’ So, too, [Sarah said:] ‘Had you said: “We go childless,” just as He granted you [a child], so would He have granted me. But now that you have said: “I go childless” (Genesis 15:2), He granted you [a child], but did not grant me.’ This is analogous to two people who went to borrow seeds from the king. One of them said to him: ‘Lend me seeds.’ He gave the order and they gave it to him. His counterpart said: ‘I have a grievance against you. Had you said: Lend us seeds, just as he gave you, so he would have given me.’ Here, too, [Sarah said: ‘Had you said: “Behold, you have not given us descendants,” just as He granted you [a child], so would He have granted me. Now that you said: “Behold, you have not given me descendants” (Genesis 15:3), He granted you, but did not grant me.’ Rabbi Neḥemya said in the name of Rabbi Avun: She scratched [ḥimesa] him in the face. The Rabbis said: Four traits are mentioned regarding women: Gluttons, eavesdroppers, lazy people, and jealous people. Gluttons, from Eve – “she took of its fruit and ate” (Genesis 3:6). Eavesdroppers – “Sarah heard” (Genesis 18:10). Lazy – “quickly bring three seah of high quality flour” (Genesis 18:6). (Since Abraham had to urge her to hurry, the implication is that she would not otherwise have acted with alacrity.) Jealous, as it is written: “Rachel was jealous of her sister” (Genesis 30:1). Rabbi Yehuda bar Neḥemya said: Sensitive and chatty, as well. Sensitive – “Sarai said to Abram: The injustice done to me is on you.” Talkative – “Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses” (Numbers 12:1). Rabbi Levi said: Thieves, as well, as it is stated: “Rachel stole the household idols” (Genesis 31:19). Roamers – “Dina went out [to see the girls of the land]” (Genesis 34:1). Rabbi Tanḥuma said in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya the Great and Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya: Anyone who assiduously pursues the attribute of justice will not emerge intact from its effects. Sarah was worthy of reaching Abraham’s years, but because she said: “May the Lord judge between me and you” (Genesis 16:5), thirty-eight (Manuscripts read: Forty-eight.) years were deducted from her life. It is written: “He consorted with Hagar, and she conceived.” Why, then, does the verse [later] state [to Hagar]: “Behold, you will conceive and bear a son”? (Genesis 16:11). The explanation is that it teaches that Sarah directed an evil eye against her and caused her to miscarry her fetus. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: “Between me and you [uveinekh] – uvinkha is written. (The word could be read uvinkha, your son.) Rabbi Ḥanina said: Had Elisha the prophet said this [to Hagar] through the Divine Spirit, it would have been sufficient. But she was privileged to have an angel speak with her. (“The angel of the Lord said to her: Behold, you will conceive and bear a son” (Genesis 16:11).)
“My honesty will speak on my behalf on a future day, when you will review my wages before you: every one among the goats that is not speckled and spotted, or brown, among the sheep, was stolen by me” (Genesis 30:33). “My honesty will speak on my behalf on a future day” – Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: It is written: “Do not glory in a future day” (Proverbs 27:1). You said: “My honesty will speak on my behalf on a future day” – in the future, your daughter will go out and be violated, as it is stated: “Dina, Leah’s daughter, went out” (Genesis 34:1). “Laban said: Indeed, if only it will be in accordance with your statement” (Genesis 30:34). “Laban said: Indeed, if only [hen lu] it will be in accordance with your statement” – Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Rabba said: Each and every matter that Laban would stipulate with Jacob, he would renege upon it ten times retroactively, as it is stated: “Hen lu.” (Hen means yes, lu indicates uncertainty, which constitutes the first step toward reneging on his agreement.) The Rabbis say: One hundred times, as it is stated: “But your father has cheated me, and changed my wages ten times [monim]” (Genesis 31:7) – ten times ten, as a quorum [minyan] is no fewer than ten. “He established a distance of three days’ journey between himself and Jacob. Jacob herded the remaining flock of Laban” (Genesis 30:36). “He established a distance of three days…Jacob herded the remaining [notarot] flock of Laban” – Reish Lakish said: Notarot – among them of poor quality, among them barren, and among them ill. Nateret is written natur]>. (Ḥullin 59b.)
“He arose during that night and he took his two wives, and his two maidservants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Yabok” (Genesis 32:23). “He arose during that night and he took his two wives, and his two maidservants…” – but where was Dina? He placed her in a chest and locked it with her in it. He said: ‘This wicked one has a covetous eye; [I do this] so he will not direct his eyes, see her, and take her from me.’ Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Abba HaKohen Bardela: The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘“For the sake of one who deprives his neighbor of kindness” (Job 6:14) – you withheld kindness from your neighbor, you withheld kindness from your brother. (Jacob should have allowed his brother to marry Dina.) Had she married the man, she would not have engaged in licentiousness. You did not seek to marry her to a circumcised man, so she married an uncircumcised man. You did not seek to marry her in a permitted fashion, so she married in a prohibited fashion.’ That is what is written: “Dina daughter of Leah…went out” (Genesis 34:1). “He took them, and crossed them over the stream, and brought over that which he had” (Genesis 32:24). “He took them, and crossed them over the stream” – Rav Huna in the name of Rabbi Idi: He made himself like a bridge, taking from here and placing it here.
“He established there an altar, and called it El, God of Israel” (Genesis 33:20). “He established there an altar, and called it [vayikra lo] El” – Reish Lakish said: “And called it El, God of Israel” – he said: ‘You are God of the heavenly, and I am the ruler of the earthly.’ (He called himself, “Israel,” by the name El.) Rav Huna said in the name of Reish Lakish: Even the beadle in a synagogue does not assume authority on his own, but you (Jacob.) assume authority on your own? Tomorrow, your daughter will go out and be violated. That is what is written: “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out” (Genesis 34:1).
Dina, daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land (Genesis 34:1). “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.” “Behold, all who cite proverbs will cite this proverb about you, saying: Like the mother is her daughter” (Ezekiel 16:44) – Yosei of Maon interpreted in the synagogue of Maon: “Hear this, priests, and listen, house of Israel, and hearken, house of the king” (Hosea 5:1) – he said: The Holy One blessed be He is destined to take the priests, place them on trial, and say to them: ‘Why did you not toil in Torah? Did you not benefit from twenty-four priestly gifts?’ And they say to Him: ‘They did not give us anything.’ “Listen, house of Israel” – ‘why did you not give the priests twenty-four priestly gifts that I wrote for you in the Torah?’ They say to Him: ‘It is because of those from the house of Nasi, (The political leader.) who take it all.’ “Hearken, house of the king, as judgment is yours” – ‘was it yours? (God tells the king.) “This will be the due of the priests” (Deuteronomy 18:3). Therefore, to you and upon you, the attribute of justice will turn.’ Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi II] (Grandson of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.) heard and was angry. At dusk, Reish Lakish ascended and inquired after the wellbeing of Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi II] and placated him regarding Yosei of Maon. He said to him: ‘Rabbi, we must be grateful to the nations of the world, who introduce clowns into their theaters and circuses so that they would not converse with one another and come to gratuitous altercations. Yosei of Maon said a Torah matter, and you became angry with him.' He said to him: ‘And does he know anything of matters of Torah?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ ‘Has he received the Oral Law?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ ‘If I ask him, will he respond?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ ‘If so, let him ascend to here,’ and he ascended to there. He [Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi II] said to him: ‘What is what is written: “Behold, all who cite proverbs will cite this proverb about you, saying: Like the mother is her daughter”?’ He said to him: ‘Like the daughter, so is her mother; like the generation, so is the nasi; like the altar, so are its priests. Here they say: According to the garden, the gardener.’ Reish Lakish said to him: ‘Until now I have not finished placating him over that one, and now you are bringing another upon us?’ [Reish Lakish said to Yosei of Maon ]‘What is the essence of: “Behold, all who cite proverbs”?’ (What is the literal explanation of the phrase that the daughter is like the mother? ) He [Yosei of Maon] said to him: ‘There is no cow that is prone to gore that does not have a calf that kicks. There is no woman who engages in promiscuity that does not have a daughter who engages in promiscuity.’ They said to him: ‘If so, Leah our matriarch was a harlot?’ He said to them: ‘“Leah came out to meet him…” (Genesis 30:16) – she came out adorned like a harlot.’ That is why, “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.”'
“Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have troubled me, to render me loathsome to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizites, and I am few in number; they will mobilize against me and smite me, and I and my household will be destroyed” (Genesis 34:30). “They said: Shall he render our sister as a harlot?” (Genesis 34:31). “Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have troubled me” – the Rabbis said: [Jacob said:] ‘The barrel was clear, and you rendered it murky. There is a tradition of the Canaanites, that they are destined to fall into my hands; however, the Holy One blessed be He said: Until you multiply and reach six hundred thousand.’ (But because of the action of Simeon and Levi the Canaanites will conclude that Jacob is an immediate threat.) Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [Simeon and Levi replied:] ‘The barrel was murky, and we rendered it clear.’ They said: ‘“Shall [he render our sister] a harlot?”’ – they said: ‘What, will they treat us as worthless people?’ Who caused it? “Dina…went out.”
“Like troops of robbers waylay a man, a company of priests murders its way to Shekhem, for they have formulated a plot” (Hosea 6:9). Just as these robbers sit on the way, kill people, and take their wealth, so, Simeon and Levi did to Shekhem. But, like “a company of priests”? I wonder. Just as these priests join together at the threshing floor to take their portion, so Simeon and Levi did in Shekhem, as it is stated: “Murders its way to Shekhem” – it was proper for Simeon and Levi to have killed in Shekhem. “Shall [he render our sister] a harlot?” (Genesis 34:31) – they said: ‘What, will they treat us as worthless people?’ Who caused it? “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.”
“The thistle that was in the Lebanon sent to the cedar” (II Kings 14:9). “The thistle that was in the Lebanon” – this is Ḥamor, father of Shekhem; “sent to the cedar” – this is Jacob. “Give your daughter to my son as a wife” (II Kings 14:9) – “The soul of my son Shekhem longs for your daughter. [Please, give her to him as a wife]” (Genesis 34:8). But the beasts of the field…passed and trampled” (II Kings 14:9) – “They killed Ḥamor and Shekhem his son by the sword” (Genesis 34:26). Who caused it? “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.”
Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon began: “Do not glory in tomorrow [leyom maḥar][for you do not know what the day will bring]” (Proverbs 27:1), but you say: “My honesty shall speak on my behalf on a future day [beyom maḥar]”? (Genesis 30:33). In the future, your daughter will go out and be violated. (Namely, you cannot be certain of what will happen in the future.) That is what is written: “Dina…went out.” Rabbi Ḥanina in the name of Rabbi Abba HaKohen ben Rabbi Eliezer began: “For the sake of one who deprives his neighbor of kindness” (Job 6:14) – you withheld kindness from your brother, (Jacob hid Dina away from Esau when they met, not allowing him to see her and ask for her hand in marriage. If she had been married to Esau, this episode would not have happened. See Bereshit Rabba 76:9. ) she married Job, (Some say that Job lived in the days of Jacob, and married Dina. See Bava Batra 15b.) who is neither a proselyte nor circumcised. You did not seek to marry her to a circumcised man, so she married an uncircumcised man. You did not seek to marry her in a permitted fashion, so she married in a prohibited fashion. “Dina…went out.”
Rabbi Tanḥuma began: “One man out of one thousand I have found, but a woman among all these I did not find” (Ecclesiastes 7:28). (The Yefe Toar explains that this comes to explain how it is possible to say that there was something improper in Leah's behavior, as mentioned by Reish Lakish above in paragraph 1.) Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Levi began: “You neglect all my counsel” (Proverbs 1:25) – that is what is written: “The Lord God built [vayiven] the side” (Genesis 2:22). Vayiven – he observed from where to create her… (See Bereshit Rabba 18:2 for the entire statement of Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Levi. God created the woman such that she should be modest, but nevertheless not all are modest.) Reish Lakish cites it from here: “He erected an altar there” (Genesis 35:7). (See Bereshit Rabba 79:8 where Reish Lakish said that Jacob gave an improper name to the altar, and what happened to Dina was a punishment.) “Shekhem, son of Ḥamor the Ḥivite, prince of the land, saw her, and he took her, and lay with her, and violated her” (Genesis 34:2). Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: This is analogous to one who had a litra of meat in his possession. When he revealed it, a bird swooped down and snatched it. So, “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.” Immediately, “Shekhem, son of Ḥamor…saw her.” Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: She exposed her forearm. (When it says that Shekhem saw her, it was only her forearm, and no other concealed part of her body.) “And lay with her, and violated her.” “And lay with her” – in the typical manner; “and violated her” – in an atypical manner.
“God blessed them and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and dominate over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living creature that crawls upon the earth” (Genesis 1:28). “And dominate over the fish of the sea” – Rabbi Ḥanina said: If they merit it, [they will] dominate [redu], but if not, they will fall [yeredu]. (They will become victims to the predations of animals.) Rabbi Yaakov of Kefar Ḥanin said: One who fulfills “in our image, in our likeness – “And dominate”; those who do not fulfill “in our image, in our likeness” – they will fall [yeredu]. Rabbi Yaakov of Kefar Ḥanan said: Let the one who is “in our image, in our likeness” (Man.) come “and dominate” the one who does not resemble being “in our image, in our likeness.” (The animals.) “God blessed them” – there we learned: A virgin should marry on a Wednesday and a widow on a Thursday.” (Ketubot 2a.) Why? It is because a blessing [for fertility] is written in connection with these days. But, is it not so, that a blessing [for fertility] is written only in connection with Thursday and Friday? (Genesis 1:22 and 1:28.) Bar Kapara said: Wednesday means on the eve of Thursday, and Thursday means on the eve of Friday. (The marriage that takes place during the day is consummated at night.) Rabbi Elazar in the name of Rabbi Yosei Ben Zimra: “[Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth] and subdue it” [vekhivshuha] (Plural.) – it is written [as if it should be read] vekhovshah (Singular.) – the man alone is commanded regarding procreation, but not the woman. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says: Both the man and the woman [are commanded]. Regarding both of them it says: “God blessed them […and said: Be fruitful, and multiply…].” Vekhivshuha – it is written [as if it should be read] vekhovshah (Meaning: And subdue her.) – the man restrains his wife so she should not go out in public, (In an inappropriate manner.) as any woman who goes out in public will ultimately falter. From where do we derive it? It is from Dina, as it is stated: “Dina went out” (Genesis 34:1) – and she ultimately faltered. That is what is written: “Shekhem saw her…” (Genesis 34:2). Rabbi Yirmeya, Rabbi Abahu, and Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Maryon in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yoḥanan. (Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka.)
(Numb. 22:2:) NOW BALAK SAW. He saw retribution which Israel inflicted against the Ammonites. (Tanh., 7:2; Numb. R. 20:2.) It would have been better for the wicked if they had been blind, (Cf. Matthew 5:29; 18:9 // Mark 9:47.) for their eyes bring a curse to the world. With reference to the generation of the flood, [it is written] (in Gen. 6:2): THE SONS OF GOD SAW THE HUMAN DAUGHTERS WERE . [It is also written] (in Gen. 9:22): THEN HAM, THE FATHER OF CANAAN, SAW . [It is also written] (in Gen. 12:15): SO PHARAOH'S COURTIERS SAW HER (i.e., Abram's wife Sarah) . [It is also written] (in Gen. 34:1–2): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR SAW HER…. So also (in Numb. 22:2): NOW BALAK SAW. is comparable to someone who appointed guards to guard from an invader; and he had confidence in them, because they were warriors. When the invader came over and killed them, he trembled with fear for himself. It was the same also with Balak. When he saw what happened with Sihon and Og to whom he had been sending payment to guard him, he was afraid for himself. And in addition to that, he had seen the miracles at the wadies of Arnon. (According to Numb. 21:26-31, Sihon defeated the King of Moab and captured his territory as far at the Arnon. See above, Numb. 6:47 // Numb. R. 19:25, for a description of the miracles. See also below, Numb. 7:6 // Numb. R. 20:7, according to which Sihon’s victory resulted from a curse by Balaam.)
Jacob was the first-born of the Holy One, as stated (in Exod. 4:22): ISRAEL IS MY FIRST-BORN SON. How happy he was! He saw a ladder, and (according to Gen. 28:12) THE ANGELS OF GOD WERE ASCENDING AND DESCENDING, as they looked at him with the Holy One standing above it. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:13): AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD UPON IT…. Then he went to Laban, fled from Esau, became Laban's servant for twenty years, and in the end became wealthy, sired children, and returned in peace. He also met Esau, was saved from him, and paid his vow. But in the end he did not remain in his happiness. Instead (according to Gen. 34:1): NOW DINAH < THE DAUGHTER WHOM LEAH HAD BORNE TO JACOB > WENT OUT…, < and was raped >. There also came upon him the trouble over Joseph. Now surely if Jacob the Righteous, one to whom the Holy One had said: In whom I will be glorified, as stated (in Is. 49:3): ISRAEL, IN WHOM I WILL BE GLORIFIED, did not remain in his happiness, how much the less will the wicked < so remain >! [It is therefore stated (in Ps. 75:5 [4]): I SAY TO THE MERRYMAKERS: DO NOT MAKE MERRY.]
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH < WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB > WENT OUT. Let our master instruct us: Is is legitimate for a woman to go out with her jewelry on the Sabbath into a public place? (Tanh., Gen. 8:5.) Thus have our masters taught (according to Shab. 6:1): A WOMAN SHALL NOT GO OUT into a public place on the Sabbath with her jewelry, NOR WITH A HAIR NET … NOR WITH A GOLDEN TIARA, NOR WITH A CATELLA (The Latin word denotes a small ornamental chain worn by women.) {i.e., a type of jewelry} < … > NOR WITH A NEEDLE HAVING NO EYE. BUT, IF SHE SHOULD GO OUT, SHE IS NOT LIABLE FOR [A SIN OFFERING], < i.e., > when she goes out < of her rooms > with them < but remains > within the house. Let her not, however, go out into a public place with a single piece of jewelry. Now, our masters say: Even on a weekday she must not go out into a public place. Why? Because people will stare at her. Thus the Holy One gave jewelry to a woman only for her to adorn herself with them inside of the house; for one does not give an opening (I.e., an occasion for transgression.) to the trustworthy person, let alone to the thief. And so Job has said (in Job 31:1): I HAVE MADE A COVENANT WITH MY EYES. HOW THEN SHALL I GAZE ON A MAIDEN? Come and see Job's righteousness. If in the case of a maiden, at whom any man has a right to look, perhaps to marry her or perhaps to marry her to his son or to one of his kin, Job did not look at her, how much the less in the case of someone's wife, at whom he has no right to look. It is therefore written (in Ps. 45:14 [13]): ALL GLORIOUS IS THE KING'S DAUGHTER WITHIN. So, if she acts to conceal herself and is worthy, (ibid., cont.:) HER CLOTHING IS OF GOLD BROCADE. R. Levi said: She was worthy to raise up priests to put on the high priestly garments. Now there is no BROCADE except priestly garments. Thus it is stated (regarding Aaron's vestments in Exod. 28:13): AND YOU SHALL MAKE GOLD BROCADE. There is already an allusion in the Torah about this thing, that a woman should not go about a lot in a marketplace. Where? Where it is so written (in Gen. 1:28): THEN GOD BLESSED THEM, AND GOD SAID TO THEM: < BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY, FILL THE EARTH > AND SUBDUE HER. [AND SUBDUE HER is written < here >]. (Tanh., Gen. 2:12; Gen. R. 8:12; cf. Yev. 65b.) The man subdues the woman, and the woman does not subdue the man. But, if she walks about a lot and goes out into the marketplace, she finally comes to a state of corruption, to a state of harlotry. And so you find in the case of Jacob's daughter Dinah. All the time that she was sitting at home, she was not corrupted by transgression; but, as soon as she went out into the marketplace, she caused herself to come to the point of corruption.
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT. This text is related (to Prov. 11:12): ONE WHO DESPISES HIS NEIGHBOR IS LACKING IN SENSE. Whoever scorns his neighbor is called LACKING IN SENSE. But, if that same person who was despised was a person of knowledge and understanding, he would put his hand over his mouth and be silent. Thus it is stated (ibid., cont.): BUT A PERSON OF UNDERSTANDING WILL KEEP SILENT. (Prov. 11:12:) ONE WHO DESPISES HIS NEIGHBOR IS LACKING IN SENSE. This is Hamor, (A name which means “ass” in Hebrew.) the father of Shechem, who said (in Gen. 34:8): THE SOUL OF MY SON, SHECHEM, LONGS FOR YOUR DAUGHTER. (Prov. 11:12, cont.:) BUT A PERSON OF UNDERSTANDING WILL KEEP SILENT. This is Jacob of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:5): SO JACOB KEPT SILENCE UNTIL THEY CAME. For what reason? On account of this corruption (in Gen. 34:1-2): NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, < WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB > WENT OUT…. < THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. SO HE TOOK HER, LAY WITH HER, AND VIOLATED HER >.
[(Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT.] This text is related (to Ezek. 16:44): BEHOLD, EVERYONE WHO USES PROVERBS WILL USE A PROVERB ABOUT YOU AND SAY: LIKE MOTHER, LIKE DAUGHTER. (See ySanh. 2:6 (29d); Gen. R. 80:1. These versions draw a conclusion missing here, that, like her mother, Leah, Dinah also played the harlot.) Our master asked R. Hiyya: In what sense do you say: LIKE MOTHER, LIKE DAUGHTER? He said to him: Just as the altar, so are its priests. Rabbi (in his day) had taken a lot of pains with < this text >. He said to him: Tell < me > the truth; in what sense do you say it? He said to him: Just as the prince, so is the generation. (‘Arakh. 17a.)
Another interpretation (of Ezek. 16:44): LIKE MOTHER, LIKE DAUGHTER. This refers to Dinah. What is written of Leah (in Gen. 30:16)? LEAH WENT OUT TO MEET HIM. So also (in Gen. 34:1): NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT.
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT. This text is related (to II Kings 14:9): THE THISTLE THAT WAS IN LEBANON. This thistle was Shechem's father, Hamor. (Gen. R. 80:3; cf. Tanh., Gen. 8:7; cf. also rule 26 in the thirty-two middot of R. Eliezer b. R. Jose the Galilean.) (Ibid., cont.:) SENT TO THE CEDAR THAT WAS IN LEBANON. This is Jacob, as stated (in Ps. 92:13 [12]): THE RIGHTEOUS ONE SHALL FLOURISH LIKE THE PALM, LIKE A CEDAR IN LEBANON SHALL HE GROW. (II Kings 14:9, cont.:) GIVE YOUR DAUGHTER TO MY SON FOR A WIFE. Thus it says (in Gen. 34:8): PLEASE GIVE HER TO HIM FOR A WIFE. (II Kings 14:9, cont.:) BUT A WILD BEAST PASSED BY. These are the tribes, who have been compared to wild beasts. (See Gen. R. 99:4.) Thus it is stated (in Gen. 49:9): JUDAH IS A LION'S WHELP, (in vs. 27:) BENJAMIN IS A RAVENOUS WOLF, (in vs. 21:) NAPHTHALI IS A HIND LET LOOSE, (and in vs. 14:) ISSACHAR IS A STRONG-BONED ASS. (II Kings 14:9, cont.:) AND TRAMPLED DOWN THE THISTLE. This is Hamor and his son Shechem, whom < the tribes > killed with the edge of the sword because of Dinah, as stated (in Gen. 34:1): NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT. In every place the female child is accompanied by males, but here she is accompanied by her mother. Thus, the corruption had begun with her mother.
Another interpretation (of Gen. 34:1): NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT. But < had she gone out > from sin? After all, Jacob had said (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): I AM UNWORTHY OF ALL THE KINDNESSES. R. Aha said: < The Holy One said >: I have nourished your ancestors from their < good > deeds, but you say: I AM UNWORTHY! The Holy One said to him: Jacob, < it is > through your righteousness < that > I have done all these miracles of which you say that you are unworthy. But look, she is going out; yet your merit shall remain for you. (Gen. 34:1:) NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT.
[(Gen. 34:1:) NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT.] This text is related (to Prov. 1:25): BUT YOU HAVE SPURNED ALL MY COUNSEL AND WOULD NOT ACCEPT MY REBUKE. < The verse > speaks about Eve. When the Holy One wanted to create her, (Tanh., Gen. 9:6; Gen. R. 18:2; 80:5.) the Holy One said: If I create her from Adam's head, her spirit will be haughtily above her; < if > from his eyes, < she will be > flirtatious; < if > from his mouth, she will be loquacious; < if > from his hands, she will be a thief; < if > from his feet, she will be a gadabout. The Holy One said: All this counsel I took before I created her, and I did not depart from it. I said: If I create her from his head, her spirit will be haughtily above her; < yet >, as stated (in Is. 3:16): MOREOVER, THE LORD SAID: BECAUSE THE DAUGHTERS OF ZION ARE HAUGHTY…. < If > from his eyes; < yet >, (ibid., cont.:) < HER > EYES ARE ROVING ABOUT. < If > from < the > ears; < yet >, (in Gen. 18:10:) SARAH WAS LISTENING < AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE TENT >. < If > from his mouth; < yet >, (in Numb. 12:1:) THEN MIRIAM … SPOKE < AGAINST MOSES >. < If > from his hands; < yet >, (in Gen. 31:19) RACHEL STOLE. < If > from his feet, she will be going in and out; < yet >, (in Gen. 34:1) DINAH … WENT OUT. Ergo (in Prov. 1:25): BUT YOU HAVE SPURNED ALL MY COUNSEL….
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH… WENT OUT. R. Hiyya bar Abba said: The male is always attributed to the wife, and the female, to the husband. (See Tanh. (Buber), Lev. 4:4; Tanh., Lev. 4:3.) Then why is this < daughter > attributed to her mother? Because her pregnancy was originally male. However, when Leah had borne six < sons >, Billah, two, and Zilpah, two, for a total of ten; then she prayed on behalf of < the barren > Rachel, and < the child > in her womb became female. (See above, 7:19; Ber. 60a; Gen. R. 72:6. Ber. 60a explains that Jacob could have no more than twelve sons and that, therefore, if Leah’s seventh child were a son, there would only be one son left for Rachel to have. Then Rachel would not even be equal to one of the handmaidens.) For that reason, she was attributed to her mother. (Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT.
(Gen. 34:1:) < NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT > TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. TO SEE < implies > TO BE SEEN. (The unpointed Hebrew text could be read either way by assuming a contraction of the passive common in Mishnaic Hebrew. See M.H. Segal, A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew (Oxford: Clarendon, 1958), section 115. See also Gen. 22:14, where the same contracted passive is used to explain a place-name based on the active Hebrew verb, “to see.” On Gen. 22:14, see E.A. Speiser, Genesis (“Anchor Bible,” 1; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 163f.) To what is the matter comparable? To one who was walking in the marketplace with a piece < of meat > in his hand. (Gen. R. 80:5.) A dog, having seen it, went after it, and snatched it from him. Thus did Dinah go out TO SEE (and TO BE SEEN) when Shechem saw her and seized her. (See Eccl. R. 10:8:1.) Another interpretation (of Gen. 34:1): TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. When the children of Jacob came into the land of Israel, they began to exhibit their strength, their wealth, and their beauty. They exhibited their strength (according to Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, < SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH >, [EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. They exhibited their wealth (according to Gen. 33:17): BUT JACOB JOURNEYED TO SUCCOTH, BUILT A HOUSE FOR HIMSELF, AND MADE STALLS (sukkot) FOR HIS CATTLE. He began opening < cattle > bazaars. (Gk.: katalusis (“resting place” or “inn”). See Gen. R. 79:6; Eccl. R. 10:8:1; Esth. R. 3:7.) And where is it shown concerning their beauty? (In Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT TO SEE AND TO BE SEEN. (Note that the midrash understands the one verb, “see,” in both an active and passive sense. See above, note 59.) (Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < It is > the wicked < who > "see." (Thus in Esth. 3:5:) WHEN HAMAN SAW. (Similarly in Gen. 28:6:) WHEN ESAU SAW. (So also here, in Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR … SAW. David said (in Ps. 69:24:) LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED SO THAT THEY DO NOT SEE.
(Lev. 9:1) “And it came to pass on the eighth day….” This text is related (to Ps. 75:5), “I say to the merrymakers, ‘Do not make merry….’” What is the meaning of [the words], “I say to the merrymakers (rt.: hll), ‘do not make merry (rt.: hll)?’” (This root can also mean “act with abandon” and is to be taken in that sense here. For another interpretation of the word, see Lev. R. 20:2.) [The verse refers] to whoever sings in a mahanaim dance (mahol), (As in Cant. 7:1 [6:13]. In comparing these two words, the midrash assumes that both words come from the root HLL and ignores the fact that in the first case the H is a he while in the second case the H is a het.) and so it says (in Jud. 21:21), “to dance (lehol) in the dances.” [Because no happiness endures for a mortal] (Ps. 75:5), “I say to the merrymakers, ‘Do not make merry (rt.: hll).’” Why? The one who is happy today shall not be happy tomorrow; and the one who is depressed today shall not be depressed tomorrow. And so it says (in Eccl. 2:2), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad (rt.: hll)….’” (Cf. PRK 26:2–3.) Are you willing to understand? As behold, even the happiness of the Holy One, blessed be He, did not endure. When? When the Holy One, blessed be He, created His world. He was very happy, as stated (in Ps. 104:31), “the Lord shall be happy in His works.” It also says (in Gen. 1:31), “Then God saw everything which He had made; and behold, it was very good.” [These verses are] to teach you that the Holy One, blessed be He, found pleasure in and took pride in His works. Then He gave the first Adam an easy commandment, but he did not fulfill it. Immediately He rendered him a verdict (Gk.: apophasis.) [of death], as stated (in Gen. 3:19), “for dust you are, and unto dust you shall return.” So He, as it were, did not remain in His happiness but said, “I created everything only for the human, and now he dies. What pleasure is there for Me? [Now surely if the Holy One, blessed be He,] did not remain [happy], how much the less shall people [remain happy! It is therefore stated (in Ps. 75:5), “I say to the merrymakers, ‘do not make merry.’”] How happy Abraham was! He was blessed in the world, magnified, slew some kings and handed over heaven and earth to the Holy One, blessed be He. Also when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave him a son at age one hundred, he circumcised him and reared him. Then finally he was told (in Gen. 22:2), “Please take your son, your only son…, [and go unto the land of Moriah,] and offer him there as a burnt offering.” So he made a three-day journey, as stated (in Gen. 22:4), “On the third day….” When he returned from Mount Moriah, he buried Sarah. He did not find a place to bury her until he bought one for four hundred silver shekels. Then after that, old age came upon him. Now surely if such was the case with Abraham the righteous, how much the more is it the case with the wicked! Isaac did not remain in his happiness: He escaped from the sword and from the men of Gerar. And [God] informed them about who he was, so that they came to him. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 26:26, 28), “Then Abimelech came unto him from Gerar […. And they said, ‘We have clearly seen that the Lord is with you.’]” But he did not remain in his happiness. Rather (according to Gen. 27:1), “Now it came to pass, that when Isaac was old and his eyes were too weak to see.” So just as [this loss of happiness] happened in the case of Isaac the burnt offering of the Holy One, blessed be He, (according to Gen. 22:2), how much the more does it happen in the case of the wicked! Jacob was the first-born of the Holy One, blessed be He, as stated (in Exod. 4:22), “Israel is My first-born son.” How happy he was! He saw a ladder, and (according to Gen. 28:12-13) “the angels of god were ascending and descending [….] And behold, the Lord stood upon it and said, I am the Lord….” Then he went to Laban, fled from Esau, became Laban's servant for twenty years and in the end became wealthy, sired children and returned in peace. He also met Esau and was saved from him, and paid his vow. But in the end he did not remain in his happiness. Instead (according to Gen. 34:1), “Now Dinah [the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob] went out…,” and was raped]. There also came upon him the trouble over Joseph. Now surely if Jacob the righteous – one to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, had said, “In whom I will be glorified,” as stated (in Is. 49:3), “Israel, in whom I will be glorified” – did not remain in his happiness, how much the less will the wicked [so remain! It is therefore stated (in Ps. 75:5), “I say to the merrymakers, ‘Do not make merry.’”] How happy Joshua was! He slew thirty-one kings, gave Israel the land to possess, and distributed it. In addition all Israel gave him a [helping] hand and said (in Josh. 1:18), “Anyone who disobeys your command… [shall be put to death.” Such an honor was] something of which [even] Moses our master did not merit. Still he (i.e., Joshua) did not remain in his happiness, but rather died childless. It is therefore stated (in Ps. 75:5), “I say to the merrymakers, ‘Do not make merry.’” How happy Eli was, when he was king, chief justice, and high priest! It is so stated (in I Sam. 1:9), “now Eli [the priest] was sitting on the throne by the doorpost of the Temple of the Lord.” “Now Eli the priest was sitting on the throne,” because he was king. [He was] “by the doorpost of the Temple of the Lord,” because he was chief justice. Still he did not remain in his happiness. Instead (according to I Sam. 4:18), “And it came to pass that when he (i.e., a messenger) mentioned the ark of God, he (i.e., Eli) fell backward from off the throne….” Moreover, his two sons, Hophni and Phinehas died. So just as this [shift in fortune] happened with Eli the righteous, how much the more [does it happen with] the wicked! You find neither man nor woman who saw joys like Elisheba bat Amminadab, [the wife of Aaron, as stated (in Exod. 6:23), “And Aaron took for a wife Elisheba bat Amminadab”]. (PRK 26:2; Zev. 102a; Tanh. (Buber), Lev. 6:2.) She saw her husband become high priest serving in the high priesthood and [as a] prophet. In addition, Moses, her husband's brother, was king and prophet. Moreover, her sons were deputies [to the high priest] in the priesthood, and her brother Nahshon was head of all of the princes of Israel. (According to Numb. 10:13, Nahshon was in command of the troops of Judah, and the troops of Judah headed those of the other tribes. See also Numb. 2:3; I Chron. 2:10.) Still she did not remain in her happiness. Rather, when two of her sons went in to offer a sacrifice, (according to Lev. 10:2,) “Fire came forth from before the Lord and consumed them, so that they died before the Lord.” It is therefore stated (in Ps. 75:5), “I say to the merrymakers, ‘Do not make merry.’” And so Solomon said (in Eccl. 2:2), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad.’” There is a story about one of the great Babylonian [scholars], who married off his son, (PRK 26:2; Lev. R. 20:2.) and made a great banquet for the sages. He said to his son, “Go up and bring us a jar of such and such a wine from the attic.” He went up to the attic. [There] a snake [from] among the jars bit him, and he died. His father remained with those who were reclining [at his table]. So he delayed and did not come. [Finally,] his father said, “Let me go up and see what my son is doing.” His father went up [and] found him cast down dead among the jars. What did that saint do? He waited by himself until the guests had eaten and drunk sufficiently. When they had finished, he said, “You came to say a bridegrooms' blessing over my son. [But instead] say a mourners' blessing over him. You came to bring my son to the wedding canopy. [Instead] bring him to [his] grave.” They said about R. Zakkay of Kabul and they opened about him (in the words of Eccl. 2:2), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad; and what does joy do?’”
Observe that when the Holy One, blessed be He, was about to fashion Eve, He gave considerable thought to the parts of Adam’s body out of which He would create her. He said: If I create her out of a portion of his head, she will be haughty; if I fashion her from his eyes, she will be inquisitive; if I mold her out of his mouth, she will babble; from the ear, she will be an eavesdropper; from the hands, she will steal; and from the feet, she will be a gadabout. What did He do? He fashioned her out of one of Adam’s ribs, a chaste portion of the body, so that she would stay modestly at home, as it is said: And the rib which the Lord had taken (Gen. 2:22). Nevertheless, women do not lack any of these failings. He did not create her from the head of Adam lest she be haughty, nevertheless the daughters of Zion arose and were haughty, as is said: Moreover, the Lord said: Because the daughters of Zion are haughty (Isa. 3:16). He did not fashion her from his eyes lest she be inquisitive, yet Eve was inquisitive, as it is said: And the woman saw that the tree was good (Gen. 3:6). He did not mold her from his mouth lest she babble, but Leah came and babbled, as it is written: And she said unto her: “Is it a small matter that thou hast taken away my husband?” (Gen. 30:15), and it states elsewhere: And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses (Num. 12:1). He did not create her from the ear, lest she eavesdrop, yet Sarah did eavesdrop, as is said: And Sarah heard in the tent door (Gen. 18:10); He did not fashion her out of his hand, lest she steal, nevertheless Rachel stole the teraphim, as it is said: And Rachel stole (ibid. 31:19); He did not create her from the foot, lest she be a gadabout, but Leah came and was a gadabout, as is said: And Leah went out (ibid. 30:16), and similarly Dinah went out (ibid. 34:1).
And Dinah, the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne unto Jacob, went out (Gen. 34:1). May it please our master to teach us whether a woman is permitted to walk about on the Sabbath while adorned with jewelry (gold medallions)? Thus do our masters teach us: A woman is prohibited from walking about on the Sabbath with a gold medallion suspended about her neck, with a signet ring upon her finger, or wearing an eyeless hairpin in her hair. If she wears any of these adornments in the public thoroughfare, she must bring a sin offering. In the courtyard of her home, however, she is permitted to wear them.
And Dinah, the daughter of Leah, went out (Gen. 34:1). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: All honor to the king’s daughter within the palace (Ps. 45:14). R. Yosé asserted: If a woman conducts herself modestly in her home, she is worthy of marrying a high priest, and of rearing high priests, as is written: All honor to the king’s daughter, etc. If she behaves honorably in her home, Her raiment is of chequer work (ibid.); that is, she will marry a man about whom Scripture says: And thou shalt weave a tunic in chequer work (Exod. 28:39). (Referring to the priestly vestments, which were of checkered work.)
And Dinah, the daughter of Leah, went out to see (Gen. 34:1). Was she not also Jacob’s daughter? Indeed, but Scripture associates her name with that of her mother. Leah’s daughter (Dinah) loved to roam about just as her mother did. How do we know this about Leah? It is written: And Leah went out to meet him (Gen. 30:16). Ezekiel declared: Behold, everyone that useth proverbs shall use this proverb against thee, saying: As the mother, so her daughter (Ezek. 16:44). To see should be read as “to be seen,” for though she went out to see, she was, in fact, seen, as it is said: And Shechem the son of Hamor … saw her (Gen. 34:2).
... “He will save him because He delights in him.” (Tehillim 22:9) R’ Shimon ben Lakish said that the Holy One expressed His love for Israel with three languages of affection, with ‘cleaving,’ with ‘desiring,’ and with ‘wanting.’ With cleaving – “But you who cleave to the Lord your God are alive…” (Devarim 4:4) With desiring – “…did the Lord desire you…” (Devarim 7:7) With wanting – “…for the Lord wants you…” (Yeshayahu 62:4) We learn all of these from that wicked one of the story of “And Dinah went out…” (Bereshit 34:1) With cleaving – “And his soul cleaved to Dinah…” (Bereshit 34:3) With desiring – “My son Shechem his soul desires your daughter.” (Bereshit 34:8) With wanting – “…because he wanted Jacob's daughter…” (Bereshit 34:19) R’ Aba bar Elisha added two more, with love and with speaking to the heart. With love, as it says “I loved you, said the Lord…” (Malachi 1:2) With speaking to the heart, as it says “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem…” (Yeshayahu 40:2) We learn these also from the story of that wicked one – “…he loved the girl and spoke to the girl's heart.” (Bereshit 34:3) “He will save him because He delights in him.”
JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN "OR went into the house and leaned his hand on the wall, and the serpent bit him" (Amos 5:19). When Jacob went into his house in the land of Canaan the serpent bit him. || And who was the serpent? This was Shechem, the son of Chamor. Because the daughter of Jacob was abiding in the tents, and she did not go into the street; what did Shechem, the son of Chamor, do? He brought dancing girls who were (also) playing on pipes in the streets. Dinah went forth to see those girls who were making merry; and he seized her, and he slept with her, and she conceived and bare Asenath. The sons of Israel said that she should be killed, for they said that now people would say in all the land that there was an immoral daughter in the tents of Jacob.
“Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:2). “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” – that is what is written: “It is preferable that you do not vow than if you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda: Rabbi Meir says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – but one who vows and pays is better. There is proof for Rabbi Meir from what is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Rabbi Yehuda says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – and better than both of them (Better than one who vows and does not pay, and one who vows and pays. ) is one who does not vow at all, but rather, brings his lamb to the Temple courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it. “If you refrain from vowing, there will be no sin in you” (Deuteronomy 23:23) – Rav Huna said: There was an incident involving one who took a vow but did not pay his vow, and he embarked to sail in the Mediterranean Sea. His ship sunk and he died at sea. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow, ultimately he will come to idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander. From whom do you derive all this? It is from Jacob; because he vowed and delayed fulfilling his vow, (Jacob’s vow is related in Genesis 28:20–22, and a midrash asserts that he did not fulfill his vow in a timely enough fashion when he returned to the Land of Israel. ) he came to all of them. Idol worship, from where is it derived? “Jacob said to his household…remove the foreign gods [that are in your midst]” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, from where is it derived? From Dina, as it is stated: “Dina went out.… [and Shekhem…lay with her and violated her]” (Genesis 34:1). Bloodshed, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “It was on the third day, when they were in pain…[Simeon and Levi…killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). Slander, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons” (Genesis 31:1). The Rabbis say: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow buries his wife. That is what is written: “And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and pays, he has reward for the vow and for the payment, as it is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Anyone who vows and delays fulfillment of his vow causes death to himself, as it is written: “As the Lord your God will demand it from you” (Deuteronomy 23:22) – payment is exacted from you, and not from your property. Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). There is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgression with a rod, and their iniquity with plague” (Psalms 89:33). Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: Just as regarding vows, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, (See Numbers 30:3. ) and: You shall not delay, (See Deuteronomy 23:23. ) so, regarding valuations, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, and: You shall not delay. That is why Moses cautions Israel and says: “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord.” (Moses mentions the term vow in the context of valuations in order to imply that the prohibitions against violating or delaying fulfillment of vows applies to valuations as well. )
ותצא דינה בת לאה . The lesson we learn from this incident is how careful women have to be to conduct their affairs as far as possible within the privacy of the home. This rule does not only apply to married women but also to unmarried girls. If Dinah, a daughter of such illustrious parents as Jacob and Leah, was not safe from an attack on her virginity, daughters of less illustrious parents certainly need to be guarded carefully.
From beginning to end, Genesis 34 tells a terrifying story. Dina, Jacob’s daughter – the only Jewish daughter mentioned in the entire patriarchal narrative – leaves the safety of home to go out to “look at the daughters of the land” (Gen. 34:1). She is raped and abducted by a local prince, Shechem, son of the king of the town known as Shechem.
Est. 9:10, 15–16. Jacob seems passive throughout. He neither acts nor instructs his sons on how to act. Even Dina herself seems at best to have been guilty of carelessness in going out into the town in the first place, in what was clearly a dangerous neighbourhood – recall that both Abraham and Isaac, her grandfather and great-grandfather, had feared for their own lives because of the lawlessness of the times. (The Midrash is critical of Dina. See Midrash Aggada (Buber) to Gen. 34:1. Midrash Sekhel Tov 34:1 is even critical of her mother Leah for allowing her to go out.)
He who digs a pit will fall into it (Ecclesiastes 10:8) — that is Dinah, the daughter of Leah. Since her brothers and the house of her father would sit and study in the study hall, she went out to see the daughters of the land, as it is stated: And Dinah the daughter of Leah went out (Genesis 34:1). Who is the snake that bit her? That was Shekhem, the son of Chamor. (Avot DeRabbi Natan, Recension B 3:8)
According to Midrash Tanchuma Vayeshev 6, the above words are an illustration of why Solomon warned in Kohelet 7,26: “and I have discovered that a woman whose heart is snares and nets is worse than death.” Rabbi Yehudah son of Shalom added: “there is no worse cause of sin than woman; whereas we find that three thousand Jewish males were slain for having worshipped the golden calf, (Exodus 32,28), twenty-four thousand Jewish males were killed due to the seduction by the Mobaite and Midianite women reported in Numbers 28,9”. What is the meaning of the words אסורים ידיה “her hands are tied?” If G’d had not tied woman’s hands she would accost man in the marketplace demanding that he have carnal relations with her. Kohelet continues by saying that “he who is pleasing to G’d will escape the machinations of such a woman whereas the sinner will be trapped by her.” The “man pleasing to G’d” is a reference to Joseph who escaped the wife of Potiphar, where the “sinner” is a reference to Zimri, prince of the tribe of Shimon, who slept with Cosbi the Midianite during the encounter described in Numbers. When G’d created Chavah, (first woman) He had said to Himself: “which part of Adam shall I use to make into woman? If I use the head she will be of haughty spirit. If I use Adam’s eyes as raw material she will possess insatiable curiosity. If I create her from part of Adam’s mouth she will babble interminably. If I construct her out of part of Adam’s ear, she will turn out to be extremely inquisitive. If I create her out of Adam’s hands, she may turn out to be a thief, whereas if I construct her from part of Adam’s legs, she will constantly roam outside her house. What did G’d do? He formed Chavah from the rib, a place well hidden from Adam’s exterior so that she would be chaste and remain primarily indoors. In spite of the fact that G’d took care not to construct Chavah from one of the organs which would made her prone to the afore-mentioned character weaknesses, we find that she possessed these weaknesses after all. She is described as haughty in Isaiah 3 16, “because the daughters of Zion are so vain and walk with their heads thrown back, with roving eyes, and with mincing gait, etc.” Although G’d did not use part of Adam’s eyes as raw material from which to form Chavah we still find that she was insatiably curious as the prophet records her as possessing “roving eyes.” We also find that the Torah writes (Genesis 3,6) “the woman saw that the tree was good to eat and alluring for the eyes.” Even though G’d did not utilise any of Adam’s hands to create woman she still became a thief as the Torah writes (Genesis 30,15) “Rachel stole the teraphim.” Even though G’d did not use any part of Adam’s ears in order to make Chavah, she became unduly curious as we know from Sarah who is reported as listening to the conversation between Avraham and the angels “at the entrance to the tent” in Genesis 18,10. Even though G’d also did not use any part of Adam’s legs or feet to make Chavah, she still developed the tendency to roam outside her home as we know from Dinah, the daughter of Yaakov and Leah of whom the Torah reports that “she went out to look around amongst the girls of the country”’ (Genesis 34,1). Dinah’s mother Leah has also been described as leaving her home needlessly when the Torah writes (Genesis 30,15) “Leah went out, etc.” We know that Leah was babbling when the Torah describes her as accusing her sister Rachel of taking her husband away from her (Genesis 30,15), an accusation which was quite unwarranted. All this happened although G’d had not made Chavah from any part of Adam’s mouth.
“And the Lord God formed” [2:22]. Rabbi Joshua says in the name of Rabbi Levi. The Holy One sat and considered from which organ should she be created. He said, I will not create her from Adam’s head since she will be very arrogant and carry her head high. If I were to create her from the eye, she will want to see everything. From the ear, she will want to hear everything. From the mouth, she will want to speak much. From the heart, she will be envious of all people. From the hand, she will want to grab everything. From the feet, she will run around. Therefore, I will create her from an organ that is hidden. This is the rib that one doesn’t see, even when the person is naked. However, none of this helped. I did not create her from the head, yet she holds her head high, as the verse says, “and walk with heads thrown back” [Isaiah, 3:16], and they go with throats high. I did not create them from the eye and they want to see everything, as the verse says, “with roving eyes” [Isaiah, 3:16], they see everything with their eyes. I did not create them from the ear and they listen to everything that they shouldn’t, as the verse says, “and Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent” [Genesis, 18:10]. I did not create her from the heart so that she shouldn’t be envious of everyone, as the verse says, “and Rachel became envious of her sister” [Genesis, 30:1], and Rachel was envious of her sister. I did not create her from the hand, because they would have long hands to grasp, as the verse says, “and Rachel stole the Teraphim” [Genesis, 31:19]. I did not create her from the feet, so that she should not run around among the houses, as the verse says, “and Dinah went out” [Genesis, 34:1]. (Genesis Rabbah, 18.2.)
(A similar paragraph is in Gen. r. 80(1).) Yose from Maon interpreted (In the Talmudim, תרגם is only used for interpretation or translation of Scripture. One has to assume that Yose from Maon was reading Hos. 5 as Hafṭara to Gen. 34 in the Palestinian 3½ year cycle of Torah reading (cf. J. Mann, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue I, Cincinnati 1940). One also has to assume that the Aramaic translator of the Hafṭara had the freedom to expound upon the verses read, similar to what is described in the New Testament (Luke 4:17–20).) in the synagogue of Tiberias: Listen to this, you priests (Hos. 5:1.) , why do you not study Torah? Did I not give you 24 gifts (The 24 emoluments of priesthood; cf. Hallah 4:11 (Note 146) and the sources quoted there.) ? They told him, they do not give us anything. And hearken, House of Israel, why do you not give the 24 gifts which I commanded you at Sinai? They told him, the king (The Patriarch was responsible for collecting the taxes due from the Jewish population in Palestine; there is an intentional ambiguity whether king refers to the Roman Emperor or the Davidic Patriarch.) takes everything. Listen, king’s court, for yours are legal proceedings, for you I did say, these are the priests’ legal rights (Deut. 18:3.) ; in the future I shall sit in judgment over you, to stop them and to eliminate them from the world. Rebbi Jehudah the Prince heard this and became angry. He (Yose the Maonite.) was afraid and fled. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish went to appease him. They told him, Rabbi, he is a great man. He (The Patriarch.) asked them, would it be possible that he (Yose the Maonite.) could answer any question which I would ask him? They told him, yes. He asked him: What is that which is written (Hos. 2:7.) : For their mother whored? Was our mother Sarah a whore? He answered, like daughter like mother (The text is confirmed by a Genizah fragment (M. Sokoloff, The Genizah Fragments of Bereshit Rabba, Jerusalem 1982, p. 167.) The reading in the printed editions of Gen. rabba הָכָא אָמְרֵי “here, they say” has to be rejected as lectio facilior.) , like mother like daughter, like generation like the prince, like the prince like the generation, like the altar like its priests. Cahana used to say (The text is confirmed by a Genizah fragment (M. Sokoloff, The Genizah Fragments of Bereshit Rabba, Jerusalem 1982, p. 167.) The reading in the printed editions of Gen. rabba הָכָא אָמְרֵי “here, they say” has to be rejected as lectio facilior.) , like the garden like its gardener. He told them, not only did he curse me once in my absence, but he cursed me three times in my presence! He asked him, what is that which is written (The Genizah fragment shows that instead of “like daughter like mother”, the text read כְּבַיִת כְּאוּמָּא “like dynasty like people, like generation like Prince” with the quote from the verse missing, a much more insulting formulation.) : Anybody wanting to formulate a simile about you will state as follows: like mother like daughter; was our mother Leah a prostitute since it is written (Ez. 16:44.) , Dinah went out? He told him, for it is written (Gen. 34:1, the starting verse for the sermon. In both Galilean and Babylonian Aramaic is the prostitute called נַפְקַת בָּרָא “the one who goes out.”) , Leah went out towards him. One identifies going out with going out.
Deenah went out, the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Yaakov, to see [visit] the local girls.
And Dinah the daughter of Leah whom she bare to Jakob, went forth to see the manners of the daughters of the people of the land.
| וַיַּ֨רְא אֹתָ֜הּ שְׁכֶ֧ם בֶּן־חֲמ֛וֹר הַֽחִוִּ֖י נְשִׂ֣יא הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּקַּ֥ח אֹתָ֛הּ וַיִּשְׁכַּ֥ב אֹתָ֖הּ וַיְעַנֶּֽהָ׃ | 2 J | Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country, saw her, and took her and lay with her and disgraced her. (and disgraced her Heb. wa-y‘anneha, lit. “and violated her.” NJPS “by force,” but whether Dinah consented is not stated, and is not at issue; regardless, by the norms of the ancient Near East, she was disgraced. OJPS “and humbled her.”) |
And mistreated her. Elsewhere this word implies deprivation from relations (see Rashi 31:50). She believed that after this no Israelite would want to marry her, but in the end her brother Shimon married her.
AND HUMBLED HER. He had normal intercourse with her. (Contra Rashi who interprets humbled as sodomized.) Scripture uses the term va-ye’anneha ( and humbled her) (The root ayin, nun, heh means to afflict. Thus va-ye’anneha (and he humbled her) means he afflicted her. Hence I.E.’s interpretation.) because she was a virgin. (Intercourse was thus painful, hence the term afflicted her.)
נשיא הארץ, the prince of the land, etc. Shechem's position in the community was the reason that no one came to Dinah's assistance when she cried for help against being raped.
וישכב אותה ויעניה. He slept with her by forcing her. We must understand the sequence of how the Torah reports what happened [not "he forced her and slept with her," Ed.] in light of a statement in Horiyot 10 where the encounter between Yael and Siserah is described. The Talmud says that when the wicked derive physical pleasure this is a source of pain for the righteous. The Torah therefore tells us that although Shechem slept with Dinah in a perfectly natural way, not subjecting her to painful perversions, Dinah felt tortured instead of enjoying the experience. Her distaste of Shechem is obvious; this is why Shechem had to expend so much effort by "speaking to her heart."
וירא, the reason why the Torah uses the word ויעניה when what Shechem had done was more in the nature of a seduction that a violent rape, is that this term is used in connection with a virgin having intercourse, something usually very painful for her. The term is also used on account of this reason in Deuteronomy 22,29.
AND HE LAY WITH HER, AND HE AFFLICTED HER. He lay with her in natural gratification; and he afflicted her unnaturally. This is Rashi’s language. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said: And he afflicted her naturally because she was a maiden.” But there is no need for this for all forced sexual connection is called “affliction.” Likewise, Thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast afflicted her. (Deuteronomy 21:14.) And so also: And my concubine they afflicted, and she is dead. (Judges 20:5.) Scripture thus tells — in Dinah’s praise — that she was forced, and she did not consent to the prince of the country.
וישכב אתה AND HE LAID WITH HER — naturally (vaginally).
ויענה AND HE AFFLICTED HER — unnaturally (anally) (Genesis Rabbah 80:1).
Schechem, der Sohn, scheint der נשיא zu sein, hieß doch die Stadt nach ihm. Er war der "Gutsherr"; die Einsassen waren völlig von ihm abhängig, sonst wäre ja auch die spätere Gefügigkeit derselben vollends unbegreiflich.
Shekhem, son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the land, saw her and was attracted to this young foreign woman. He took her, and lay with her, and raped her.
וישכב אותה ויענה, “he slept with her and subsequently abused her.” According to Rashi the word וישכב describes normal intercourse, whereas the word ויענהdescribes a more perverted method of sexual intercourse. Ibn Ezra understands the word ויענה as describing the pain involved in her having intercourse as she had been a virgin. Nachmanides writes that there is no need for all these explanations, seeing that any intercourse in which the woman is being raped is described in the Bible as עינוי, i.e. that is the meaning of the word ויעניה. In this instance, intercourse by mutual consent appears to have preceded the rape. The opposite was the case in the rape of Tamar by her half-brother Amnon. (Samuel II 13). There the rape is mentioned before the sexual intercourse. Some commentators suggest that Dinah had first been seduced, whereas Amnon never bothered to seduce Tamar.
The word ona has three meanings: 1. Time or season: This mitzva is fulfilled at intervals dictated by the husband’s stamina and the demands of his job (Ramban and Ibn Ezra on Shemot 21:10). 2. Torment (inui), and its opposite, responsiveness and reciprocity (hei’anut): When a man separates from his wife, he torments her. As Lavan said to Yaakov, “…if you torment (te’aneh) my daughters” (Bereishit 31:50), which the Sages interpret to mean, “If you separate from them and do not provide them with ona.” This also explains why on Yom Kippur, when we are commanded to afflict ourselves (lehitanot), we must refrain from sexual relations (Yoma 77b and Rosh ad loc.; Ketubot 47b and Tosafot and Ritva ad loc.). Similarly, the rape of a woman by a man is called inui, as we read, “Shechem the son of Ḥamor the Ḥivite, chief of the country, saw her and took her; he slept with her and tormented her (va–ye’aneha)” (Bereishit 34:2). In stark contrast to inui, the mitzva of ona is to couple with joy and pleasure, each responding to the other. Ona thus means responsiveness (hei’anut) and the prevention of torment (inui).
Rabbi Tanḥuma began: “One man out of one thousand I have found, but a woman among all these I did not find” (Ecclesiastes 7:28). (The Yefe Toar explains that this comes to explain how it is possible to say that there was something improper in Leah's behavior, as mentioned by Reish Lakish above in paragraph 1.) Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Levi began: “You neglect all my counsel” (Proverbs 1:25) – that is what is written: “The Lord God built [vayiven] the side” (Genesis 2:22). Vayiven – he observed from where to create her… (See Bereshit Rabba 18:2 for the entire statement of Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Levi. God created the woman such that she should be modest, but nevertheless not all are modest.) Reish Lakish cites it from here: “He erected an altar there” (Genesis 35:7). (See Bereshit Rabba 79:8 where Reish Lakish said that Jacob gave an improper name to the altar, and what happened to Dina was a punishment.) “Shekhem, son of Ḥamor the Ḥivite, prince of the land, saw her, and he took her, and lay with her, and violated her” (Genesis 34:2). Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: This is analogous to one who had a litra of meat in his possession. When he revealed it, a bird swooped down and snatched it. So, “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.” Immediately, “Shekhem, son of Ḥamor…saw her.” Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: She exposed her forearm. (When it says that Shekhem saw her, it was only her forearm, and no other concealed part of her body.) “And lay with her, and violated her.” “And lay with her” – in the typical manner; “and violated her” – in an atypical manner.
“God blessed them and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and dominate over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living creature that crawls upon the earth” (Genesis 1:28). “And dominate over the fish of the sea” – Rabbi Ḥanina said: If they merit it, [they will] dominate [redu], but if not, they will fall [yeredu]. (They will become victims to the predations of animals.) Rabbi Yaakov of Kefar Ḥanin said: One who fulfills “in our image, in our likeness – “And dominate”; those who do not fulfill “in our image, in our likeness” – they will fall [yeredu]. Rabbi Yaakov of Kefar Ḥanan said: Let the one who is “in our image, in our likeness” (Man.) come “and dominate” the one who does not resemble being “in our image, in our likeness.” (The animals.) “God blessed them” – there we learned: A virgin should marry on a Wednesday and a widow on a Thursday.” (Ketubot 2a.) Why? It is because a blessing [for fertility] is written in connection with these days. But, is it not so, that a blessing [for fertility] is written only in connection with Thursday and Friday? (Genesis 1:22 and 1:28.) Bar Kapara said: Wednesday means on the eve of Thursday, and Thursday means on the eve of Friday. (The marriage that takes place during the day is consummated at night.) Rabbi Elazar in the name of Rabbi Yosei Ben Zimra: “[Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth] and subdue it” [vekhivshuha] (Plural.) – it is written [as if it should be read] vekhovshah (Singular.) – the man alone is commanded regarding procreation, but not the woman. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says: Both the man and the woman [are commanded]. Regarding both of them it says: “God blessed them […and said: Be fruitful, and multiply…].” Vekhivshuha – it is written [as if it should be read] vekhovshah (Meaning: And subdue her.) – the man restrains his wife so she should not go out in public, (In an inappropriate manner.) as any woman who goes out in public will ultimately falter. From where do we derive it? It is from Dina, as it is stated: “Dina went out” (Genesis 34:1) – and she ultimately faltered. That is what is written: “Shekhem saw her…” (Genesis 34:2). Rabbi Yirmeya, Rabbi Abahu, and Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Maryon in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yoḥanan. (Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka.)
“Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I am dying, and God will be with you, and He will restore you to the land of your fathers” (Genesis 48:21). “Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I [anokhi] am dying, and God will be with you, and He will restore…” – the son of Rabbi Yosei’s brother [said]: The elder gave them three signs: One who comes [to redeem] with the term anokhi, who will appoint elders from among you, and will say to you pakod, he is the redeemer. (These were Jacob’s signs as to the identity of the future redeemer of the Israelites. Moses fulfilled all three signs; see, e.g., Exodus 3:11, 3:16, 4:29. ) Rabbi Ḥunya removes anokhi, and inserts the ineffable Name in its place. (See Exodus 3:13–14. ) “And I have given to you one portion [shekhem] beyond your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Emorite with my sword and with my bow” (Genesis 48:22). “And I have given to you” a son who was vigilant [shehishkim], and you did not act in accordance with their actions; therefore, the portion will be in your territory. (The midrash interprets the additional portion promised here to Joseph to be the city of Shekhem. This was granted to Joseph, because he did not act as his brothers did in Shekhem, where they sold Joseph into slavery (see Genesis 37:14; Sanhedrin 102a). Alternatively, he did not act as did Shekhem, who raped Dina (Genesis 34:2). Joseph refrained from acting on his desires even when approached by the wife of Potifar (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: In Shekhem there was breach in the area of licentiousness, and you repaired it; therefore, it will be in your portion. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya: Rabbi Yehuda said: “I have given to you [one] shekhem” – this is the birthright and the garment of Adam the first man. “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite” – this is Esau. Was Esau, in fact, an Emorite? It is, rather, that he performed the actions of the Emorite. “With my sword and with my bow” – with mitzvot and good deeds. Rabbi Neḥemya said: “I have given to you one shekhem” – this is literally [the city of] Shekhem. “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite” – this is Ḥamor father of Shekhem. Was he, in fact, an Emorite? It is that the Hivite are included in the Emorite. (The Emorites were a larger group surrounding the Hivites, and therefore the Hivites were sometimes called Emorites (see Etz Yosef). ) “With my sword and with my bow” – Jacob did not want his sons to perform that act. (But when his sons performed that act, he said: What, will I allow my sons to fall at the hand of the nations of the world? What did he do? He took his sword and his bow, stood at the entrance of Shekhem, and said: If the nations of the world come to confront my sons, I will battle against them. See Bereshit Rabba 80:10.) But when…
“One who digs a pit will fall into it; and one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him” (Ecclesiastes 10:8). “One who digs a pit will fall into it” – this is the wicked Pharaoh, who said: “Every son who is born [you shall cast him into the Nile]” (Exodus 1:22). “He will fall into it” – as it is stated: “He shook Pharaoh and his people in the Red Sea” (Psalms 136:15). Another matter: “One who digs a pit” – this is Haman, as it is stated: “To destroy, to kill, and to eliminate” (Esther 3:13). “Will fall into it” – as it is stated: “His wicked intentions will return […upon his head, and he and his sons should be hanged on the gallows]” (Esther 9:25). “One who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him” – this is Dina. When her father and her brothers were sitting in the study hall, she went out “to see the daughters of the land” (Genesis 34:1). She brought upon herself that Shekhem ben Ḥamor the Hivite, who is called a serpent, (Hivite is related to the Aramaic word ḥivya, which means serpent.) consorted with her and bit her, as it is written: “Shekhem ben Ḥamor saw her…” (Genesis 34:2). “He took her” (Genesis 34:2) – he seduced her with words, as it is stated: “Take words with you” (Hosea 14:3). “He lay with her” (Genesis 34:2) – with natural intercourse; “and he raped her” (Genesis 34:2) – with unnatural intercourse. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai and Rabbi Elazar his son went into hiding in a cave in Pekiin for thirteen years during a period of religious persecution. They would eat carobs and dates. At the conclusion of thirteen years, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai emerged and sat at the entrance to the cave. He saw a trapper placing his traps to trap birds. He heard a Divine Voice saying: ‘Success,’ and [a bird] was trapped. He heard a Divine Voice a second time, saying: ‘Failure,’ and [a bird] escaped. He said: Even a bird, without a divine decree, will not escape; all the more so the soul of a person. (Rabbi Shimon was saying: Since it is in God’s hands whether or not we will be caught, we do not need to continue hiding in the cave (Etz Yosef).) [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said to his son:] ‘Let us descend and be healed in the water of the hot springs of Tiberias.’ (Apparently conditions in the cave led them to suffer from skin ailments, and they hoped the hot springs would heal their skin (Etz Yosef).) They descended and were healed in the water of the hot springs of Tiberias. They said: We must do good, and benefit the residents of this place, just as Jacob our patriarch did, as it is stated: “He encamped [vayiḥan] (This is expounded as a reference to both market [ḥanut] and favor [ḥanina].) before the city” (Genesis 33:18), [indicating] that he established a market and sold to them at low prices. They established a market and sold to them at low prices. He said: We must purify Tiberias. (During the Roman conquest there were many casualties who were buried in unmarked graves, causing Tiberias to lose its presumptive status of purity.) What did he do? He took lupines and scattered them in the street, and any place that a corpse was buried, it rose. (It became visible on the surface of the ground.) A certain Samaritan saw him. He said: Am I not able to ridicule this Jewish elder? What did he do? He took a corpse and buried it in a street that they had purified. Some say it was [in the market] of the barrel makers and some say in the market of the sack makers. He came and said to [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai]: ‘Did you purify such and such street?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘And if I produce a corpse for you from it?’ He said: ‘Pull it out and show me.’ Immediately, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai saw through divine inspiration that he had buried it there; he said: ‘I decree that the one who is lying shall stand and that the one standing will lie.’ Some say [that he said]: ‘I decree that the one above will descend and the one below will ascend.’ And so it occurred to him. He departed and passed before that synagogue in Migdal and heard the voice of Nakai the scribe: ‘Did ben Yoḥai purify Tiberias?’ (He was mocking Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai because of the corpse found on the street he had already purified.) [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai] said: ‘ , let [such and such] come upon me if I do not have traditions as numerous as the hairs on my head that this [city of] Tiberias is destined to be purified and will be available to those who partake of teruma, with the exception of this and that.’ (Only these streets will remain impure.) He did not believe him. [Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai] said to [Nakai]: ‘You have breached the fence of the Torah scholars, “and one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him,”’ and so it occurred to him. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai was passing by during the Sabbatical Year; he saw a certain person who was harvesting aftergrowths (These are grain and vegetables that grow on their own without cultivation.) of the Sabbatical Year. He said to him: ‘But is it not the Sabbatical Year?’ He said to him: ‘But is it not you who permits it? Did we not learn: [Rabbi Shimon says:] All aftergrowths are permitted except for the aftergrowths of cabbage, because there is nothing corresponding to them in the growths of the field?’ (Mishna Sheviit 9:1. Since cabbage does not grow wild in the field, one must assume that it was cultivated in violation of the laws of the Sabbatical Year.) [Rabbi Shimon] said to him: ‘But do my colleagues not disagree with me?’ (The Sages in the Mishna prohibit consumption of even uncultivated annual crops that grow during the Sabbatical Year.) He read in his regard: “And one who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him,” and so it occurred to him.
"she'eirah": This is her food, as in (Michah 3:3) "and who eat the she'er of My people", and (Psalms 78:27) "He rained she'er (manna) upon them as dust." (Exodus, Ibid.) "kesuthah": as stated (i.e., "her clothing"), "and onathah": her (conjugal) time, as in (Genesis 34:2) "And he lay with her and ye'anehah." These are the words of R. Yoshiyah.
(Gen. 34:1:) < NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT > TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. TO SEE < implies > TO BE SEEN. (The unpointed Hebrew text could be read either way by assuming a contraction of the passive common in Mishnaic Hebrew. See M.H. Segal, A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew (Oxford: Clarendon, 1958), section 115. See also Gen. 22:14, where the same contracted passive is used to explain a place-name based on the active Hebrew verb, “to see.” On Gen. 22:14, see E.A. Speiser, Genesis (“Anchor Bible,” 1; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 163f.) To what is the matter comparable? To one who was walking in the marketplace with a piece < of meat > in his hand. (Gen. R. 80:5.) A dog, having seen it, went after it, and snatched it from him. Thus did Dinah go out TO SEE (and TO BE SEEN) when Shechem saw her and seized her. (See Eccl. R. 10:8:1.) Another interpretation (of Gen. 34:1): TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. When the children of Jacob came into the land of Israel, they began to exhibit their strength, their wealth, and their beauty. They exhibited their strength (according to Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, < SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH >, [EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. They exhibited their wealth (according to Gen. 33:17): BUT JACOB JOURNEYED TO SUCCOTH, BUILT A HOUSE FOR HIMSELF, AND MADE STALLS (sukkot) FOR HIS CATTLE. He began opening < cattle > bazaars. (Gk.: katalusis (“resting place” or “inn”). See Gen. R. 79:6; Eccl. R. 10:8:1; Esth. R. 3:7.) And where is it shown concerning their beauty? (In Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT TO SEE AND TO BE SEEN. (Note that the midrash understands the one verb, “see,” in both an active and passive sense. See above, note 59.) (Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < It is > the wicked < who > "see." (Thus in Esth. 3:5:) WHEN HAMAN SAW. (Similarly in Gen. 28:6:) WHEN ESAU SAW. (So also here, in Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR … SAW. David said (in Ps. 69:24:) LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED SO THAT THEY DO NOT SEE.
(Gen. 34:2, cont.:) SO HE TOOK HER, LAY WITH HER, AND VIOLATED HER. Because of what sin did the uncircumcised one come upon her? It is written (in Job 6:14) TO ONE WHO IS DESPONDENT LOYALTY IS DUE FROM HIS NEIGHBOR EVEN THOUGH HE SHOULD ABANDON THE FEAR OF THE ALMIGHTY. However, when our father Jacob came along with the tribes, Dinah was with him < as well >. As soon as the messengers came and said to him (according to Gen. 32:7 [6]): WE CAME UNTO YOUR BROTHER ESAU, Jacob took Dinah and put her in a chest so that Esau would not see her and take her for a wife. (Gen. R. 76:9.) The Holy One said to him: You have withheld her from him. By your life, she is ready for an uncircumcised man, i.e., the one about whom it is written (in Job 6:14): TO ONE WHO IS DESPONDENT LOYALTY IS DUE FROM HIS NEIGHBOR. If she had been married to Esau, perhaps she would have converted him. When Job took her, did she not convert him? (See ySot. 5:8 (20c); BB 15b; Gen. R. 57:4; 80:4.) He therefore withheld her. See, < now > the son of a cursed (rt.: 'RH) one has come across her. Ergo (in Gen. 34:2): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR … SAW (rt.: R'H) HER.
What is written above on the matter (in Gen. 33:18)? NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. < When > he had come from Paddan-Aram under conditions that the Holy One had set with him, he did not lessen him in any respect. What did Jacob do? He began opening bazaars. (On this word, see above, 8:19, and the note there.) The Holy One said to him: Have you forgotten what you vowed to me? And did you not say this (in Gen. 28:20): IF GOD IS WITH ME, so that I do not commit idolatry, (ibid., cont.:) AND PROTECTS ME, from bloodshed, (ibid., cont.:) ON THE WAY, from unchastity, as stated (in Prov. 30:20): SUCH IS THE WAY OF AN ADULTERESS: SHE EATS, WIPES HER MOUTH, AND SAYS: I HAVE DONE NO WRONG. The Holy One did protect him, for it so states (in Gen. 28:15): AND I WILL PROTECT YOU WHEREVER YOU GO. Jacob said (in Gen. 28:22): [AND] OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME, I WILL SURELY SET ASIDE A TITHE FOR YOU. As soon as he came to the land of Israel, he forgot this vow. The Holy One said: By your life, through the very things which you said you would observe, through them you shall come to grief. Where is it shown in regard to idolatry? Where it is stated (in Gen. 35:4): THEN THEY GAVE UNTO JACOB ALL THE ALIEN GODS THAT THEY HAD…. Where is it shown in regard to bloodshed? Where it is stated (in Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … [AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. Where is it shown in regard to unchastity? From Dinah, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:2-3): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < … > AND HIS SOUL CLUNG TO JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH. R. Abbahu said: We have learned things from putrid secretion (i.e., mere mortals): (“Putrid secretion” can denote semen or, as here, the mere mortals like Pharaoh, who were produced by it.) (Gen. 41:44:) PHARAOH SAID TO JOSEPH: I AM PHARAOH. (Gen. R. 90:2.) I have said that you shall be king. The Holy One said to Israel concerning each and every commandment which they do: I AM THE LORD (e.g., in Lev. 19:3, 4, 10, 12, 14, 16, etc.). I am the one who is going to repay each and everyone with his reward. Now, just as in the case of flesh and blood, when it said: I AM PHARAOH, it raised him to great dignity; so much the more so with me when I say something. And just as you said (in Gen. 41:40): ONLY WITH RESPECT TO THE THRONE SHALL I BE GREATER THAN YOU, < so > has the Holy One said to Israel (in Deut. 28:13): AND YOU ONLY SHALL BE AT THE TOP. Just as an "only" from flesh and blood (i.e., from Pharaoh) magnified Joseph, so much the more so in the case of an "only" from the Holy One.
(Numb. 22:2:) “Now Balak ben Zippor saw.” What is the meaning of “Now he saw?” He saw retribution which would come against Israel in the future. (Numb. R. 20:2.) And he hated them more than all their enemies, as all of the [others] came with wars and subjugation which they could withstand. But this one was like a man who could extract a word from his mouth to uproot an entire nation. (Numb. 22:2:) “Now Balak [ben Zippor] saw.” It would have been better for the wicked if they had been blind, for their eyes bring a curse to the world. With reference to the generation of the flood, [it is written] (in Gen. 6:2), “The sons of God saw [how beautiful the human daughters were and took whomever they chose as their wives].” [It is also written] (in Gen. 9:22), “Then Ham, the father of Canaan, saw [the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside].” It is also written (in Gen. 12:15), “So Pharaoh's courtiers saw her (i.e., Abram's wife Sarah) [and praised her to Pharaoh, and the woman was taken to Pharaoh's house].” It is also written (in Gen. 34:2), “Then Shechem ben Hamor saw [Dinah].” So also [here] (in Numb. 22:2), “Now Balak [ben Zippor] saw.” The matter is comparable to someone who appointed guards to guard from an invader; and he had confidence in them, because they were warriors. When the invader came over and killed them, he trembled with fear for himself. It was the same also with Balak. When he saw what happened with Sihon and Og to whom he had been sending payment to guard him, he was afraid for himself. And in addition to that, he had seen the miracles at the Wadis of Arnon. (According to Numb. 21:26-31, Sihon defeated the King of Moab and captured his territory as far at the Arnon. See above and Numb. R. 19:25, for a description of the miracles. See also below and Numb. R. 20:7, according to which Sihon’s victory resulted from a curse by Balaam.) (Numb. 22:3:) “Wayyagor mo'av.” (A traditional translation of these words would be NOW MOAB WAS IN GREAT DREAD, or something similar.) What is the meaning of “Wayyagor (rt.: ygr)?” (Numb. R. 20:3.) When Israel appeared to the Ammonites, they appeared clothed for peace. But when they appeared to the Moabites they appeared armed [for battle]. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 2:19), “When you draw near the frontier of the Children of Ammon, do not trouble them.” It is written [to imply not to trouble them] with all kinds of trouble; (ibid., cont.) “and do not provoke (rt.: grh) them,” with any kind of provocation. In regard to Moab, however, He said (in Deut. 2:9), “Do not trouble Moab, and do not provoke (rt.: grh) them with war.” Do not make war with them, but whatever you can seize apart from [war], seize. For that reason they appeared armed, and [the Moabites] gathered themselves (rt.: 'gr) to their cities, as stated (in Numb. 22:3), “Now Moab yagor (i.e., gathered).” Wayyagor (rt.: ygr, here understood a form of 'gr) can only be a word for a gathering, just as it says (in Prov. 10:5), “A prudent child gathers (rt.: 'gr) in the summer.” Another interpretation (of Numb. 22:3), “wayyagor”: [It is] a word for fear, in that they were afraid, as they saw the whole land in the hands of Israel. As Sihon had come and taken [part of] the land of Moab, as stated (Numb. 21:26), “and he fought against the earlier king of Moab….” And Og had taken all of the land of the Children of Ammon, as stated (Deuteronomy 3:11), “Since only Og was left from the remnant of the Rephaim….” [And] Israel came and took it from both of them; theft that has no iniquity. And [so the Moabites] saw their land in the hand of Israel and they would say, “Did the Holy One, blessed be He, not say (in Deuteronomy 2:9), ‘As I will not give you from its land as an inheritance’; and behold our land is in front of them (already in their possession).” Therefore they were afraid. (Numb. 22:3, cont.:) “And Moab had a horror (rt.: qwts) [of the Children of Israel],” because they saw themselves as a [mere] thorn (qwts) over against them.
(Lev. 8:2:) “Take Aaron and his sons.” This text is related (to Prov. 20:7), “The one who walks in his integrity is righteous; blessed are his children after him.” This refers to Aaron and his children. If this interpretation is so, (Reading KN for MN, as suggested in Midrash Tanhuma (Jerusalem: Eshkol, n.d.), p. 500, n. 3. The Buber text is more awkward, but means essentially the same: “If [this interpretation results] from this saying.”) Moses also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Eli also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Samuel [was] righteous, but his children were not like him, as stated (I Sam. 8:3), “But his sons did not walk in his ways.” So why do you say [of Aaron] (in Prov. 20:7), “The one who walks in his integrity is righteous; blessed are his children after him?” Because during his lifetime he saw his sons after him serving in the high priesthood. Therefore (in Lev. 8:2) “Take Aaron and his sons.” Another interpretation (of Lev. 8:2) “Take Aaron and his sons.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (i.e., to Moses), “Entice him with words, because he is fleeing from [the priestly] office.” Take can only be a word [implying] persuasion, for so did Nebuchadnezzar (The Masoretic Text throughout Jer. 39 reads “Nebuchadrezzar.”) say to Nebuzaradan (concerning Jeremiah in Jer. 39:12), “Take him and look after him.” (Since Jeremiah was being taken for his own good, he would not have been taken by force but by persuasion.) So also it (i.e., Scripture) speaks of our mother Sarah (in Gen. 12:15), “and the woman was taken to Pharaoh's house,” as she did not seek to go. So also with Dinah, [it states] (Genesis 34:2), “and he took her and lay with her,” as she did not seek to go. And also (here in Lev. 8:2), “Take Aaron” is language [implying] persuasion because he was fleeing from office.
And Dinah, the daughter of Leah, went out to see (Gen. 34:1). Was she not also Jacob’s daughter? Indeed, but Scripture associates her name with that of her mother. Leah’s daughter (Dinah) loved to roam about just as her mother did. How do we know this about Leah? It is written: And Leah went out to meet him (Gen. 30:16). Ezekiel declared: Behold, everyone that useth proverbs shall use this proverb against thee, saying: As the mother, so her daughter (Ezek. 16:44). To see should be read as “to be seen,” for though she went out to see, she was, in fact, seen, as it is said: And Shechem the son of Hamor … saw her (Gen. 34:2).
A Midrashic approach, based on Tanchuma Balak 2: The word וירא, he “saw,” means he foresaw some kind of disaster. We have a rule that whenever wicked people are described by the Bible as having “seen” something, the “something” is invariably some kind of disaster. Compare Genesis 9,22, (where Cham “saw” his father’s nudity, resulting in his offspring being condemned to be slaves). Compare also Genesis 6,2 where the elite of mankind is described as seeing the daughters of man and violating them, resulting eventually in the inevitability of the deluge. Compare also Genesis 12,15 where the Egyptians saw the physical beauty of Sarah and this resulted in her being abducted to Pharaoh’s palace. Still another example is that of Shechem, son of Chamor “seeing” Dinah, which resulted in his raping her and in the whole city of Shechem being destroyed (Genesis 34,2 and subsequent verses).
עיר שכם, the city of Shechem (who subsequently raped Dinah) The description parallels Numbers 21,26 where Cheshbon is described as the city of Sichon, King of the Emorites. Anyone who explains Shechem as being the name of the city errs. We do not find anywhere that a city is described in such terms, i.e. as עיר ציון, or as עיר ירושלים. Invariably such cities are described with the appropriate definitive article ה i.e. as the word העיר following the name of the city in question. Even assuming that the city under discussion was Shechem, the town may have been renamed in commemoration of the heroism displayed by the sons of Yaakov. We know that the town Luz was renamed Bet El by Yaakov. (28,19) We find the same construction in Joshua 19,7 when the Danites renamed a city “Dan” to honour their tribal father and the acts of heroism by the soldiers of the tribe in capturing the city. Already the first builder of a city, Kayin, is described in Genesis 4,14 as ויקרא שם העיר כשם בנו חנוך, “he named the city in accordance with the name of his son Enoch.” Even the sages of the Midrash who understand the word שלם as an attribute, adjective, describing Yaakov at that point as “whole” in body, spirit, and material wealth, did not catch the plain meaning of the text if that was their intention. It is simply not the style of the Scriptures to express itself in such terms. There is no need for this. Did the Torah have to tell us that Yaakov’s wealth was not impaired as a result of the lavish gift he sent to Esau?
Serve the people of Chamor. If you want to get yourselves leaders, come serve the men of Chamor, who ruled the land in early times. (Bereishis, 34:2.)
Now Dinah – the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob – went out to visit the daughters of the land. Shechem, son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country, saw her; he took her, and lay with her by force. Genesis 34:1–2
על דבר אשר ענה את אשת רעהו, “for his having raped the wife of his fellow;” Nachmanides writes that although, generally, the expression עינוי, affliction, is used only when actual rape takes place, as in Genesis 34,2 with Dinah daughter of Yaakov, whereas here the woman in question was a willing partner in the act, why else would the Torah declare her guilty? However the situation described here is one where the man in question has been seen taking hold of her, and was lying down with her and she made no attempt to be rescued or to rescue herself; she is guilty while the man, at the same time, is considered as having raped her, since he initiated the crime without her consent being expressed, and he had made no attempt to seduce her, i.e. to secure her freely given consent.
[194] Thus the oracles say that Shechem spake “according to the mind of the virgin” after first humiliating her (Gen. 34:2, 3). Are not these words “according to the mind of the virgin” added with exact thought so as almost to shew that his actions were the opposite of his words? For Dinah is incorruptible judgement, the justice which is the assessor of God, the ever virgin, for the word “Dinah” by interpretation is either judgement or justice.
He explains: “And Lot cast his eyes” is an allusion to the verse: “His master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and said: Lie with me” (Genesis 39:7). “His eyes” is an allusion to the verse: “And Samson said: Get her for me, as she is pleasing to my eyes” (Judges 14:3). “And beheld” is an allusion to the verse: “And Shechem, son of Hamor, the prince of the land, beheld her; and he took her and lay with her” (Genesis 34:2). “The entire plain [kikar] of the Jordan” is an allusion to the verse: “For on account of a prostitute a man is brought to a loaf [kikar] of bread” (Proverbs 6:26). “That it was well watered [mashke] everywhere” is an allusion to the verse “I will follow my lovers, givers of my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink [veshikkuyai]” (Hosea 2:7).
HALAKHAH: (Parallel texts in Babli 33b, Tosephta Chapter 8, Sifry Deut. 56.) “ (Deut. 11:30: “They are on the other side of the Jordan, westward, on the road to sunset, in the Land of the Canaanite who dwells in the prairie, opposite Gilgal, near the terebinths of guidance.”) They are on the other side of the Jordan,” away from the Jordan. “Far away (Rashi, Commentary to Soṭa 33b, attributes this meaning of אחרי to Gen. rabba. If one accepts the usual meaning “westward” (adopted by Rashi in his Commentary to Deut.), one would have to read “sunset” in the opinion of R. Jehudah and “sunrise” in that of R. Eleazar, as suggested by L. Finkelstein, Sifry Deut., pp. 123–124.) from the road towards the sun’s coming”, the place from where the sun shines. “In the Land of the Canaanite who dwells in the prairie, opposite Gilgal, near the terebinths of guidance.” That refers to Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal among the Samaritans, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Eleazar (Only in Sifry Deut. the reading is: R. Eliezer. That reading is very unlikely since R. Ilaï, R. Jehudah’s father, was R. Eliezer’s student. (The one reading “R. Eleazar” quoted by Finkelstein in his apparatus comes from a secondary source not necessarily dependent upon Sifry.)) said, this does not refer to Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal of the Samaritans. “They are on the other side of the Jordan,” by the Jordan. “To the West, on the road to sunset,” a place where the sun goes down. “In the Land of the Canaanite,” but there is the Ḥiwwite (In Sichem, Gen. 34:2.) . “Who dwells in the prairie,” but there it is in the mountains. “Opposite Gilgal,” Gilgal is nowhere there (East of Jericho, Jos. 4:19.) . “Near the terebinths of guidance.” The terebinths of guidance are not there (Here one speaks of a grove, in the verse referring to Abraham of a single tree.) . How does Rebbi Eleazar uphold “Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal”? They made two elevations and called them Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal. In the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah, they walked 120 mil on that day (The distance from Jericho to Sichem is estimated at 60 mil (in the Babli, 36a, and one Tosephta source, “more than 60 mil”). In R. Jehudah’s opinion they crossed the Jordan, put up the stones, walked to Sichem, completed the ceremony, and walked back, all in one day. This contradicts Jos. 8:30–35.) . In the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar, they did not move at all.
Rabbi Yoḥanan continues to interpret the verse as a series of references to licentiousness. The phrase “and saw” is reminiscent of the verse dealing with Jacob’s daughter Dinah: “And Shechem, the son of Hamor the Hivite, saw her and he took her, and lay with her” (Genesis 34:2). The verse continues: “All the plain [kikar] of the Jordan,” which alludes to the verse: “For on account of a harlot a man is brought to a loaf [kikar] of bread” (Proverbs 6:26). The last part of the verse: “That it was well watered everywhere,” recalls: “I will go after my lovers, who give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink” (Hosea 2:7).
The Gemara explains: The one who says that Ham castrated Noah adduces the following proof: Since he injured Noah with respect to the possibility of conceiving a fourth son, which Noah wanted but could no longer have, therefore Noah cursed him by means of Ham’s fourth son. Ham’s sons were Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Canaan (see Genesis 10:6), and of all of these, it was Canaan whom Noah cursed (see Genesis 9:25–28). And the one who says that Ham sodomized Noah learned this from a verbal analogy between the words “and he saw” and “and he saw.” Here it is written: “And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father”; and there it is written: “And Shechem, son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, and he took her, and lay with her, and afflicted her” (Genesis 34:2). This indicates that the term “saw” alludes to sexual intercourse.
“Behind the way of the coming of the sun,” according to Rabbi Elazar, is referring to the place where the sun sets, in the west. This is distant from Shechem, which is in the center of Eretz Yisrael. Furthermore, the verse states: “In the land of the Canaanites,” and Shechem is located in the land of the Hivites (see Genesis 34:2).
Rav Pappa said to Abaye: But conjugal relations themselves are called affliction, as it is written: “And Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her; and he took her, and he lay with her and afflicted her” (Genesis 34:2). If so, how can it be said that the affliction is in withholding conjugal relations? He said to him: There, Shechem afflicted her from different relations, meaning he slept with her in an unnatural way. That type of relations is clearly an affliction.
She was seen by Shechem, son of Chamor, the Chivite, who was the prince of the land. He took her, was with her, and mistreated her.
And Shekem, the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the land, saw her, and took her by force, and lay with her and afflicted her.
| וַתִּדְבַּ֣ק נַפְשׁ֔וֹ בְּדִינָ֖ה בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֑ב וַיֶּֽאֱהַב֙ אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲרָ֔ וַיְדַבֵּ֖ר עַל־לֵ֥ב הַֽנַּעֲרָֽ׃ | 3 J | Being strongly drawn to Dinah daughter of Jacob, and in love with the maiden, he spoke to the maiden tenderly. |
AND SPOKE COMFORTINGLY UNTO THE DAMSEL. He spoke tenderly and comfortingly to her.
ותדבק נפשו בדינה, “His soul became attached to Dinah.” At that time Dinah was eight years and one month old. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 72,6) arrive at this conclusion by assuming that Leah’s prayer that her fetus should be a girl was offered when she was in a state of advanced pregnancy. Dinah was born before Joseph as the Torah mentions Rachel as becoming pregnant after her birth. Joseph was born 14 years after Yaakov had arrived in Charan when Yaakov started serving Lavan an additional six years for his sheep. They stayed in Sukkot for 18 months before moving on to Shechem. This makes Joseph seven and a half years old at that time. Dinah was seven months older than he (Joseph was born at the end of a seven month pregnancy) so that made Dinah eight years and one month when she was raped.
ותדבק נפשו בדינה בת יעקב, his soul felt a strong attachment to her on account of her beauty as well as on account of the fact that she was the daughter of an outstanding personality, Yaakov.
וידבר על לב הנערה, seeing that he had caused her pain, he now did his best to soothe her feelings as he was intent of marrying her and needed her consent. He hoped that his being the crown prince would help sway her opinion in his favour.
על לב הנערה [AND SPAKE] LOVINGLY TO THE DAMSEL (literally, he spoke to the heart of the maiden) words that would appeal to her heart: See how much money your father has lavished for a small plot of field. I will marry you and you will then possess the city and all its fields (Genesis Rabbah 80:7).
Nachdem er ursprünglich, durch Sinne gereizt, in sinnlicher Lust Jakobs Tochter gewaltsam misshandelt hatte, fesselte der sittliche und natürliche Liebreiz der Jakobstochter ihn so, daß er ein dauerndes Verhältnis wünschte.
ותדבק נפשו, this was the opposite of Amnon having raped Tamar whose infatuation with her turned to disgust the moment he had satisfied his biological urge. (Samuel II 13,14-16)
בדינה בת יעקב, because she was the daughter of the widely respected Yaakov, someone of an international reputation. The Torah confirms this once more later in verse 19 when it describes Shechem as desiring the “daughter of Yaakov.”
Presumably, this was not the first woman whom Shekhem had abused in this manner, by taking advantage of his social status. However, on this occasion he did not abandon her afterward; rather, his soul was drawn to Dina, daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman, and furthermore he spoke soothingly to the young woman. Although Shekhem was certainly more powerful than the young woman, he wanted her to consent to marriage.
“He was strongly drawn to Dinah” [34:3]. Hamor had relations with Dinah by force. Bahya writes. Dinah was eight years old at that time. (Bahya, Genesis, 34:3.) Shechem convinced her. He said: your father Jacob does not have a field and my father has many fields. Therefore, take me as a husband. (Rashi, Genesis, 34:3.)
“And his soul cleaved to Dina the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman, and spoke comfortingly to the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). “And Shekhem spoke unto his father Hamor, saying: Take me this girl for a wife” (Genesis 34:4). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter, and his sons were with his livestock in the field, and Jacob kept silent until their arrival” (Genesis 34:5). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter…and Jacob kept silent” – that is what is written: “But a man of understanding will be silent” (Proverbs 11:12). “And the sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard, the men were saddened, and they became very angry, as he performed a depravity to Israel to lie with Jacob's daughter, and so should not be done” (Genesis 34:7). “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” – Isi ben Yehuda said: Four verses have no resolution, (It is not clear whether the words in the verses under discussion is the last word of the previous phrase, or the first word of the subsequent phrase. See Yoma 52a–b and Rashi on Yoma 52b.) and they are: “It will be lifted [se’et]” (Genesis 4:7); “Cursed [arur]” (Genesis 49:7); “And will arise [vekam]” (Deuteronomy 31:16); “Shaped like almond flowers [meshukadim]” (Exodus 25:34). Rabbi Tanḥuma adds this one: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard,” or: “when they heard, the men were saddened.” “And so should not be done” – even among the nations of the world, as from the moment that the world was stricken in the generation of the Flood, they stood and fenced themselves away from licentiousness.
“Ḥamor spoke with them, saying: The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter. Please, give her to him as a wife” (Genesis 34:8). “Ḥamor spoke with them, saying” – Reish Lakish said: With three expressions of fondness, the Holy One blessed be He expressed His fondness for Israel: With cleaving, with desiring, and with wanting. With cleaving – “but you who cleave [to the Lord…]” (Deuteronomy 4:4). With desiring – “It is not for your multitude that the Lord desired [you]” (Deuteronomy 7:7). With wanting – “All the nations will praise you, [as you will be a wanted land]” (Malachi 3:12). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With cleaving – “his soul cleaved [to Dina daughter of Jacob]” (Genesis 34:3). With desiring – “The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter” (Genesis 34:8). With wanting – “because he wanted Jacob’s daughter” (Genesis 34:19). Rabbi Abba bar Elisha adds two more: With love and with speech. With love – “I have loved you” (Malachi 1:2). With speech – “speak to the heart of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With love – “he loved the young woman” (Genesis 34:3), with speech – “he spoke tenderly to [al lev] the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). Do you have a person who speaks to the heart [al lev]? It is, rather, matters that calm the heart. He said to her: ‘Your father, for one field, see how much he wasted and how much money he expended. I, who have the means to give you several orchards and several fields of grain, all the more so.’ “And intermarry with us; your daughters you will give to us, and you will take our daughters” (Genesis 34:9). “Intermarry with us” – Rabbi Elazar said: An Israelite never places his finger into the mouth of an idolater first, unless the idolater first placed his finger into the mouth of the Israelite. “Intermarry with us” – “do not intermarry with them” (Deuteronomy 7:3). They said: “Intermarry with us.” They said; they demanded first. (The Malbim (on Genesis 34:9) explains that normally in cases of intermarriage the non-Jew is the one who initiated the marriage.) “Increase greatly the bridal payment and gift, and I will give in accordance with what you shall say to me, and give me the young woman as a wife” (Genesis 34:12). “Increase bridal payment [mohar] and gift [umatan].” Mohar – dowry; matan – addition. (An addition to the standard dowry.)
“I have spoken with my heart, saying: Behold, I have amassed and added wisdom, beyond all who were before me over Jerusalem; my heart has seen much wisdom and knowledge” (Ecclesiastes 1:16). “I have spoken with my heart” – the hearts sees, as it is stated: “My heart has seen much.” The heart hears, as it is stated; “Give your servant an understanding [shome’a] (Literally, hearing.) heart” (I Kings 3:9). The heart speaks, as it is stated: “I have spoken with my heart.” The heart goes, as it is stated: “Didn’t my heart go?” (II Kings 5:26). The heart falls, as it is stated: “Let no man’s heart fall” (I Samuel 17:32). The heart stands, as it is stated: “Will your heart endure [haya’amod]” (Literally, stand.) (Ezekiel 22:14). The heart rejoices, as it is stated: “Therefore, my heart rejoices” (Psalms 16:9). The heart cries out, as it is stated: Their heart cried out to the Lord” (Lamentations 2:18). The heart is consoled, as it is stated: “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2). (This verse is preceded by: “Console, console My people, says your God.”) The heart grieves, as it is stated: “Your heart shall not be grieved” (Deuteronomy 15:10). The heart hardens, as it is stated: “The Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart” (Exodus 9:12). The heart softens [mitrakekh], as it is stated: “Let your heart not be faint” (Deuteronomy 20:3). The heart is saddened, as it is stated: “He was saddened in His heart” (Genesis 6:6). The heart fears, as it is stated: “From the fear of your heart” (Deuteronomy 28:67). The heart breaks, as it is stated: “A broken and contrite heart” (Psalms 51:19). The heart becomes conceited, as it is stated: “Your heart will grow haughty” (Deuteronomy 8:14). The heart is recalcitrant, as it is stated: “But this people had a revolting and rebellious heart” (Jeremiah 5:23). The heart fabricates, as it is stated: “The month that he fabricated from his heart” (I Kings 12:33). The heart contemplates, (Matters of stupidity) as it is stated: “[I will have peace] though I walk in the stubbornness of my heart” (Deuteronomy 29:18). The heart overflows, as it is stated: “My heart overflows with goodly matter” (Psalms 45:2). The heart calculates [meḥashev], as it is stated: “Many are the thoughts [maḥshavot] in the heart of man” (Proverbs 19:21). The heart desires, as it is stated: “The desire of his heart You have granted him” (Psalms 21:3). The heart deviates, as it is stated: “Let your heart not turn aside to her ways” (Proverbs 7:25). The heart strays, as it is stated: “You shall not follow after your heart…[after which you stray]” (Numbers 15:39). The heart is sustained, as it is stated: “And sustain your heart” (Genesis 18:5). The heart is stolen, as it is stated: “Jacob stole the heart of Laban” (Genesis 31:20). The heart is humbled, as it is stated: “Perhaps then their hearts will be humbled” (Leviticus 26:41). The heart is enticed, as it is stated: “He spoke soothingly (Literally, “to the heart.” Shekhem was speaking to Dina and attempting to entice her to marry him.) to the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). The heart goes astray, as it is stated: “My heart has gone astray” (Isaiah 21:4). The heart trembles, as it is stated: “For his heart was trembling” (I Samuel 4:13). The heart awakens, as it is stated: “I am asleep but my heart is awake” (Song of Songs 5:2). The heart loves, as it is stated: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart” (Deuteronomy 6:5). The heart hates, as it is stated: “Do not hate your brother in your heart” (Leviticus 19:17). The heart envies, as it is stated: “Let your heart not envy…” (Proverbs 23:17). The heart is searched, as it is stated: “I the Lord search the heart…” (Jeremiah 17:10). The heart is rent, as it is stated: “Rend your heart and not your garments” (Joel 2:13). The heart meditates, as it is stated: “The meditation of my heart will be understanding” (Psalms 49:4). The heart is like fire, as it is stated: “My heart will be like fire” (Jeremiah 20:9). The heart is like stone, as it is stated: “I will remove the heart of stone” (Ezekiel 36:26). The heart repents, as it is stated: “Who returned to the Lord with all his heart” (II Kings 23:25). The heart is incensed, as it is stated: “For his heart is incensed” (Deuteronomy 19:6). The heart dies, as it is stated: “His heart died within him” (I Samuel 25:37). The heart melts, as it is stated “The heart of the people melted” (Joshua 7:5). The heart absorbs matters, as it is stated: “These matters that I command you today shall be upon your heart” (Deuteronomy 6:6). The heart absorbs fear, as it is stated: “I will place My fear in their hearts” (Jeremiah 32:40). The heart thanks, as it is stated: “I will thank my Lord with all my heart” (Psalms 111:1). The heart covets, as it is stated: “Do not covet her beauty in your heart” (Proverbs 6:25). The heart is toughened, as it is stated: “And one who toughens his heart” (Proverbs 28:14). The heart becomes merry, as it is stated: “It was when their hearts were merry” (Judges 16:25). The heart deceives, as it is stated: “Deceit is in the heart of those who devise evil” (Proverbs 12:20). The heart speaks from within, as it is stated: “Hannah was speaking in her heart” (I Samuel 1:13). The heart loves a bribe, as it is stated: “Your eyes and your heart [are only on your ill-gotten gain]” (Jeremiah 22:17). The heart writes matters, as it is stated: “Write them on the tablet of your heart” (Proverbs 3:3). The heart devises, as it is stated: “Duplicity is in his heart, he devises evil” (Proverbs 6:14). The heart absorbs mitzvot, as it is stated: “The wise of heart will grasp mitzvot (Proverbs 10:8). The heart acts with malice, as it is stated: “The malice of your heart deceived you” (Obadiah 1:3). The heart arranges, as it is stated: “To a person are the arrangements of the heart” (Proverbs 16:1). The heart glorifies, as it is stated: “Your heart has glorified you” (II Chronicles 25:19). That is, “I have spoken with my heart, saying: Behold, I have amassed…”
"she'eirah": This is her food, as in (Michah 3:3) "and who eat the she'er of My people", and (Psalms 78:27) "He rained she'er (manna) upon them as dust." (Exodus, Ibid.) "kesuthah": as stated (i.e., "her clothing"), "and onathah": her (conjugal) time, as in (Genesis 34:2) "And he lay with her and ye'anehah." These are the words of R. Yoshiyah.
It is written of Israel (in Deut. 7:7): THE LORD HAS DELIGHTED IN YOU AND CHOSEN YOU. It is also written (in Gen. 34:3): AND HE (Shechem) LOVED THE MAIDEN (Dinah). Now you would not know what that love was; [however, from the fact that he set his soul upon her, you do know what love was]. How much the more so in the case of the Holy One, when he said to Israel (in Mal. 1:2): I HAVE LOVED YOU! (According to Deut. 7:7:) THE LORD HAS DELIGHTED IN YOU; you do not know how. We do, however, learn from Shechem, as stated (in Gen. 34:8): THE SOUL OF MY SON, SHECHEM, LONGS FOR YOUR DAUGHTER. R. Abbahu said: We have learned from putrid secretion (i.e., mere mortals). It is written about Shechem (in Gen. 34:3): AND HIS SOUL CLUNG TO JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH; and it is written about Israel (in Deut. 4:4): BUT YOU WHO CLUNG TO THE LORD YOUR GOD ARE ALL ALIVE TODAY.
... “He will save him because He delights in him.” (Tehillim 22:9) R’ Shimon ben Lakish said that the Holy One expressed His love for Israel with three languages of affection, with ‘cleaving,’ with ‘desiring,’ and with ‘wanting.’ With cleaving – “But you who cleave to the Lord your God are alive…” (Devarim 4:4) With desiring – “…did the Lord desire you…” (Devarim 7:7) With wanting – “…for the Lord wants you…” (Yeshayahu 62:4) We learn all of these from that wicked one of the story of “And Dinah went out…” (Bereshit 34:1) With cleaving – “And his soul cleaved to Dinah…” (Bereshit 34:3) With desiring – “My son Shechem his soul desires your daughter.” (Bereshit 34:8) With wanting – “…because he wanted Jacob's daughter…” (Bereshit 34:19) R’ Aba bar Elisha added two more, with love and with speaking to the heart. With love, as it says “I loved you, said the Lord…” (Malachi 1:2) With speaking to the heart, as it says “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem…” (Yeshayahu 40:2) We learn these also from the story of that wicked one – “…he loved the girl and spoke to the girl's heart.” (Bereshit 34:3) “He will save him because He delights in him.”
Rabbi José said: Isaac observed mourning during three years || for his mother. After three years he married Rebecca, and forgot the mourning for his mother. Hence thou mayest learn that until a man marries a wife his love centres in his parents. When he marries a wife his love is bestowed upon his wife, as it is said, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and he shall cleave unto his wife" (Gen. 2:24). Does a man then leave his father and mother with reference to the precept, "Honour"? But the love of his soul cleaves unto his wife, as it is said, "And his soul clave (unto Dinah)" (Gen. 34:3); and it says, "And he shall cleave unto his wife" (Gen. 2:24).
ותדבק נפשו בדינה . We find a statement in Bereshit Rabbah 80,7, that three expressions are used to describe G–d's love or attachment for Israel. The expressions are: דביקה, חשיקה, and חפיצה. The first expression is used in Deut. 4,4; the second expression is used in Deut. 7,7; the last expression is used in Malachi 3,12. The Midrash continues that we learn this lesson from this wicked person Shechem, of whom all these three kinds of feelings for Dinah are reported in 34,3-19 [actually the expression ויאהב is also used for his feelings.] Shechem's attachment to Dinah was of a terrestrial nature, designed to gratify his cravings in this world, and he wanted to achieve realization by means of these three kinds of "love."
The meaning of the name "Israel" in the future envisioned would not only denote the fact that he had prevailed in a struggle between the forces of evil and of good. At that time, Israel would not compete with evil but with the most highly placed angels. The position of Israel then would be so exalted that angels would address halachic enquiries to Israel. Rashi has mentioned this in connection with Numbers 23,23: כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל מה פעל השם, "At such a time Jacob and Israel will be spoken to about what G–d's works are." [my translation reflects the commentary mentioned. Ed.] The name "Israel" also denotes something of eternal value. We have already explained that the first two letters 310-יש, refer to the 310 worlds that every צדיק and צדקת will inherit in the Hereafter, [based on להנחיל אוהבי יש, Proverbs 8,21 Ed.] The remaining letters רלא, are an allusion to the superiority of Israel over the angels, seeing that Israel possesses the merit of having observed the Torah which is based on 22 letters, (alphabet) These 22 letters are 231 gateways, i.e. the permutations constructed from the alphabet as explained in the Sefer Yetzirah. [The second Mishnah in the fifth chapter of the book explains how these permutations are worked; you combine the first letter א, for instance, with all the other 21 letters. The second letter ב, is combined with the remaining 20 letters. The third letter ג, is combined with the remaining 19 letters, etc. By continuing in this fashion you will arrive at a total of 231. Ed.] The name ישראל is a composite of יש+ראל. Jacob had seen an allusion to this already in his dream of the ladder, during the course of which he glimpsed the highest domain of holiness, a dimension of the World to Come. When he lay down, i.e. וישכב, the letters in that word are a composite of יש+כ"ב, the 22 letters of the Aleph Bet. We have elaborated on that theme in its place. When Samael named Jacob ישראל, however, that was not what he had in mind, and that is why Jacob had still suffered from the "touch" (ויגע) during the struggle with Samael even after he had obtained his blessing. This effect also expressed itself in the word וישכב, with which Shechem's rape of Dinah is introduced in 34,2 [It would have been sufficient to merely mention ויענה, "he violated her against her will," the word following וישכב. Ed.]. The same word וישכב is repeated in the Torah's description of Reuben's relations with Bilhah, his father's concubine, in 35,22. Subsequently, however, there was no longer any Nachash (in the sense of serpent) attached to Jacob [play on words of Numbers 23,23 כי לא נחש ביעקב where Bileam describes the virtues of the Jewish people], seeing the name Jacob referred to the World to Come ever since Jacob's spirit was resurrected. This in turn represented an additional spiritual level over and above the one where G–d called Jacob "El," in 33,20. When G–d called Jacob "Isra-el," we must view the "Isra" as an additional dimension to the title "El" that He had already bestowed on him. The numerical value of the word א-ל, is 10% (מעשר) of the numerical value of the word 310) יש).
I will reveal to you another mystery. There are occasions when a pure soul is very closely attached to an impure soul and the pure soul is unable to exert a spiritually positive influence on the impure soul. The latter remains as it is until the time comes to be freed from its body. We have an example of something like that in the soul of Rabbi Chaninah ben Tradyon whose soul [obviously long before it inhabited the body of that scholar, Ed.] reputedly was attached to that of Shechem, son of Chamor (who had raped Dinah). This is alluded to in the Torah by the letters in the word רחבת ידים (Genesis 34,21) which form the initals of the name of Rabbi Chanina ben Tradyon, as explained by Rabbi Chayim Vittal in his commentary on the relevant verse in Genesis (Likutey Torah). [I have seen this text and it is somewhat different from what the author quotes. Ed.] This soul of Rabbi Chaninah had not exerted a positive influence on the soul of Shechem so that when the latter committed the rape of Dinah the soul of Rabbi Chaninah departed from him and found its mate in the soul of Dinah whose soul had previously been described as נידה, i.e. as polluted. This is the mystical dimension of the words ותדבק נפשו בדינה, "his soul cleaved to Dinah the daughter of Jacob" (Genesis 34,3). You will do well to keep this principle in mind. Sometimes you find a holy soul mixed in amongst those that belong to the domain of the קליפה, the spiritually negative forces. Such a soul may exert a spiritually positive influence on other souls in its environment, driving out the evil resident within those souls or at least weakening it. These are the souls who eventually become proselytes by their own efforts such as Ruth the Moabite and Naamah the Ammonite who became the mother of King Rechavam.
He became deeply attached to [He desired] Deenah, the daughter of Yaakov, and he loved the girl. He spoke to the girl’s heart.
And his soul delighted in Dinah the daughter of Jakob; and he loved the girl, and spake kindly to the heart of the girl.
| וַיֹּ֣אמֶר שְׁכֶ֔ם אֶל־חֲמ֥וֹר אָבִ֖יו לֵאמֹ֑ר קַֽח־לִ֛י אֶת־הַיַּלְדָּ֥ה הַזֹּ֖את לְאִשָּֽׁה׃ | 4 J | So Shechem said to his father Hamor, “Get me this girl as a wife.” |
אל חמור אביו לאמור, “to his father Chamor, to say:” The word לאמור means that he wanted his father to speak to Yaakov on the subject. Alternately, the word is merely used to underline the urgency with which Shechem viewed the matter. He wanted his father to be insistent. We find a similar use of the word לאמור in connection with the wife of Potiphar in Genesis 39,14, where she wanted to underline that the fact that her husband had brought a Hebrew slave into the household resulted in her almost being raped.
קח לי — der Herr Schechem spricht ziemlich sultanisch. Daß sie seine Frau werde, scheint ihm nur von seinem Wunsche abzuhängen, war er doch der Gutsherr und sie — ein fremdes Judenmädchen.
Shekhem spoke to his father Hamor, saying: Take for me this girl as a wife.
“And his soul cleaved to Dina the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman, and spoke comfortingly to the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). “And Shekhem spoke unto his father Hamor, saying: Take me this girl for a wife” (Genesis 34:4). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter, and his sons were with his livestock in the field, and Jacob kept silent until their arrival” (Genesis 34:5). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter…and Jacob kept silent” – that is what is written: “But a man of understanding will be silent” (Proverbs 11:12). “And the sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard, the men were saddened, and they became very angry, as he performed a depravity to Israel to lie with Jacob's daughter, and so should not be done” (Genesis 34:7). “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” – Isi ben Yehuda said: Four verses have no resolution, (It is not clear whether the words in the verses under discussion is the last word of the previous phrase, or the first word of the subsequent phrase. See Yoma 52a–b and Rashi on Yoma 52b.) and they are: “It will be lifted [se’et]” (Genesis 4:7); “Cursed [arur]” (Genesis 49:7); “And will arise [vekam]” (Deuteronomy 31:16); “Shaped like almond flowers [meshukadim]” (Exodus 25:34). Rabbi Tanḥuma adds this one: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard,” or: “when they heard, the men were saddened.” “And so should not be done” – even among the nations of the world, as from the moment that the world was stricken in the generation of the Flood, they stood and fenced themselves away from licentiousness.
(Numb. 34:1–2:) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, ‘Command the Children of Israel [and say unto them], “When you come into the Land of Canaan, [this is the land]....”’” [“This is the land”] (These words occur also in Deut. 34:4 (cited below). The midrash, therefore, interprets the two passages together. What follows in Numb. 34:3ff. describes what Israel is about to receive, while Deut. 34:4 (cited below) speaks of the promise to Israel’s future seed and adds that Moses shall see it.) teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Moses all that had been and all that was going to be. (Numb. R. 23:5.) He showed him Samson arising from Dan, and Barak [arising] from Naphtali. So also it was for every generation with its expounders, every generation with its leaders, (Gk.: pronoos.) every generation with its sages, every generation with its wicked, every generation with its righteous, as stated (in Deut. 34:4,) “This is the land which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob....” [This] teaches that He showed him gehinnom. Moshe said in front of Him, “Master of the world, who is sentenced to it?” He said to him, “The wicked and those that rebel against Me, as stated (in Is. 66:24), “And they went out and saw the corpses of the people....” Moshe began to fear. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (as in Deut. 34:4), “I have shown it to your eyes, but you will not pass there.” And what is the meaning of “This is the land which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying?” [The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses,] “The oath that I swore to them I have fulfilled for their children.” It is therefore stated (in Deut. 34:4), “saying.” (The Hebrew here can imply the giving of one’s solemn word.) (Numbers 34:2:) “This is the land that shall fall to you as your portion.” And does the land fall? But is it not written (in Eccl. 1:4), “but the land stands forever?” It is simply that when the spies came and put out slander on the land and said (in Numb. 13:33), “And we saw the Nephilim there,” and they said (in Numb. 12:31), “it is stronger than us,” Moshe got angry. [Then] all of Israel said, “Moses, our teacher, if these spies were two [or] three, it would be correct for us to trust [them], as stated (Deut. 17:6), ‘By the testimony of two witnesses....’ And behold, they are ten, (as in Deut. 1:28), ‘To where shall we go up?’” As it were, [they were complaining that] the Master of the house is not able to remove his vessels (the inhabitants) from there. What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He took the ministering angel of the land and bound him and put him down in front of them, as stated (Deut. 1:21), “See the Lord, your God, has placed in front of you....” And was [the land] in front of them? It is simply that He put down its ministering angel. And He said to them (in Deut. 1:21, cont.), “Go up and possess..., do not fear and do not tremble,” not from the Nephilim and not from the people that [you say] are bigger and more numerous than us. (Ezek. 45:1:) “When you allot the land as an inheritance....” This text is related (to Psalms 16:6), “Portions of land fell to me in pleasantness, even a beautiful inheritance for me.” “Portions of land fell to me.” These are the twelve tribes, since the land was divided to the twelve tribes, as stated (in Ezek. 47:13), “Thus said the Lord God, ‘These shall be the boundaries of the land that you shall allot to the twelve tribes of Israel.’” “In pleasantness,” in the merit of the Torah, about which it is stated (in Prov. 22:18), “As it is pleasant that you should store them in your belly....” “Even a beautiful inheritance for me.” There is a man who is handsome but his clothing is ugly, and one is ugly but his clothing handsome. But Israel is not like this. They are handsome and their clothing is handsome. They adorn the land and the Land of Israel adorns them. Hence it is stated (in Ps. 16:6), “Even a beautiful inheritance for me.” And so too is it stated (in Job 29:14), “I clothed myself in righteousness and it clothed me.”
The debate continues today among Bible scholars. Two in particular subject the story to close literary analysis: Meir Sternberg in his The Poetics of Biblical Narrative (The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), 444–81.) and Rabbi Elchanan Samet in his studies on the parasha. (Iyyunim BeParashat HaShavua, third series (Tel Aviv: Yediot Aharonot, 2012), 149–171.) They too arrive at conflicting conclusions. Sternberg argues that the text is critical of Jacob for both his inaction and his criticism of his sons for acting. Samet sees the chief culprits as Shechem and Hamor. Both point out, however, the remarkable fact that the text deliberately deepens the moral ambiguity by refusing to portray even the apparent villains in an unduly negative light. Consider the chief wrongdoer, the young prince Shechem. The text tells us that “his heart was drawn to Dina daughter of Jacob; he loved the young woman and spoke tenderly to her. And Shechem said to his father Hamor, ‘Get me this girl as my wife’” (Gen. 34:3–4). Compare this with the description of Amnon, son of King David, who rapes his half-sister Tamar. That story too is a tale of bloody revenge. But the text says about Amnon that after raping Tamar, he “hated her with intense hatred. In fact, he hated her more than he had loved her. Amnon said to her, ‘Get up and get out!’” (II Sam. 13:15). Shechem is not like that at all. He falls in love with Dina and wants to marry her. The king, Shechem’s father, and the people of the town readily accede to Simeon and Levi’s request that they become circumcised.
He explains: “And Lot cast his eyes” is an allusion to the verse: “His master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and said: Lie with me” (Genesis 39:7). “His eyes” is an allusion to the verse: “And Samson said: Get her for me, as she is pleasing to my eyes” (Judges 14:3). “And beheld” is an allusion to the verse: “And Shechem, son of Hamor, the prince of the land, beheld her; and he took her and lay with her” (Genesis 34:2). “The entire plain [kikar] of the Jordan” is an allusion to the verse: “For on account of a prostitute a man is brought to a loaf [kikar] of bread” (Proverbs 6:26). “That it was well watered [mashke] everywhere” is an allusion to the verse “I will follow my lovers, givers of my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink [veshikkuyai]” (Hosea 2:7).
Shechem spoke to his father Chamor, saying, Take this young girl for me as a wife.
And Shekem spake to Hamor his father, saying, Take for me this damsel to wife.
| וְיַעֲקֹ֣ב שָׁמַ֗ע כִּ֤י טִמֵּא֙ אֶת־דִּינָ֣ה בִתּ֔וֹ וּבָנָ֛יו הָי֥וּ אֶת־מִקְנֵ֖הוּ בַּשָּׂדֶ֑ה וְהֶחֱרִ֥שׁ יַעֲקֹ֖ב עַד־בֹּאָֽם׃ | 5 J | Jacob heard that he had defiled his daughter Dinah; but since his sons were in the field with his cattle, Jacob kept silent until they came home. |
THAT HE HAD DEFILED. That Shechem had defiled.
עד בואם, until they came home. Jacob sent a message to them asking them to return home.
ויעקב שמע כי טמא, Shechem, who had already been mentioned (hence his name does not need to be repeated here and a pronoun will do) and that as a result of what he did, Dinah had been defiled by an uncircumcised person who had been intimate with her.
והחריש יעקב, he did not raise a fuss in the town but waited until his sons would come home from the field. Similarly, when Chamor came to speak to him, Yaakov waited with answering him by telling him that he preferred to wait until his sons were present.
Jakobs Schweigen offenbart die ganze Sachlage. Jakob war ein Greis, vielleicht schon siebenundneunzig Jahre. Wenn hier etwas mit Vernunft, Vorstellung auf dem Wege des Rechts zu tun gewesen wäre, so hätte er wohl nicht geschwiegen. Wenn der greise Vater zum Fürsten geht und sein geschändetes Kind zurückfordert, — wenn überall noch die Stimme des Rechts ein Gehör zu finden hoffen durfte — so wäre der Eindruck jedenfalls ein größerer gewesen, als der durch die jungen Brüder zu erzielende. Jakobs Schweigen zeigt, daß von vornherein vom Rechte nichts zu erwarten gewesen und nur ein Weg der Gewalt offen erschien, der der jungen Kräfte bedurfte.
והחריש יעקב עד בואם, he refrained from starting a quarrel until his sons would have been informed of what happened so that they could be on their guard against their adversaries.
Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter. The news reached him at home, and his sons were with his livestock in the field; and Jacob kept silent. He did nothing about the matter until their arrival.
“And his soul cleaved to Dina the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman, and spoke comfortingly to the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). “And Shekhem spoke unto his father Hamor, saying: Take me this girl for a wife” (Genesis 34:4). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter, and his sons were with his livestock in the field, and Jacob kept silent until their arrival” (Genesis 34:5). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter…and Jacob kept silent” – that is what is written: “But a man of understanding will be silent” (Proverbs 11:12). “And the sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard, the men were saddened, and they became very angry, as he performed a depravity to Israel to lie with Jacob's daughter, and so should not be done” (Genesis 34:7). “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” – Isi ben Yehuda said: Four verses have no resolution, (It is not clear whether the words in the verses under discussion is the last word of the previous phrase, or the first word of the subsequent phrase. See Yoma 52a–b and Rashi on Yoma 52b.) and they are: “It will be lifted [se’et]” (Genesis 4:7); “Cursed [arur]” (Genesis 49:7); “And will arise [vekam]” (Deuteronomy 31:16); “Shaped like almond flowers [meshukadim]” (Exodus 25:34). Rabbi Tanḥuma adds this one: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard,” or: “when they heard, the men were saddened.” “And so should not be done” – even among the nations of the world, as from the moment that the world was stricken in the generation of the Flood, they stood and fenced themselves away from licentiousness.
“It is better that you do not vow, than that you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). “It is better that you do not vow” – Rabbi Meir said: Better than both is one who does not vow at all, but rather brings his sheep to the Temple Courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it, as it is stated: “If you refrain from vowing, [there will be no sin in you]” (Deuteronomy 23:23). Rabbi Huna said: There was an incident involving one who vowed and did not pay. He set sail in the Mediterranean Sea, and his ship sank in the sea and he died. Rabbi Shmuel said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes for himself that his wife will die, as it is written: “I, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me…” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes [himself] to come to four transgressions: Idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander, and all of them are derived from Jacob. (While fleeing Esau, Jacob took a vow that he was to fulfill upon his return to Canaan (see Genesis 28:20–22), but he did not fulfill it immediately upon his return.) Idol worship, as it is written: “Remove the foreign gods” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, as it is written: “That he had defiled Dina his daughter” (Genesis 34:5). Bloodshed, as it is written: “Jacob’s two sons, […each] took [his sword…and killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). And slander, as it is written: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons [saying: Jacob has taken everything that was our father’s]” (Genesis 31:1). Rabbi Mana said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes death to come upon him, as it is stated: “For the Lord your God will demand it of you [and it will be a sin for you]” (Deuteronomy 23:22), and Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). And there is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgressions with a rod and their iniquity with plagues” (Psalms 89:33).
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT. This text is related (to Prov. 11:12): ONE WHO DESPISES HIS NEIGHBOR IS LACKING IN SENSE. Whoever scorns his neighbor is called LACKING IN SENSE. But, if that same person who was despised was a person of knowledge and understanding, he would put his hand over his mouth and be silent. Thus it is stated (ibid., cont.): BUT A PERSON OF UNDERSTANDING WILL KEEP SILENT. (Prov. 11:12:) ONE WHO DESPISES HIS NEIGHBOR IS LACKING IN SENSE. This is Hamor, (A name which means “ass” in Hebrew.) the father of Shechem, who said (in Gen. 34:8): THE SOUL OF MY SON, SHECHEM, LONGS FOR YOUR DAUGHTER. (Prov. 11:12, cont.:) BUT A PERSON OF UNDERSTANDING WILL KEEP SILENT. This is Jacob of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:5): SO JACOB KEPT SILENCE UNTIL THEY CAME. For what reason? On account of this corruption (in Gen. 34:1-2): NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, < WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB > WENT OUT…. < THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. SO HE TOOK HER, LAY WITH HER, AND VIOLATED HER >.
(Deut. 3:26), “Do not [ever] speak [unto me on this matter] again.]” This is related to what Job said (in Job 20:6-7), “Even though one's height ascends to the heavens, [and his head reaches the clouds]. He perishes forever, like his dung….” With reference to whom did Job say this verse? It only speaks with reference to the day of death. So even though one ascends to the heavens and makes himself wings like a bird; when his time to die arrives, his wings are broken, and he falls before the angel of death like an animal before the butcher. So also has David said (in Ps. 146:4), “His spirit departs; he returns to the ground.” And Job has already stated (in Job 3:19), “The small and the great are there, and the slave ('eved) is free from his master.” As even if his master bought him for thousands and thousands of gold coins, once [the slave’s] time to die has come, he cannot say, “He is my slave,” but rather he becomes free from his master. Another interpretation (of Job 20:6), “Even though one's height ascends to the heavens.” This refers to Moses, who ascended to the firmament and who came to the Araphel (the lower sky). Moreover, he was like the ministering angels in that he spoke with Him (i.e., with the Holy One, blessed be He,) face to face and received the Torah from His hand. When his time to die arrived, He said to him (in Deut. 31:14), “Behold the days are drawing near for you to die.” [Moses] said to Him, “Master of the world, is it for nothing that my feet have trodden Araphel? Is it for nothing that I have run before Your children like a horse, that my end be for the worm? R. Abbahu said, “To what is the matter comparable? To one of the nobles of the kingdom, who found a certain Hindu sword, which was unmatched [in the world] and who said, ‘This is suitable only for the king.’ What did he do? He brought it to the king as a gift. (Gk.: doron.) The king said, ‘Cut off his head with it.’ So also Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘By the word that I [used to] praise (Rt.: KLS. Cf. Gk.: kalos.) you, when I said (in Deut. 10:14), “Behold (hen), the heavens [and the heavens of the heavens, the earth and all that is in it] belong to the Lord your God!’ By that [very] word (i.e., hen) You are decreeing death over me, when you say (in Deut. 31:14), “Behold (hen), the days are drawing near for you to die.”’” (Below, Deut. 11:6.) He said to him, “Moses, I have already decreed (Rt.: QLS. Cf. Lat.: census; Gk.: kensos.) death over the first Adam.” He said to him, “My master, the first Adam deserved to die. You decreed an easy commandment for him, and he transgressed it. Hence it is fitting for him to die. [God] said to him, “Consider Abraham, [who] sanctified My name in My world [but still died].” He said to him, “Master of the world, From Abraham there came out Ishmael, whose race provoked You to anger, as stated (in Job 12:6) ‘The tents of robbers prosper, [and those who provoke God have security, the ones whom God brought forth in His hand].’” He said to him, “Consider Isaac, who stretched out his neck upon the altar.” He said to him, “From Isaac there came out Esau, who in the future will destroy the Temple and burn Your sanctuary.” He said to him, “Consider Jacob, out of whom there came twelve tribes without any flaw.” He said to him “Jacob did not ascend into the firmament, his feet did not trod Araphel, he was not like the ministering angels, he did not receive Torah from Your hand and he did not speak with you face to face.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (in Deut. 3:26), “Enough from you; do not [ever] speak [unto Me on this matter] again.” He said to Him, “Perhaps [future] generations will say, ‘If He had not found bad things in Moses, He would not have removed him from the world.” He said to him, “I have already written in my Torah (in Deut. 34:10), “Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses.” He said in front of Him, “The people will say] I did your will in my youth, but I did not do your will in my old age.” He said to him, “I have already written (in Deut. 32:51), “Because you acted faithlessly with me.” (Cf. Numb. 20:12.) He said to Him, “Please let me enter the land [and spend] two or three years there, and after that let me die.” He said to him (in Deut. 32:52), “And there you shall not go.” He said to Him, “If I am not to enter while alive, let me enter after my death.” He said to him, “Not while you are alive, and not when you are dead.” He said in front of Him, “Why all this anger against me?” He said to him (according to Deut. 32:51), “Because you did not sanctify Me.” He said to him, “With all mortals you are guided two or three times by the principle of mercy, as stated (in Job 33:29), ‘Behold, God does all these things two or three times to a man’; yet in my case, when a single sin is found in me, you do not forgive me.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “See here, Moses, you have committed six sins, and I have not disclosed one of them. First you said, (in Exod. 4:13) ‘Please make someone else your agent’; secondly (in Exod. 5:23), ‘For ever since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, [he has dealt worse with this people, and You have still not delivered Your people]’; thirdly (in Numb. 11:22) ‘If the sheep and cattle would be slaughtered for them , would it be [enough] for them’; fourthly (in Numb. 16:29), ‘The Lord did not send me’; fifthly (in Numb. 20:10), ‘Listen, you rebels, [shall we bring forth water for you from this rock]’; (See above, the note at the end of Exod. 1:20.) sixth (in Numb. 32:14), ‘And now you brood of sinners have arisen in place of your ancestors.’ But were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob sinners, for you to say this to their children?” He said to Him, “I have learned so from You, when you said (in Numb. 17:3), ‘The censers of these who have sinned [at the cost of their lives].’ He said to him, “I said (ibid.), ‘At the cost of their lives,’ and not, ‘at the cost of their ancestors.’” He said in front of Him, “I am an individual, while Israel numbers sixty myriads (i.e., 600,000). They have sinned before You a lot of times; and when I sought mercy on their behalf, You forgave them. You took care of sixty myriads [because of me], yet You are not taking care of me.” He said to him, “Moses, a decree over a community is not like a decree over an individual. Furthermore, up to now [the] time was delivered into your hands, but from now [the] time is not delivered into your hands.” He said to Him, “Master of the universe, rise up from the seat of judgment and sit down upon the seat of mercy for me, so that I do not die. Then my sins shall be forgiven through torments which You shall bring on my body. So do not deliver me to the pangs of the angel of death. Moreover, if You do this, I will proclaim Your praise to all who come into the world, just as David has said (in Ps. 118:17), ‘I shall not die, but live [and recount the works of the Lord].’” He said to him (in vs. 20), “This is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall come through it.” [From this it follows that] death has been ordained from time immemorial for the righteous and for all mortals. When Moses saw that they paid no attention to him, he went to the heaven and earth, where he said to them, “Seek mercy for me.” They said to him, “Before seeking mercy for you, we should seek mercy for ourselves, since it is stated (in Is. 51:6), ‘for the heavens shall vanish like smoke, and the earth shall wear out like a garment.’” (See ‘AZ 17a, for this verse applied to Eleazar ben Dordia in a similar way.) He went to the stars and planets. He said to them, “Seek mercy for me.” They said to him, “Before seeking mercy for you, we should seek mercy for ourselves, since it is stated (in Is. 34:4), ‘All the host of heaven shall rot away….’” He went to the mountains and hills. He said to them, “Seek mercy for me.” They said to him, “[Before seeking mercy for you,] we should seek mercy for ourselves, since it is stated (in Is. 54:10), ‘For the mountains shall move, and the hills shall be shaken.’” (The translation of the verb tenses here differs from some biblical translations but fits the sense of the midrash.) He went to the Great Sea. He said to it, “Seek mercy for me.” [The sea] said to him, “Son of Amram, how is today different from a couple of [other] days? Are you not the son of Amram, who came upon me with your rod, smote me, and divided me into twelve parts? For I was unable to stand before you because the Divine Presence was walking at your right hand. It is so stated (in Is. 63:12), ‘Who had His glorious arm walk at the right hand of Moses, who divided the waters before them […].’ So what has happened to you today?” When the sea reminded him what he had done in his youth, he cried out and said (in Job 29:2), “’O that I were as in the months of old, as in the days when God watched over me!’ When I passed through you, I was a world king; but now I am prostrate, and they pay no attention to me.” Immediately he betook himself to the arch[angel] of the [Divine] Presence and said to him, “Seek mercy for me, that I not die.” He said to him, “My master, Moses, why the exertion? This is what I have heard from behind the curtain: (Pargod. Cf. Lat.: paragauda or [paragaudis] (a garment with a lace border); Gk.: Paragaudes (a garment with a purple border).) That your prayer is not heard on this matter.” Putting his hands on his head, Moses sobbed and wept, as he said, “With whom shall I seek mercy for myself?” R. Simlay said, “At that time the Holy One, blessed be He, was full of anger over him, as stated (in Deut. 3:26), ‘But the Lord was angry with me […],’ until Moses began by uttering this Scripture (Exod. 34:6): ‘Then the Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “the Lord, the Lord is a merciful and gracious God, slow to anger…].’” Immediately the holy spirit was cooled off.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Moses, I have sworn two oaths, one that you should die and one to destroy Israel. To repeal both of them is impossible; so if you want to live, Israel will be destroyed.” He said before Him, “You are coming to me with a plot. You are seizing the rope at both ends. Let Moses and a thousand like him be destroyed, but do not let one person in Israel be destroyed.” He said to him, “Master of the Universe, should feet that have climbed up to the firmament, should a face that has greeted the Divine Presence, should hands that have received Torah from Your hands lick the dust? Woe! (Vay.) All mortals will say, “If Moses, who ascended on high, became like the ministering angels, spoke with Him face to face, and received Torah from His hand, had no reply for responding to the Holy One, blessed be He, how much the worse it will be for [mere] flesh and blood, who comes with no [merit from] Torah and with no [merit from the] commandments?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Why all this anguish that you are experiencing?” He said, “Master of the world, I am afraid of the pangs of the angel of death.” He said to him, “I am not delivering you into his hands.” He said in front of Him, “Master of the universe, my mother Jochebed, who was distressed (literally, whose teeth were blunted) during her lifetime by two of her sons, will be distressed by my death.” He said to him, “So has it come up in [My] mind, and so is it the way of the world: every generation with its expositors, every generation with its administrators, (Gk.: pronoi (“prudent ones”).) every generation with its leaders. Up to now it has been your lot to serve in front of Me, but now your lot is over and the time of your disciple Joshua for him to serve [Me] has arrived.” He said to him, “My Master, if I am dying because of Joshua, let me go and become his disciple!” He said to him, “If you want to do that, go and do it.” Moses arose and went early to Joshua's door. (Cf. the somewhat different account in Deut. R. 9:9.) Now Joshua was seated expounding [Torah], so Moses stopped to bend his stature and put his hand on his mouth. But Joshua's eyes were hidden, and he did not see him, so that he (Moses) would be sorrowful and resign himself to death. When Israel came to Moses' door to study Torah, they asked and said, “Where did Moshe our master [go]?” [Others] said to them, “He got up early and went to the door of Joshua.” [So] they went and found him at the door of Joshua, with Joshua sitting and Moses standing. They said to Joshua, “What has come over you that Moses our master stands, while you sit?” When he raised his eyes and saw him, he immediately rent his clothes. Then sobbing and weeping, he said, “O my master, my master! My father, my father and lord!” Israel said to Moses, “Moses our master, teach us Torah.” He said to them, “I am not allowed.” They said to him, “We are not leaving you.” A heavenly voice (bat qol) came forth and said to them, “Learn from Joshua.” [So] they took upon themselves to sit and learn from the mouth of Joshua. Joshua sat at the head with Moses to his right and with [Elazar and Ithamar] to his left. So he sat and expounded in the presence of Moses. R. Samuel bar Nahmani said that R. Johanan said, “When Joshua opened by saying, ‘Blessed be the One who has chosen the righteous,” they took the traditions of wisdom from Moses and gave them to Joshua. Now Moses did not know what Joshua was expounding. After Israel arose [from the session], they said to Moses, “[Explain] the Torah [we have just heard] to us.” He said to them, “I do not know what to answer you.” So Moses our master was stumbling and falling. It was at that time that he said, “Master of the universe, up to now I requested life, but now here is my soul given over to You.” Then when he had resigned himself to death, the Holy One, blessed be He, opened by saying (in Ps. 94:16), “’Who will stand for Me (In context, the word, me, here is self-referential to the author of Psalms, and not referring to God.) against evildoers?’ Who will stand for Israel in the time of My wrath? Who will stand in the battle of My children? And who will stand and seek mercy for them, when they sin before Me?” At that time Metatron (Lat.: metator (“measurer,” “one who marks out boundaries”).) came and fell on his face. He said to Him, “Master of the world, [as] in Moses' life he belonged to You, so in his death he belongs to You.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Let me give you a parable. To what is the matter comparable? To a king who had a son. Now on each and every day, his father was angry with him and sought to kill him because he did not maintain respect for the father; but his mother rescued him from his hand. One day his mother died and the king wept. His servants said to him, ‘Our lord king, why are you weeping?’ He said to them, ‘It is not over my wife alone that I am weeping, but for my son; for many times when I was angry with him and wanted to kill him, did she rescue him from my hand?’” So also did the Holy One, blessed be He, say to Metatron, “It is not over Moses alone that I am weeping, but over him and over Israel, for look at how many times that they angered Me, and I was angry with them; but he stood in the breach before Me to turn back My anger from destroying them.” They came and said to Moses, “The hour has arrived for you to depart from the world.” He said to them, “Wait for me until I bless Israel, for they have not found contentment from me all my days, because of the rebukes and warnings with which I rebuked them.” He began to bless each tribe separately. When he saw that the time was growing short, he included all of them in a single blessing. They came and said, “The hour has arrived for your soul to depart from the world.” He said to Israel, “I have caused you a lot of grief over the Torah and over the commandments, but now forgive me.” They said to him, “Our lord master, you are forgiven.” Israel also arose before him and said to him, “O Moses our master, we have angered you a lot and increased the burden upon you. Forgive us.” He said to them, “You are forgiven.” They came and said to him, “The moment has arrived for you to depart from the world.” He said, “Blessed be the name of the One who lives and abides forever.” He said to Israel, “If you please, when you enter the land, remember me and my bones, and you shall say, ‘Woe (oy) to the son of Amram, who ran before us like a horse but whose bones have fallen in the wilderness.’” They came and said to him, “The half moment has arrived.” He took his two arms and placed them on his heart. Then he said to Israel, “See the final end of flesh and blood.” They answered and said, “The hands which received the Torah from the mouth of the Almighty shall fall to the grave.” At that moment his soul departed with a kiss (from the Holy One, blessed be He), (See MQ 28a.) as stated (in Deut. 34:5), “Then Moses [the servant of the Lord] died there [in the Land of Moab at the command of the Lord (literally, by the mouth of the Lord)].” (BB 17a; ARN, A 12:2; Cant. R. 1:2:5; Petirat Mosheh Rabbenu, recension A, in A. Jellinek, Bet ha-Midrasch (Leipzig: Vollrath, 1853-57), vol. I, p. 129; ibid., recension B, in Jellinek, vol. VI, p. 77.) Now [the ones who] took care of his burial were neither Israel nor the angels but the Holy One, blessed be He, [Himself], as stated (in vs. 6), “Then He (the Holy One, blessed be He,) buried him (Moses) in the valley [in the Land of Moab].” And for what reason was he buried outside the land? So that those who die when outside the land might live [again] through his merit, (The translation here follows the traditional Tanhuma. Deut. 2:6. So also Codex Vaticanus Ebr. 34. The Buber text omits “might live again” and reads “through their merit.”) as stated (in Deut. 33:21), “He has chosen the best for himself, [for there is an honored lawgiver's portion].” But when did Moses our master die? On the seventh of Adar, (Seder ‘Olam Rabbah, 10; TSot. 11:7; Qid. 38a; see Meg. 13b; Sot. 12b.) as stated (in Deut. 34:5), “Then Moses the servant of the Lord died there [in the Land of Moab].” It is also written (in vs. 8), “And the children of Israel mourned Moses [on the Plains of Moab for thirty days.]” And it is written (in Josh. 1:1), “And it came to pass after the death of Moses, [the servant of the Lord, the Lord spoke unto Joshua]”; (Josh. 4:19) “Now the people came up from the Jordan on the tenth day of the first month (i.e., Nisan).” Reckon back thirty-three days [from then]. Ergo, he died on the seventh of Adar. And where is it shown that he was born on the seventh of Adar? Where it is stated (in Deut. 31:2), “He said to them, ‘I am one hundred twenty years old today.’” (Since Moses spoke these words on the day of his death, his birthday must have been the same as the day of his death.) What is the text teaching with, “today?” Today, I have fulfilled my days and any years. [It is there] to teach you that the Holy One, blessed be He, fulfills the years for the righteous from day to day and from month to month, as stated (in Exod. 23:26), “I will fulfill the number of your days.”
And after some time. Jacob went away from the borders of the land and he came to Shalem, a city of Shechem which is in the land of Canaan, and he pitched his tent before the city. And he bought there a parcel of a field at the hand of the children of Hamor the people of the land for fifty shekels. And Jacob built him a house and made booths for his cattle; therefore the name of the place is called Suc coth; and Jacob tarried in Succoth one year and six months. And at that time part of the women of the in habitants of the land went to the city of Shechem to dance and be merry with the daughters of the city people, and Rachel and Leah, Jacob's wives, with their families went along to witness the festivities of the daughters of the city. And Dinah, Jacob's daughter, was also with them, and she saw the daughters of the city and remained among them while all the people of the city stood around them, to see their rejoicings; and all the prominent citizens were present, and Shechem the son of Hamor, the prince of the land, was likewise there to see them. And when Shechem saw Dinah sitting with her mother before the daughters of the city, the maiden pleased him greatly and he inquired of his friends and of his people, saying: Whose daughter is she that sitteth among the women and whom I do not know in this city? And they said to him: Verily that is the daughter of Jacob son of Abraham the Hebrew, who hath been dwelling in this city for some time; and when she heard that the daughters of the land were going to a festival, she also came with her mother and maid-servant to sit amongst them, as thou seest. And Shechem continued looking at Dinah, and his soul clave to Dinah, and he sent and had her taken forcibly into his house, and after having seized her by force he defiled her. And they came and informed Jacob of what had occurred, and when Jacob heard that Shechem defiled his daughter Dinah, he sent two of his servants to bring Dinah from the house of Shechem. And when they came to the house to take Dinah away, Shechem went towards them with his men and he drove them away from his house and he would not allow them to come before Dinah. And Shechem was sitting by Dinah’s side, kissing and embracing her before the eyes of Jacob's servants. And the servants of Jacob returned unto him saying: When we came to the house, Shechem drove us away, and thus did Shechem do unto Dinah before our very eyes. And Jacob knew now beyond doubt that Shechem had defiled his daughter, but he held his peace, because his sons were at that time in the field with the cattle; and Jacob remained silent until they’re turned.
And he said, "One who is nonchalant about giving legal decisions is an imbecile, wicked, and arrogant in spirit": Its explanation is that it is a sign of foolishness that is found with him, as he is hasty to bring out a legal decision from himself. This is a sign of an imbecile. And it is the opposite of this when he is not hasty to bring out words - that is a sign of wisdom. And we explained this thing above (Derekh Chayim 1:17), concerning, "One who increases words, increases foolishness": For hastiness to speak indicates a lack of wisdom, but keeping words inside oneself indicates wisdom. And it is as it said in the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 80:6), "'And Yaakov remained silent until they returned' (Genesis 34:5); 'And a prudent man remains silent' (Proverbs 11:12)." For with a wise person, the spiritual is the essence, such that the spiritual power negates the power of speech - which is a material power, as we explained above at length: That when one has much spiritual power, it negates the actions of the material power of speech. Hence "one who is nonchalant about giving legal decisions," and is hasty to bring them out - that is a sign of foolishness. And he is wicked, as he does not fear that maybe he erred in the legal decision. And he is arrogant in spirit. For if he were not arrogant in spirit - even if he was wicked, nevertheless, why does he need this pain, to be hasty in legal decisions. It is only to show his arrogance; that all of the Torah is clear to him and that he is a master of legal decisions.
No more overt hints are offered (Genesis 34:5, 35:22.) until Jacob’s deathbed, when he held back nothing, and fired at Reuben:
BARAITHA. (K 9.) R. Joḥanan b. Dahabai said: The Ministering Angels told me four things, viz.: Why [are children born] lame? Because [their parents] overturned their tables. Why [are children born] blind? Because [their parents] gazed at ‘that place’. Why [are children born] dumb? Because [their parents] kiss ‘that place’. Why [are children born] deaf? Because [their parents] converse during cohabitation. GEMARA. Raba said: All the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He, [are exercised towards man on the principle of] measure for measure. Man ‘overturned his table’, therefore the feet of his children are deformed; (lit. ‘overturned’.) he gazed at the pudenda which should be hidden from all, therefore is he hidden from his children; (Being blind, they never see him.) he showed no regard for the mouth that speaks and by which the kiss [of love] is given and kissed what is closed, (i.e. the ‘dumb mouth’ of the body.) therefore the mouth of his children is closed; he conversed at a time when he should have been silent, therefore the ear [52a] of his children is silenced. Why is [a deaf person] termed ḥeresh? Because he keeps silent [ḥoresh], as it is written, And Jacob held his peace [weheḥerish] until they came. (Gen. 34, 5.) Raba said: All these [children are so affected only] if they are conceived from such cohabitation.
Yaakov heard that he had defiled his daughter, Deenah, [while] his sons were with the livestock in the fields. Yaakov remained silent until they returned.
But Jakob had heard that he had polluted Dinah his daughter, And his sons were with the flocks in the field, and Jakob was silent until they came.
| וַיֵּצֵ֛א חֲמ֥וֹר אֲבִֽי־שְׁכֶ֖ם אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֑ב לְדַבֵּ֖ר אִתּֽוֹ׃ | 6 J | Then Shechem’s father Hamor came out to Jacob to speak to him. |
ויצא חמור, when he noticed that Yaakov’s reaction had been silence he began to worry about reprisals.
Meanwhile, Hamor, father of Shekhem, went out to Jacob to speak with him about the possibility of marriage. Were it not for the prior act of rape, there would have been nothing inappropriate about this proposal.
“Shechem’s father Hamor came out to Jacob to speak to him” [34:6]. The Midrash writes. Hamor said to Jacob: you grandfather Abraham was a prince, and I am a prince. Give your daughter to a prince. Jacob responded: my grandfather Abraham was called, ox, as the verse says, “Abraham ran to the herd” [Genesis, 18:7]. This is an ox. You are called Hamor, which means donkey, and the verse says, “you shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together” [Deuteronomy, 22:10]. (Tanhuma, Vayishlach, 7.) This means, you should not plow with an ox and a donkey together.
(Numb. 21:17:) “Then Israel sang.” For what reason is Moses not mentioned there? (Numb. R. 19:26.) For the reason that he was being punished because of the waters; and no person praises (Rt.: QLS. Cf.: Gk.: kalos.) his executioner. (Lat.: speculator (“examiner” or “overseer”).) And why is the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, not mentioned there? The matter is comparable to a governor who made a banquet for the king. The king said, “Will my friend so-and-so be there?” They told him, “No.” He said, “[Then] I also am not going there.” Also here the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Inasmuch as Moses is not mentioned, I also will not be mentioned there.” (Numb. 21:18:) “The well that the princes dug.” Was it dug there? It is simply that it was given through the merit of the ancestors who were called princes. Thus it is stated (in Ps. 105:41-42), “He opened a rock, and water gushed out […]. For he remembered His holy promise and His servant Abraham.” (Numb. 21:18, cont.:) “That the nobles of the people dug with the scepter, even with their own staffs.” The princes were standing by it, and each and every one drew [the water] with his own staff for his own tribe and for his own family. And the space between the [four] standards was filled with a [flow of] water that was gathering strength. A woman who had to go to her companion from one standard to [another] standard went by ship, as stated (in Ps. 105:41), “they traveled the river by tsiyyot.” (A more traditional translation would be: IT FLOWED THROUGH THE WILDERNESS LIKE A RIVER.) Now tsiyyot (here understood as the plural of tsi) can only denote a ship, since it is stated (in Is. 33:21), “nor shall a stately ship (tsi) pass by.” Now the waters flowed outside the camp and embraced a great strip of land. Thus it is stated (in Ps. 23:3) “He leads me in paths (literally, circles) of righteousness.” In addition, [the encircling waters] would cause endless varieties of green herbage and trees to grow, as stated (in Ps. 23:2), “[He makes me lie down] in green pastures; [He leads me beside still waters].” All those the days that Israel was in the desert they used it (i.e., the well). Therefore, they rendered praise for it [with the song ending] (in Numb. 21:18), “the well that the princes dug.” (Numb. 21:18, cont.:) “From Midbar (literally, desert) to Mattanah,” [so stated] because in the desert [the well] was given (nittenah) them to use as a gift (mattanah). Another interpretation: Why was [the well] given in the desert? Because if it had been given to them in the land, the tribe in whose border it was given would have argued and said, “I have a prior claim to it.” For that reason it was given in the desert where all would have an equal claim to it. And for what other reason was it given in the desert? Just as a desert is neither sown nor cultivated, so is the one who receives the words of Torah. They remove from him the yoke of the government and the yoke of earning a living. Just as a desert does not grow arnona; (The Latin word generally denotes, as it probably does here, a tax on farm goods paid in kind; but the word also occurs in a broader sense denoting agricultural products generally.) so are children of Torah (i.e., Torah scholars) free [from it] in this world. (I.e., by accepting the yoke of Torah, such scholars are exempt from government taxes and the need to earn a living. See Numb. R. 19:26.) Another interpretation [of why it was given] in the desert: Who is the one who fulfills the Torah? One who uses himself like the desert, [i.e.,] whoever makes himself like a desert and removes himself from everything [that might distract him]. (Numb. 21:19:) “From Mattanah to Nahaliel, and from Nahaliel to Bamoth.” These three places correspond to the three courts in Jerusalem that would explicate the Torah to all of Israel: (Ibid.) “From Mattanah to Nahaliel,” these refer to the Sanhedrin on the Temple Mount; (ibid., cont.) “from Nahaliel to Bamoth,” these refer to the Sanhedrin (Gk.: synhedrion.) in the [Temple] court beside the altar; (Numb. 21:20) “From Bamoth to the valley that is in the Plain of Moab.” These refer to the Sanhedrin, when it was in the chamber of hewn stones, which was in the region of that woman who came from the Plain of Moab (i.e., Ruth), of whom it is stated (in Ruth 2:6), “She is the young Moabite woman who came back with Naomi from the Plains of Moab.” (Numb. 21:20, cont.:) “[At the Summit of Pisgah,] which is visible on the surface of wilderness (yeshimon);” (Yeshimon may be a place name, Jeshimon.) for from there (she’misham) Torah goes forth into the world. Another interpretation (of these verses, centering on Numb. 21:19) “From Mattanah to Nahaliel”: Moses said, “Master of the world, after all of the miracles that You did for them, I am to die from them? He gave them the Torah from the desert (midbar), [as stated] (in Numb. 21:18), ‘From Midbar to Mattanah (literally, gift).’ And through me, they inherited (nahalu) it, as stated (in Numb. 21:19) ‘From Mattanah to Nahaliel.’ And from when they inherited it, You decreed death upon me [since] (Numb. 21:19, cont.), ‘from Nahaliel to Bamoth,’ [meaning] death came (ba mavet).” (Numb. 21:20) “From Bamoth to the valley that is in the Plain of Moab…,” that is burial, as stated (in Deut. 34:6), “He buried him in the valley in the Land of Moab.” This is related to what Job said (to Job 34:19), “He is not partial to princes; the noble are not preferred to the wretched; for all of them are the work of His hands.”(Numb. 21:20, cont.:) “[At the Summit of Pisgah,] which is visible on the surface of wilderness (yeshimon).” This is in reference to the well which accompanied them until it was hidden in the Sea of Tiberias. (See above, Lev. 7:7; Numb. 1:2; 6:35, 47-49; and the notes there; also yKil. 2:4 or 3 (32cd); yKet. 12:3 (35b); Lev. R. 22:4; Eccl. R. 5:8-9:5; cf. Shab. 35b, according to which the well is visible from Mount Carmel; similarly M. Ps. 24:6, according to which the well is visible from Mount Nebo.) And one standing on the surface of the wilderness sees something in the midst of the sea about the size of the mouth of an oven; and that is the well, which is visible on the surface of the wilderness.
Chamor, father of Shechem, went out to Yaakov to speak with him.
And Hamor the father of Shekem came forth to Jakob to speak with him.
| וּבְנֵ֨י יַעֲקֹ֜ב בָּ֤אוּ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֙ כְּשׇׁמְעָ֔ם וַיִּֽתְעַצְּבוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים וַיִּ֥חַר לָהֶ֖ם מְאֹ֑ד כִּֽי־נְבָלָ֞ה עָשָׂ֣ה בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֔ב וְכֵ֖ן לֹ֥א יֵעָשֶֽׂה׃ | 7 J | Meanwhile Jacob’s sons, having heard the news, came in from the field. The men (The men More precisely, “the [salient] participants [in the situation],” namely Jacob’s sons. See the Dictionary under ’ish.) were distressed and very angry, because he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter—a thing not to be done. |
מן השדה כשמעם,”returned from the field after hearing (about Dinah’s rape).” They returned prematurely, in a hurry.
וכן לא יעשה, “and such a thing must not happen,” even to the daughter of common parents, much less one of a distinguished family such as ours.
כי נבלה עשה בישראל, “that a vile deed had been committed against Israel;” it would have been a vile deed against anyone, all the more so against the daughter of a man of the stature of Israel.
ויעצבו…כי נבלה עשה בישראל. They were distressed… because he had committed a disgraceful act against Israel, etc. The Torah uses two expressions, 1) "they were angry," and 2) "they were distressed" to indicate that Shechem had been guilty of two wrongs. It would have been shameful for the family of Jacob even if Shechem had married Dinah, seeing that they would not give their sister to an "unclean" person. However, that would have been merely distressing. The fact that Shechem had raped their sister, something that was repugnant even to the local inhabitants, i.e. וכן לא יעשה, aroused their anger. Bereshit Rabbah 80,6 states that the Gentiles had accepted sexual restrictions upon themselves after the deluge. This included rape.
ובני יעקב...בישראל, the rape of Dinah was considered as a stain of the spiritual wholeness of all the family of Yisrael.
וכן לא יעשה, it was totally unforgivable for something of this nature to be done. This is why they were so angry that it had been done to them (of all people).
AND THUS IT OUGHT NOT TO BE DONE. I.e., to do violence to maidens, for the nations “had fenced themselves round” against unchastity as a result of the Flood. This is Rashi’s language. But I do not know this, for the Canaanites were immersed in unchastity with women, beasts and males, as it is written, For all these abominations have the men of the land done, that were before you, (Leviticus 18:27.) and they did not begin such practices in that generation [but rather it was their traditional behavior], and even in the days of Abraham and Isaac, the patriarchs feared lest they kill them in order to take their wives. Instead, the expression, and thus it ought not to be done, refers back to the word beyisrael (in Israel): because he had wrought a vile deed in Israel… and thus it ought not to be done among them. This is why Scripture said in Israel for it was not a base deed among the Canaanites. And Onkelos translated: “It is not proper that it be done,” meaning that it is forbidden, and that is why it was a base deed in Israel.
ובני יעקב באו מן השדה, during this time Chamor had come from the town to speak to Yaakov, finding the brothers present.
וכן לא יעשה AND THUS IT OUGHT NOT TO BE DONE — viz., to do violence to a maiden, for even the heathens have trained themselves (literally, have fenced themselves round) against unchastity as a consequence of the Flood which had come upon the world as a punishment for this sin (Genesis Rabbah 80:6).
Von einem doppelten Gefühle waren die Männer beherrscht; עצב, von dem Schmerze der gewaltsamen Verzichtleistung, dem schmerzlichen Gefühle des Verlustes: ihre reine, sittlich keusche Dina war nicht mehr, sie hatten sie verloren, auch wenn sie sie aus Schechems Händen wieder erlangten. Dies das eine, das persönliche Gefühl. Die verruchte Tat aber "brannte" sie; denn נבלה (נפל נבל ,נול bezeichnen denselben Begriff in verschiedenen Kreisen. נול und נפל: Trümmer, Schutt; נבל: Welken der Blätter, Schwachwerden der Kraft, Ersterben tierischen Lebens, Ersterben der sittlichen Kraft, allgemein: das In-Trümmergehen eines früher kräftigen Wesens. Daher נבלה: eine Tat, die von völliger sittlicher Entartung zeugt, eine Schandtat. Auch eine Tat, die die völlige sittliche Unwürdigkeit dessen voraussetzt, an welchem sie geübt wird, so selbst Hiob 42, 8. So auch נַבֵל: etwas als unwürdig, oder als nichtswürdig behandeln. Hier dürfte es in beiden Bedeutungen zu fassen sein —) hatte er an Israel geübt, eine Tochter Jakobs zu schänden!
Jakob, die schwache, durch nichts geschützte Familie, kann — das erfuhren sie bei diesem ersten Zusammenstoss derselben mit den andern Völkern — nur gesichert sein durch Anerkennung ihres sittlichen, geistigen Adels, durch welchen sie eben in ihrer materiellen Schwäche das siegreiche Göttliche zur Erscheinung bringt und als solche Israel ist. Hier aber war diese Menschenwürde in Israel getötet: denn so würde sonst nicht geschehen sein; gegen eine einheimische, berechtigte Bürgerstochter hätte er das nicht gewagt; nur weil es ein "Judenmädchen" eine בת יעקב, gewesen, war solches geschehen. Das fühlten sie tief. Die kräftige "Sehne des festen Auftretens" den andern Völkern zu überlassen, war ihnen eben eingeschärft worden. Sie sollten es gleich erfahren, daß es doch Fälle geben könne, in denen, wie hier, wo es sich um Rettung der Reinheit, der Sittlichkeit handelt, man wünschen könne, das Schwert aus Esaus Händen in die eigenen nehmen zu können; dies das: ויחר להם.
ויתיצבו האנשים ויחר, the sadness and sorrow described by the Torah as the brothers’ reaction pertained to the despicable deed that had been perpetrated against a member of Yisrael’s family. This was in spite of the fact that whereas Jews do not rape unmarried virgins, gentiles are known to be guilty of this. Seeing that even in gentile circles it was taboo to rape the daughters of prominent citizens, the Torah adds the words וכן לא יעשה, that such a thing was totally unacceptable. Their anger, ויחר, therefore was turned against the perpetrators and against those who had condoned the act.
For the gentiles constrained themselves from illicit relationships as a result of the Flood. And one who transgresses is sentenced to death. So did they accept upon themselves, as Rashi mentioned in Parshas Chayei Sarah [24:16]. Although this was beyond the requirement of the law [i.e., to be sentenced to death in a case where the woman is unmarried]. And so too, the expression גדרו עצמן implies: they constrained themselves, although Hashem did not command it. Nachalas Yaakov objected to this answer: The prohibition on unmarried women was merely a constraint and decree that the descendants of Noach [placed upon themselves. If so,] why was Shechem liable for death? The Rambam says because of robbery, and the Ramban says because of Shechem’s various evil deeds, [but no one says that he was liable to be executed for engaging in illicit relations]. And Rashi does not mention the above reasons because he is not seeking to explain why Shechem was liable for death, but to explain that “Such a thing should not be done” even with an unmarried woman. This raises the question of Re’m: [“Is not an unmarried woman permitted to the descendants of Noach?”] to which Rashi answers, “For the gentiles constrained themselves....” See there for elaboration. [An alternate approach:] You might ask: Is not an unmarried woman permitted to the descendants of Noach? The answer is: Since Shechem kidnapped her and thereby had relations with her, it is considered like illicit relations. Thus, he was liable to be executed. (Re’m)
And the sons of Jacob came from the field immediately when they heard it; and the men were saddened over the pain and shame inflicted upon their sister, and furthermore they became very angry, as he, Shekhem, had performed an abomination in the family of Israel to lie with Jacob’s daughter; and so shall not be done to anyone, certainly not the daughter of an esteemed person.
וכן לא יעשה, “such a thing must not be allowed to happen.” Rashi writes that even the gentile nations had agreed to outlaw rape. Nachmanides takes issue with Rashi, saying that the Canaanites had certainly practiced rape and worse sexual perversions as testified by the Torah in Leviticus He therefore explains the words וכן לא יעשה, as referring to what was forbidden to Jews, seeing that the Canaanites did not consider it as something immoral.
“Jacob’s sons came in from the field” [34:7]. Hizkuni writes. The children of Jacob learned that their sister Dinah was defiled. They came immediately from the field and they were distressed that such a despicable thing should have happened to the daughter of Jacob. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 34:7.) Even the nations did not do such an evil thing at that time and especially to the daughter of an important man like Jacob. (Rashi, Genesis, 34:7.) Hamor came to Jacob and his children and said: give me your daughter for my son Shechem and tell me how much should I give you as bride money, that is to say, the ketubah. (Rashi, Genesis, 34:12.)
There are grounds for assuming the existence of an interdiction against intermarriage pre-dating the Sinaitic covenant. This is manifest in the biblical narrative concerning the incident which occurred between Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, and Shechem, the son of Hamor, as well as the subsequent narrative concerning Tamar, the daughter-in-law of Judah. The Torah censures the actions of Shechem in harsh terms: "Ki nevalah asah be-Yisra'el—He has committed a heinous deed in Israel; ve-khen lo ye'aseh—and such a deed cannot be sanctioned" (Genesis 34:7). The Brisker Rav, Rabbi Yitzchak Ze'ev Soloveitchik, examines this verse and offers an illuminating interpretation. Given the structure of society in antiquity, Shechem's action was not entirely unparalleled. It must be remembered that Hamor ruled the area as an absolute monarch. Shechem was a member of the aristocracy, a princeling, and, quite apparently, could do as he wished with any damsel in his father's domain. Why, then, is the deed deemed so heinous? The Brisker Rav points out that the Gemara, Avodah Zarah 36b, declares that at an early point in history, the Court of Shem, the son of Noah, promulgated a decree against intermarriage. When Tamar is found to be with child, Judah passes judgement: "Bring her forth, and let her be burnt." Tamar is condemned to death but her punishment is, in terms of Halakhah, incongruous. She was ostensibly a widow at the time. Fornication is not a capital transgression. The Gemara indicates that Tamar was punished, not for simple harlotry, but for the infraction of having violated the edict of the Bet Din of Shem, i.e., for apparently consorting with a gentile. The Gemara declares that even in the pre-Sinaitic era there existed a prohibition forbidding members of the family group from which stemmed the progenitors of the people destined to become the community of Israel from intermarrying with members of a gentile nation. From the early dawn of history the people of Israel sought to preserve their ethnic purity and legislated against intermarriage.
Since becoming a morally perfect personality is impossible unless one is in possession of all possible virtues, it is almost impossible to encounter a morally perfect human being, since no one has been endowed with all these virtues. The only way to progress towards moral perfection then is to refine and and constantly purify one's personality. First, impure elements in one's personality have to be eliminated, then the remaining acceptable raw material has to be brought to a state high polish. Just as a mirror which has been silvered with faulty material and the backing of which has not been polished properly, cannot reproduce a true image, so a person cannot reflect Torah and truth in a proper manner unless he has perfected himself in the aforementioned fashion. In Deut. 4,9-10, Moses warns the Jewish people that if they allow the purity they had enjoyed at Mount Sinai to become tainted, they will be headed down the path of corruption. Our soul is like a mirror which reflects the images it has absorbed. Unless the mirror is kept in perfect condition, it will reflect distorted images. Even marginal failings in a person's character distort his whole personality. Maimonides points this out in Chapter seven of his introduction to the tractate Avot. Prophetic visions departed from the prophets when they were angry, i.e. when they suffered personality lapses. A perfect character can also not be attained unless it is accompanied by a high level of intellectual accomplishments. Similarly, true wisdom cannot be attained without accompanying moral accomplishments. Since we come across many people who possess either moral or intellectual accomplishments but rarely both, we must assume that what we observe are the results of natural endowment only. These endowments do not reflect the results of their owners having refined them in order to attain the maximum achievements they are capable of in either field. Only when morality is the outgrowth of one's intellect can we be sure that such morality is comprehensive and extends to a person's entire personality. This in spite of the fact that certain traits are not necessarily observable by outsiders unless the need arises to demonstrate that their owner indeed possesses such good traits. In Proverbs 20,5-12, Solomon points out that it is a common error to attribute a virtuous personality to someone who has merely displayed a few virtues, without our probing if these virtues are natural or have been acquired, i.e. developed. If these virtues are natural, they are quite meaningless in an ethical sense. Only the Lord can pronounce judgment about whose virtue has been acquired and whose constitutes a natural trait. One way of realizing that it is natural is if one sees a person practice one particular virtue, whereas in all other areas of life that person disregards most virtues. This would prove that such an individual did not come by the virtue he did practice thanks to his own efforts, but that he was fortunate enough to have been born with it. Our sages in Kiddushin 39 tell us that "He who performs one mitzvah is given credit, his lifespan is extended, and he inherits the land of Israel. He, however, who neglects to perform one mitzvah will experience the reverse." Obviously, the performance of one single mitzvah cannot qualify for all that much reward, something which is normally made contingent on the fulfilment of all mitzvot. It is equally obvious that a person who fails to perform a single mitzvah does not need to be told that he does not rate a reward for that failure. The meaning of the passage then is that he who performs one mitzvah in all its ramifications, qualifies for this great reward, because in order to do what he did, all his virtues had to be involved. The manner in which we relate to the that we have an opportunity to perform, reveals the attitude we have towards all mitzvot if we were able to perform them. The Talmud, when questioning the special reward offered those who perform the commandment of honoring father and mother, answers that anyone who performs a commandment thereby exceeding his natural inclination to do so, is in line for such special reward. Since it is natural for a person to honor his father and mother, the Torah, and subsequently the Talmud, use this mitzvah as the example to illustrate the principle involved. Similarly, when the Talmud (Sotah 3) says that if someone has commenced performing a mitzvah, one urges him to complete it. The word "a mitzvah,” is the same as "any mitzvah" or all mitzvoth. The attitude displayed when performing a mitzvah signals whether such an act would lead to the performance of other mitzvoth. The famous principle of "mitzvah gorreret mitzvah," that performance of one good deed leads to the performance of other good deeds, reflects the same thought. If any of these good deeds have been performed because of natural inclinations, such performance is no guarantee of the performance of other good deeds in the future; therefore, no credit is given to the one performing it. The Talmud in Horiot 10 tells us that the verse "The ways of the Lord are straight, the righteous can walk therein, whereas the wicked will stumble therein" (Hoseah 14,10), means that he who eats the Passover because he is hungry and wants to stuff himself is called a sinner though he complies with the ritual; this teaches us the same lesson. Abstention from pork should not be dictated by one's natural revulsion to eating pork, but should be due to the Torah having prohibited it (compare Torat Kohanim Parshat Kedoshim 89). Rabbi Akiva in Sofrim 4 relates how it happened to him that even preoccupation with a mitzvah due to a pure motivation, involved him in a sinful act, because he did not have his priorities right. He had dragged a body for six miles on the Sabbath in order to bring it to proper burial. He had been unaware that such a body, if there are no relatives whose duty it is to perform the burial rites on it, automatically acquires the ground it lies on. This would make the act of moving it on the Sabbath unnessary and a transgression against the law of carrying in the public domain on the Sabbath. The Rabbis chided Rabbi Akiva, saying that he had been guilty of a transgression every step of the way. Aristotle in Ethics Chapter four, also argues that the validity of, say, generosity as a virtue derives from the nature and personality of the donor. Therefore, he who gives to the wrong cause or for the wrong motive, cannot be described as "liberal" or "generous." This trait of "generosity of heart" was an essential ingredient in Abraham's personality, which is always in evidence in conjunction with other virtues, all of which contributed to refinement of his personality even further. No doubt, Abraham had recognized that the acquisition of material wealth could not be the ultimate purpose in life, that there had to be higher values than that. Not only that, but such knowledge could only be attained through prophetic insight. In his search for truths, of which Isaiah 64,3 has said, "No human eye has beheld them without the help of G-d," the term machazeh, vision, is most appropriate at this point. Maimonides in his Moreh, chapter forty-five section two, already pointed out that the lowest level of such prophetic insight is comprehension by means of the parable. Indeed, most of the message Abraham receives during the revelation at the "covenant between the pieces" is by means of the parable. Concerning man's natural fear of the day when the strange union of body and soul is dissolved, the day of death, G-d reassures Abraham that he should not entertain any fear. Concerning all his other worries, G-d reassures him of His continued support. He also tells him that the reward will be of quite a different calibre than is normally understood by the term "reward." G-d’s promise regarding future possession of the land by Abraham's descendants is believed. Abraham, aware of the great difficulties faced by any human being who tries to live up to these lofty principles, asks for a sign to reassure him that his heirs will be able to muster the moral strength to qualify for the fulfilment of these promises. The answer, couched in terms of the sacrifice and what it symbolized, is in accordance with both the views of Rabbi Nechemyah and those of Rabbi Chiyah as stated in Bereshit Rabbah 44. The divided animals represent the nations and their respective leaders, all headed for eventual destruction. The undivided bird, by contrast, represents the Jewish people who will endure and withstand the attack by the vultures, thanks to the merit of their ancestor Abraham. But over and above that, there are inherent values that guarantee the fulfilment of G-d’s promise in due course.
“The man said: The woman whom You gave…” – that is what is written: “I would speak, and I would not fear Him; for it is not so that I am, with myself [imadi]” (Job 9:35) – I am unlike the one who said: “The woman whom You gave to me [imadi]…” He heeded his wife’s words, but I did not heed my wife’s words. (Job’s wife told him, “Blaspheme God and die” (Job 2:9). Unlike Adam, Job didn’t take his wife’s advice. This is why Job said that he was unlike imadi, a word that alludes to Adam.) Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Dina (Jacob’s daughter.) was Job’s wife. That is why he said to her: “You are speaking as one of the disgusting women [nevalot] would speak. (Regarding Dina it is written: “As he performed a disgusting act [nevala] in Israel to lie with Jacob's daughter” (Genesis 34:7).) Shall we accept the good from God, [and not accept the bad]?” (Job 2:10). “Shall I accept,” is not written here, but rather, “shall we accept [nekabel]” (Although it was only Job who was suffering.) – should we be pleased with the good but not be pleased with the bad? (Nekabel is interpreted as “pleased [na’im] about accepting [kabel].”) That was a rhetorical question. “With all this, Job did not sin with his lips” (Job 2:10) – [the implication is:] with his lips he did not sin, but in his heart he did sin. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: “And I ate [veakhalti]” (This is unambiguously in past tense.) is not written here, but rather, “vaokhel” (This word may indicate past or future tense.) – I ate and I will eat again. (He defiantly declared that he would do it again.) Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: Adam the first man was banished only after he blasphemed and spoke sacrilegiously. (By being defiant towards God, as was just explained.) That is what is written: “He hoped to produce grapes, but it produced sour grapes” (Isaiah 5:2). “The Lord God said to the woman: What is this you have done? The woman said: The serpent enticed me, and I ate” (Genesis 3:13). “The woman said: The serpent enticed me [hishiani], and I ate” – [hishiani has three meanings:] It enticed me, it brought liability upon me, and it misled me. It enticed me, as it says: “The enemy will not entice [yashi] you” (Psalms 89:23). It brought liability upon me, as it says: “When you lend [tashe] to your neighbor” (Deuteronomy 24:10). (Through the loan, monetary liability is created, and the serpent’s evil behavior brought her liability for sin.) It misled me, as it says: “Now, do not allow Hezekiah to mislead [yashi] you” (II Chronicles 32:15).
“Utz his firstborn, and Buz his brother, and Kemuel, father of Aram” (Genesis 22:21). Another interpretation, he [Abraham] feared experiencing suffering. (He feared that God would test him yet again, this time with physical suffering.) The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You need not [fear], the one who will experience it [suffering] has already been born. “Utz his firstborn, and Buz his brother.”’ (Utz refers to Job, as the Midrash goes on to explain.) When did Job live? Reish Lakish said in the name of bar Kappara: He lived in the days of Abraham, as it is stated: “Utz his firstborn” and it is written: “There was a man in the land of Utz, Job was his name” (Job 1:1). (The Midrash interprets this to mean that Utz had another name, namely Job.) Rabbi Yaakov bar Kahana said: He lived in the days of Jacob, as Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Dina was Job’s wife, as it is written regarding Job’s wife: “You are speaking like one of the disgraceful women [hanevalot] speak,” (Job 2:10), and it is written in Dina’s regard: “For he had committed an outrage [nevala] in Israel” (Genesis 34:7). Rabbi Levi said: He lived in the days of the Tribes. (The twelve sons of Jacob.) That is what is written: “[This I have seen, and I shall tell of it,] that wise men speak up and do not withhold from their fathers” (Job 15:17–18) – this refers to Reuben and Judah. (They both spoke up and admitted that they had committed grievous sins (see Sota 7b).) What reward did they receive for this? “To them alone the land was given” (Job 15:19). Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥalafta: While they [Jacob’s family] were going down to Egypt, he [Job] was born, and while they were going up [from there], he died. You find that the sum of Job’s years was exactly two hundred and ten years, and Israel spent two hundred and ten years in Egypt. Satan came [before God] to present accusations [against Israel], (For worshiping idols while they were in Egypt.) but He incited him instead against Job. Rabbi Ḥananya son of Rabbi Aḥa said: This is analogous to a shepherd who was standing and watching over his flock. A wolf came and confronted him. He said [to his assistants]: ‘Throw him one goat so he can satisfy his aggression with it.’ Rabbi Ḥama said: This is analogous to someone who was sitting at a feast. A dog came and confronted him. He said [to his attendants]: ‘Give him a loaf of bread so he can satisfy his aggression with it.’ So, too, Satan came [before God] to present accusations [against Israel] and He incited him instead against Job. That is what is written: “God hands me over to the unjust one, and by means of the wicked, He misdirects me” (Job 16:11) – would that it had been for righteous people, (I would not care so much if Satan’s malice had been redirected to me in order to protect righteous people from him, but in fact the people of Israel were sinful at that time.) but they were wicked people. Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: He [Job] lived during the days when the judges judged. That is what is written: ‘“Behold, all of you have seen it; why do you accuse me of worthlessness?” (Job 27:12). (It is the generation of the Judges that is described to as being worthless (see Bava Batra 15b).) You have seen my actions and the actions of my generation. You have seen my actions: Mitzvot and good deeds; the actions of my generation: They seek to pay the fee of prostitutes from the threshing floor.’ (The first thing they do with their hard-earned grain is to spend it on immoral behavior.) It is not the way of the righteous to pay the fee of prostitutes from the threshing floors. (They spend their money on mitzvot and good deeds, not on sinful activity.) That is what is written: “You have loved the prostitute’s fee upon every threshing floor of grain” (Hosea 9:1). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: He [Job] lived in the days of the Chaldeans, as it is stated: “The Chaldeans set three columns” (Job 1:17). Rabbi Natan said: He lived during the kingdom of Sheba, as it is stated: “Sheba fell upon them and took them” (Job 1:15). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: He lived during the days of Aḥashverosh, in whose regard it is written: “Let them seek for the king virgin young women who are of fair appearance” (Esther 2:2), and it is written: “No women as beautiful as the daughters of Job were found in all the land” (Job 42:15). Reish Lakish said: Job did not exist at all. (The entire book of Job is an allegory, not a narration of a true story.) Did Reish Lakish reverse his opinion? For elsewhere, Reish Lakish said in the name of bar Kappara: He lived in the days of Abraham, but here he says that Job did not exist at all. [No, he did not change his opinion.] What did he mean by: [Job] did not exist at all? [He meant only that] he did not actually experience the suffering that was written about him. Why, then, was it written about him? The intent was to say that if it had befallen him, he would have been able to withstand it. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He [Job] was one of those who came up from the [Babylonian] exile. He was an Israelite, and he had a Torah academy in Tiberias. That is why they learned the laws of rending one’s garments (Upon hearing tragic news (see Job 1:20).) and the blessing of mourners (See Job 1:21.) from his actions. That is what is written: “Job rose, and he rent his robe” (Job 1:20) – from here we learn that a person must rend his garments while standing. Rabbi Ḥanina said: He was [not an Israelite, but] a gentile. Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: [God said:] ‘One righteous gentile arose for Me among the nations of the world, I gave him his reward (In this world (see Job 42:12).) and dismissed him.’ (From the World to Come.) Who was that? It was Job. “Utz his firstborn […and Kemuel, father of Aram]” – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Laban is the same as Kemuel. Why was he named Kemuel? It is because he arose [kam] against the nation of God [El]. “And his concubine, and her name was Re'uma, she, too, bore, Tevaḥ, and Gaḥam, and Taḥash, and Maakha” (Genesis 22:24). “And his concubine, and her name was Re’uma…” – Rabbi Yitzḥak said: All of them were named with the idea of punishment: (For they were all wicked.) Tevaḥ – they are slaughtered [tevaḥun]; Gaḥam – they are excised [gemaḥun]; Taḥash – they are weakened [teḥashun]; Maakha – they are crushed [me’akhun].
“And his soul cleaved to Dina the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman, and spoke comfortingly to the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). “And Shekhem spoke unto his father Hamor, saying: Take me this girl for a wife” (Genesis 34:4). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter, and his sons were with his livestock in the field, and Jacob kept silent until their arrival” (Genesis 34:5). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter…and Jacob kept silent” – that is what is written: “But a man of understanding will be silent” (Proverbs 11:12). “And the sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard, the men were saddened, and they became very angry, as he performed a depravity to Israel to lie with Jacob's daughter, and so should not be done” (Genesis 34:7). “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” – Isi ben Yehuda said: Four verses have no resolution, (It is not clear whether the words in the verses under discussion is the last word of the previous phrase, or the first word of the subsequent phrase. See Yoma 52a–b and Rashi on Yoma 52b.) and they are: “It will be lifted [se’et]” (Genesis 4:7); “Cursed [arur]” (Genesis 49:7); “And will arise [vekam]” (Deuteronomy 31:16); “Shaped like almond flowers [meshukadim]” (Exodus 25:34). Rabbi Tanḥuma adds this one: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard,” or: “when they heard, the men were saddened.” “And so should not be done” – even among the nations of the world, as from the moment that the world was stricken in the generation of the Flood, they stood and fenced themselves away from licentiousness.
However, we find that he did not live the same number of years as Moses, our teacher. It is written about Moses: And Moses was one hundred and twenty years old when he died (Deut. 34:7), while Joshua passed away at the age of one hundred and ten years. Why did he live ten years less? Because he spoke ten words before Moses, his master, spoke, as it is said: And Joshua the son of Nun, the minister of Moses from his youth up, answered and said: “My lord Moses, shut them in” (Num. 11:28). That is why He shortened his life ten years. From this verse you learn that no pupil is permitted to speak before his master, and that anyone who teaches anything before his master does, or even if he does not teach but simply tells others what the law is before his master has stated it, will find his life’s span shortened. Another explanation of the verse The wise shall inherit honor. This alludes to Aaron and his sons, through whom the priesthood was established.
“…for your love is better than wine” (Song of Songs 1:2). We learned there (Mishna Avoda Zara 2:5): Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Yehoshua as they were walking on the way: ‘Why did [the Sages] prohibit the cheese of the gentiles?’ [Rabbi Yehoshua] said to him: ‘Because they curdle it with the stomach contents of an animal carcass.’ He said to [Rabbi Yehoshua]: ‘But are the stomach contents of a burnt offering not more stringent than the stomach contents of an animal carcass, yet they said that a priest who is broad minded (He is not particular about what he eats.) swallows it raw.’ What is, swallows it raw? He gulps it down. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: They rendered it like a tainted cup; he may not benefit, but he is not liable for misuse of consecrated items. (Thus, if one eats the stomach contents of a consecrated animal, one is not liable for misuse of a consecrated item. This proves that it is not considered a food item, therefore its consumption is not a normal act of eating. Similarly, the stomach contents of an unslaughtered animal carcass should not be considered a food item, and should not render the cheese non-kosher.) [Rabbi Yishmael] said to him: (In the mishna, this is stated as a response to a second explanation given by Rabbi Yehoshua for the prohibition of eating the cheese of gentiles: They curdle it in the stomach contents of animals that have been slaughtered as an idolatrous sacrifice.) ‘If so, why did they not prohibit benefit from it?’ [Rabbi Yehoshua] diverted his attention to another matter. He said to him: ‘Yishmael, my brother, how do you read it? For Your love [dodekha] is better than wine, or your love [dodayikh] [is better] than wine?’ (Do you think that the term “your love” is stated in the masculine form [dodekha], indicating that it is being stated by the woman, representing Israel, to the man, representing God, or is it stated in the feminine form [dodayikh], indicating that it is stated by the man, representing God, to the woman, representing Israel. Rabbi Yishmael answered that it is vocalized dodayikh, in the feminine.) He said to him: ‘The matter is not so, as its counterpart teaches in its regard: “Your oils [shemanekha] have a goodly fragrance”’ (Song of Songs 1:3). (Just as this verse is in the masculine, so, too, the previous verse, which is the verse under discussion, is also in the masculine.) Why did he not reveal it to him? (Why did he divert his attention rather than answering his question?) Rabbi Yonatan said: It is because they had prohibited it only recently, (When the Sages issue a decree, for the first year they do not reveal the reason behind it, so that people will accept the decree without questioning its rationale.) and Rabbi Yishmael was young. Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta and Rabbi Ḥagai in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman [said]: It is written: “Lambs [kevasim] will be for your garments” (Proverbs 27:26). Kevashim, concealed items, is written. (The word, as written, can be read either kevasim or kevashim.) When your students are young, conceal matters of Torah from them. When they grow and become Torah scholars, reveal the secrets of Torah to them. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: “These are the ordinances that you shall place [tasim] before them” (Exodus 21:1), just as this treasure [sima] is not revealed to every person, the same is true of matters of Torah. Rav Huna raised a question and Rabbi Ḥama bar Ukva posed a difficulty: (Some suggest that the text should read: Rav Huna, citing Rabbi Hama bar Ukva, posed a difficulty (Etz Yosef).) If he sought to divert him, he should have diverted him from the five verses in the Torah that require resolution. (In each of these cases there are two phrases, and it is unclear whether a particular word which appears at the border of the two belongs to the first or second phrase.) These are they: “se’et” (Genesis 4:7); “cursed” (Genesis 49:7); (Does “cursed” belong to the previous verse: “And with their will they hamstrung an ox that is cursed” or does it belong to the beginning of this verse: “Cursed is their wrath, as it is fierce”? ) “tomorrow” (Exodus 17:9); (Is it “Go out and battle Amalek tomorrow” or is it “Tomorrow I will stand at the top of the hill”?) “crafted like almonds” (Exodus 25:34); (Is it “four cups crafted like almonds,” or is it “like almonds are its knobs and flowers”?) “arise” (Deuteronomy 31:16). (Is it “you will lie with your ancestors and arise,” or is it “this people will arise and it will stray”?) Is it, “if you do well you will receive forgiveness [se’et],” or is it “you will bear your sin [se’et] if you do not do well”? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: I have another: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” or “when they heard [the men were saddened] and they came from the field” (Genesis 34:7). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is written: “And the Lord commanded me” (Deuteronomy 4:14); there are matters that He said to me myself, and there are matters that He told me to say to my children. (Some matters of Torah are meant to publicized to all, and others are meant to be communicated only to those who are worthy.) Rabbi Eila said: There are matters that one seals [meshikin] (This is derived from yishakeni. Rabbi Yehoshua raised this verse to Rabbi Yishmael in order to allude to the fact that not everything is meant to be publicized (Matnot Kehuna).) in one’s mouth. How so? One verse says: “I store Your saying in my heart, so as not to sin against You” (Psalms 119:11), and one verse says: “With My lips I have recounted all the ordinances of Your mouth” (Psalms 119:13). In what sense can both these verses coexist? Rather, as long as Ira HaYa’iri, David’s mentor, was alive, “I store Your saying in my heart”; when he departed, “with my lips I have recounted.” (David did not publicize halakhic matters during the lifetime of his teacher because a disciple is prohibited from issuing halakhic rulings in the presence of his teacher (Eruvin 63a).)
To return to our main subject, that the person presenting the offering is in fact the real sacrifice, something we derived from the wording of Leviticus 1,2: אדם כי יקריב מכם. This has an additional mystical dimension. It can happen that man is "sacrificed" even in our world [not only when the soul is sacrificed by the archangel Michael on the Celestial Altar. Ed.]. This happens as a result of the transmigration of souls as we have explained earlier (Torah Ohr on Eikev). It is the reason why we are commanded to slaughter animals even when we consume them as חולין, non-consecrated meat. Extreme care has to be taken in the performance of ritual slaughter so that we do not wind up eating נבלה. When this happens the verse from Genesis 34,7: נבלה עשה בישראל, "he committed an outrage in Israel," would apply. No one knows whose soul the animal in question harbored. By not having been slaughtered in the most meticulous way a great injustice may have been done. According to the directive ואהבת לרעך כמוך, "Love your neighbor like yourself," the obligation to kill the animal in such a way that its death elevates it spiritually is included. Should the animal die of natural causes (any cause other than approved ritual slaughter) the spirit of impurity which was contained in that animal will not have been released but will suffuse it. On the other hand, if it is healthy and contains some spark of sanctity, and is killed by means of ritual slaughter the soul will exit in purity.
Another peculiarity is found when the angel tells Jacob that in the future (at Bet El in 35, 9) he will be known as "Israel," suggesting that at this time he was still only "Jacob" (32, 29). We find, however, that in 33, 20 and 34,7 Jacob is already described as ישראל. Rashi comments on the former, that the name ישראל did not refer to the altar he had built, but that he employed this name as being his own. He built the altar to the G–d א-ל who had named him ישראל. This is strange since the Torah did not yet report G–d as having changed Jacob's name. This commentary does not take into consideration that the Torah reports the change of Jacob's name to be effective only after chapter 35, 10. If we accept the interpretation of the Talmud in Megillah 18, that we learn from this verse that G–d i.e. אל-הי ישראל, called Jacob “א-ל,” we have no problem: Jacob had already been renamed at the time the Torah was recorded in writing. We have to solve the difficulty in Rashi's commentary by saying that when the Torah reported Jacob as arriving שגם, "whole" in body, spirit and economic strength in 33, 18, that his thigh joint had healed, that he was free from both Esau and Laban, which were the troubles that Samael had referred to when he acknowledged that Jacob had fought man and G–d and prevailed When Jacob assumed the title "Israel" for himself, this was not an act of arrogance on his part, but on the contrary, it was an acknowledgment to G–d that his achievements were not due to his righteousness and physical prowess but to the blessing he had received from the angel (who represented Samael and who at one time had been the agent of forces called קליפה). Having said all this, this still leaves us with the problem why Jacob was referred to as ישראל, in connection with the rape of Dinah in 34, 7 where the foul deed was described as something that must not be perpetrated "in Israel."
לחננכם That He may be gracious unto you. A verb ע״ע like לחמם to warm (47:14); it is the Kal like לשכב to lie (Gen. 34:7); all these forms, however, are irregular. (The Pathah or long Kamez (a) instead of the Holem or short Kamez (o) under the second radical in the infinitive Kal is probably the irregularity referred to by I. E.) And therefore will He be exalted, that He may have mercy upon you, for the Lord is a God of judgment,
לחמם To warm at. It is infinitive of a verb (חמם) ע״ע, written in full, and similar in form (The Pathah under ל in לַחמם instead of Hirek as in לִשכב is easily explained by the guttural letter by which the ל is followed; but not so regular is the change of Pathah in the second syllable into Kamez; and a remark of I. E. on this point might have been expected, if he had had the reading לחמָם; and not rather לחמַם.) to לשכב to lie (Gen. 34:7).—The meaning of the whole sentence is: they will perish and no remnant will be left of them.
And resolved to take them over. And so [Sennacherib] did, as it says in Kings: “and he seized them” (2 Kgs 18:13). Similar cases include: “to lie with Jacob’s daughter” (Gen 34:7), “to kill him treacherously” (Exod 21:14), and those like them.
It is interesting that in the two famous rape cases in the Bible, that of Dinah by Shechem (Genesis 34) and Tamar by Amnon (2 Samuel 13), the resolution differs from the recommendations made by the verses in Deuteronomy. In both instances, the brother(s) of the rape victim, in a devious manner, kill the rapist (and his family, in the first instance). The reason for their intense anger, as stated in reference to both episodes, is that “such a thing is an abomination [נבלה], something not done in Israel” (Genesis 34:7; 2 Samuel 13:12). We thus see that no marriage took place, in either case, between victim and rapist. Note further that neither victim ever married. Following the rape, Tamar lived in her brother’s home for two years, in a state of severe depression (2 Samuel 13:20). (The Hebrew expression for depression is “ותשב תמר] ושממה].” No husband is ever reported for Dinah.)
The difference here, of course, is that the woman does not “belong” to a man. The rape must result in marriage, but since no husband’s privilege has been violated, the crime is neither a capital one nor even a criminal one. It is, however, seen as a “disgrace” (see Gen. 34:7).
All of Dinah’s brothers were “distressed and exceedingly angry” (Genesis 34:7). (See also 34:13.) Yet it was Simeon and his younger brother Levi who set forth on revenge. They killed all of the unprotected male citizens of the city at their most vulnerable, weakened from the circumcisions that they underwent as part of a peace treaty with Jacob. (34:25.) While it is possible to interpret that the other brothers joined Simeon and Levi afterward in plundering and looting the city, (Ralbag on 34:27 interpreted “benei Yaakov” as implying all of Jacob’s sons.) Simeon and Levi were the ringleaders. It was they who were held accountable by their father:
Now Dinah – the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob – went out to visit the daughters of the land. Shechem, son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country, saw her; he took her, and lay with her by force.…Jacob’s sons arrived from the field, when they heard; the men were distressed, and were fired deeply with indignation, for he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with a daughter of Jacob – such a thing may not be done! Genesis 34:1–7
The Toldot Yizhak gives an explanation. Rashi said that in Jacob’s times, the nations were pious with regard to sexual relations. They did not engage in illicit relations, since it was not long after the Flood, when the whole world was destroyed because of illicit sexual relations. If you want to ask, why were Abraham and Isaac afraid that people would take their wives if the nations feared illicit sexual relations? The explanation is that Abraham and Isaac have very beautiful wives and their likes were rare. Therefore, the kings wanted to take them as wives. Therefore, Abraham and Isaac were afraid that they would be taken. However, later in the time of Moses Our Teacher, the Canaanites did pursue illicit sexual relations. They had forgotten the Flood. It was a long time ago and there was nobody who could remind them of it. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 34:7.)
Rabbi Natan says: Job lived in the days of the kingdom of Sheba, as it is stated: “And Sheba fell upon them, and took them away” (Job 1:15). And the Rabbis say: Job lived in the days of the kingdom of the Chaldeans in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, as it is stated: “The Chaldeans formed three bands” (Job 1:17). And some say that Job lived in the days of Jacob and that he married Dina, the daughter of Jacob. As it is written here: “You speak as one of the loathsome women speaks” (Job 2:10), and it is written there in the account of the incident involving Dina: “He has done a loathsome act in Israel” (Genesis 34:7). This concludes the text of the baraita. The Gemara comments: And all these tanna’im hold that Job was a Jew except for the opinion introduced with the phrase: And some say, according to which Job lived in the time of Jacob, and he was certainly not one of Jacob’s sons.
Rebbi Onias said, Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba raised a difficulty: If he wanted to deflect him to another subject (If R. Joshua’s intention only was to deflect R. Ismael’s inquiry there were many other questions to be asked.) , he should have removed him to the five indeterminate places in the Torah (In the absence of masoretic accents it may be difficult to parse a sentence. In Babli sources, this is called “verses that have no decision,” i. e., where to place the caesura. In our masoretic texts only Ex. 25:34 remains undecided in this sense. Parallel sources are Babli Yoma52a/b, Gen. rabba80(5) (Theodor-Albeck #957/958, Sokoloff Geniza Fragments p. 170), Midrash Cant. 1(18), Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Amaleq1, Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai Epstein-Melamed p. 121, Tanḥuma Bešallaḥ26.The list itself is attributed in most sources to Issy ben Jehudah. [A discussion in principle about this subject is found in ש. קוגוט, המקרא בין טעמים לפרשנות, י־ם תשנד; מ. ברויאר, מקראות שאין להם הכרע, לשוננו נח (תשנה) 189־199.]) , which are the following: “gift, cursed, tomorrow, almond shaped, rise”. Behold if you choose well the gift or the gift if you do not choose well (Gen.4:7. They must have read הֲלוֹא אִם־תֵּיטִ֔יב שְׂאֵ֕ת וְאִם֙ לֹא תֵיטִ֔יב but also in the masoretic text הֲלוֹא אִם־תֵּיטִיב֙ שְׂאֵ֔ת there is a stop between תֵּיטִיב֙ and שְׂאֵ֔ת.) . For in their rage they killed a man and by their will castrated a cursed ox or cursed be their rage for it is strong (Gen.49:6–7. It is a question whether to read one or two sentences.) . Moses said to Joshua . . go fight Amaleq tomorrow or tomorrow I shall stand on top of the hill (Ex. 17:9.) . On the candelabra four cups almond shaped or almond shaped their knobs and their flowers (Ex. 25:34.) .The Eternal said to Moses, you will lie with your fathers and rise or rise will this people and whore (Deut. 31:16.) . Rebbi Tanḥuma added the following: Jacob’s sons came from the field when they heard or when they heard the men were offended (Gen. 34:7. Most translations follow the masoretic punctuation in choosing the first alternative but the German translation by Torczyner et al. (Berlin 1934) which opts for the second.) . Rebbi La said, there are things about which one kisses the mouth, as it is said, may he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth (This answers R. Ḥama bar Uqba’s question. The verse Cant. 1:2 was chosen because its first part, quoted now, tells R. Ismael to be silent since a person who is kissed on his mouth cannot speak at that time. The first part clearly refers to a male; nevertheless R. Ismael had a point reading the second part as addressing a female since the sentence switches from third to second person, possibly indicating a change of speaker.) . Rebbi Isaac said, and me did the Eternal command (Deut. 4:14. Here starts a rather defective Genizah fragment (Ginzberg pp. 276–277.)) . “Me, and me.” Things were said to me that were said to you. And things were said to me alone (Not everything has to be told to everybody.) .
HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Joshua said, who would remove the dust from your eyes, Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai,” etc. (The parallel is in Babli, Baba Batra 15a/b.) When was Job? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara: He was in the days of our father Abraham; that is what is written: “ (Job 1:1.) A man was in the land of Oz, his name was Job.” And it is written, “ (Gen. 23:21, in the list of Aramean Naḥor tribes.) Oz his firstborn.” Rebbi Abba said (In the Babli, this is the opinion of R. Nathan in an alternate version.) , in the days of our father Jacob and Dinah was his wife; that is what is written: “ (Job 2:10.) You speak like one of the impious ones”, and it is written: “ (Gen. 34:7.) For an impiety he did in Israel.” Rebbi Levi said, he was in the days of the tribes; that is what is written: “ (Job. 15:18. The previous verse ends: This I have seen, I shall tell it; the verses are interpreted as referring to Judah and Reuben who confessed their sins; cf. Chapter 1, Note 195.) What Sages would tell, they did not conceal from their fathers.” Rebbi Yose ben Ḥalaphta said, he was born when they descended into Egypt and he died when they left (This is an anonymous tannaïtic opinion in the Babli. The traditional duration of the tribes’ stay in Egypt is 210 years; cf. the author’s The Scholar’s Haggadah, pp. 283–284. Job lived another 140 years after his tribulations (Job 42:16). Since God gave double restitution for everything he had lost, it is concluded that he suffered in his 70th year and lived for 210 years.) . A parable of a shepherd when a wolf came and attacked his flock. What did he do? He put up a ram against him (In the Babli, 14b, this is hinted at by the statement that Job’s goats were able to attack wolves, being supernaturally safe from predators.) . That is what is written: “ (Job 16:11.) He delivered me to the evil one, he threw me amongst evildoers.” Rebbi Ismael stated: Job was one of Pharao’s servants, a great one in his government (In the later Midrash, Ex. rabba1(12), this is extended to include in Pharao’s council Bileam, who voted for killing the Jewish children and was killed, Job who abstained from voting and suffered, and Jethro who voted against Pharao’s decree and was rewarded in that his descendants sat in the Synhedrion.) ’ (Familia as a term for government is from the time of the principate when the emperor ran the state by his freedmen and slaves, his familia.) . That is what is written: “ (Ex. 9:20.) One who feared the word of the Eternal etc.”, and it is written about him, “ (Job 1:1.) a man, artless and straight, fearing God and fleeing from evil (Job 1:1.) ”. Rebbi Yose bar Jehudah (In the Babli, R. Eleazar.) says, he was in the days when the Judges judged; that is what is written: “Behold, you all did see, why do you turn all into vapor (Job 27:12.) .” You saw what my generation did, that they collect tithes on the threshing floors; “you loved whore’s wages on all grain threshing floors (Hos. 9:1. Since it is in the hand of the farmer to whom to give his tithes; the Levite or Cohen who comes to the threshing floor to collect his tithes is an extortionist (Cf. Demay 6:3, Note 69).) .” Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan (In the Babli, R. Nathan.) : He was in the days of the queen of Seba, as it is said: “Seba attacked and took them (Job 1:15.) .” Rebbi Nathan (In the Babli, the anonymous Sages.) said, he was in the days of the Chaldeans, as it is said: “The Chaldeans attacked from three sides. (Job 1:17.) ” Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥa (Same argument in the Babli.) said, he was in the days of Asuerus, as it is said: “One shall look for beautiful virgins for the king (Esth. 2:2.) .” And it is written, “no women were found like Job’s daughters (Job 42:15.) .” Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, he was of the returnees of the diaspora. Rebbi Joḥanan said, He was of the returnees from the diaspora and was a Jew (In the Babli, R. Joḥanan and R. Eleazar.) . Therefore Rebbi Joḥanan learned from him the rules of mourning. “Job got up and tore his coat (Job 1:20.) ”; Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: From here [one learns] that a mourner has to tear [his garment] while standing (In Mo‘ed Qaṭan 3:7, Babli 20b, the verse is quoted without asking whether Job was Jewish or not.) . Rebbi Ḥiyya (In the Babli this is an anonymous tannaïtic statement.) stated: In My world I had one just Gentile, I gave him his reward and removed him from My world (Since Job, in contrast to Jewish saintly persons, received his reward in this world, he seems to be excluded from the World to Come.) . Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish (In the Babli, 14a, this is the opinion of an anonymous author who proves that Scripture in effect contains tales that do not correspond to reality, such as Nathan’s tale of the poor man and his sheep.) said, Job did not exist and will never live. The opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is inconsistent: There, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said in the name of Bar Qappara: He was in the days of our father Abraham, but here he says so? But he did exist but his suffering did not. Then why is it written about him? To tell you that if it had come upon him, he would have withstood it.
Where will I carry my shame? And you, you will be like any of the scoundrels in Israel! Please, speak to the king; he will not refuse me to you.”
The sons of Yaakov returned from the field when they heard [what had happened]. The men grieved and were very angry, for he [Shechem] had committed an outrage against Yisrael to lie with a daughter of Yaakov. Such a thing should not be done [It is not fitting for such a think to have been done].
And the sons of Jakob had come up from the field when they heard. And the men were indignant, and very violently moved, because Shekem had wrought dishonour in Israel in lying with the daughter of Jakob; for so it was not right to have been done.
| וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר חֲמ֖וֹר אִתָּ֣ם לֵאמֹ֑ר שְׁכֶ֣ם בְּנִ֗י חָֽשְׁקָ֤ה נַפְשׁוֹ֙ בְּבִתְּכֶ֔ם תְּנ֨וּ נָ֥א אֹתָ֛הּ ל֖וֹ לְאִשָּֽׁה׃ | 8 J | And Hamor spoke with them, saying, “My son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him in marriage. |
Deuteronomy 10,14. “Mark, the heavens to its furthest reaches are G’ds, etc.;” the vowel “o” (cholem) on top of the letter, symbolizes the essence of Hashem in both the names Hashem and elokim, whereas the semi vowel sh’va, under the letter symbolizes the tzimtzum, restrictions that G’d has imposed upon Himself in His relations with the inhabitants of our part of the universe. The vowel kametz on the other hand, symbolizes G’d’s largesse after He has imposed restrictions upon Himself. This is the allegorical meaning of the word חשק in the verse 15, a word normally translated as “being fond of,” in the sense of being desirous of. According to the author, Moses used this word there as an acronym, a sequence of the first letters of the vowels חולם, שוא, קמץ. The message Moses wished to convey to the Jewish people was that G’d imposed restrictions upon Himself in order to be able to dispense His largesse to them. [I assume, that seeing that the word חשק is used in the sense of carnal desire, as in Genesis 34,8 where Chamor, father of Sh’chem explains the infatuation of his son for Yaakov’s daughter Dinah, our author preferred not to understand it in this sense. Ed.] Moses implies that the patriarchs of the Jewish people had been the only recipients of this outpouring of G’d’s largesse.
וידבר חמור אתם לאמור, Chamor spoke to them, saying, etc. Perhaps the word לאמור here means that he was willing to pay damages due to the father of a virgin who has been raped or seduced. He may also have been willing to marry her if her father and brothers were willing. This is why he continued: "give her to him as a wife."
On the other hand, maybe Chamor wanted to disclaim any responsibility to pay damages in accordance with Ketuvot 41 that when the rapist comes forward admitting "I have raped, or I have seduced the daughter of so and so", he is not required to pay the damages mentioned in the Torah. We have a rule that self-confessed sinners are free from financial penalties. The words לאמור שכם בני could be understood as "seeing that my son has freely admitted his guilt he is not subject to the penalty imposed on rapists." We should not understand this verse as testimony by the father that his son had committed a felony because under Noachide laws a father may testify against his son (Maimonides Hilchot Melachim chapter 9).
וידבר חמור אתם, with Yaakov and his sons.
בבתכם, not “your sister,” although she was the sister to 11 brothers, but “your daughter,” seeing her status as the daughter of Yaakov was the foremost consideration. Besides, each of Dinah’s brothers was concerned for her well being as if she had been his daughter, not just his sister.
חשקה means desires.
(8-12) Darum wendet sich auch Chamor nicht an den Vater, sondern an die jüngern Söhne. Eine eigentümliche Rolle spielen hier die beiden Väter. Für Dina hätte Jakob auftreten müssen. Er schweigt, denn er weiß, man würde ihn, den "Alten", auslachen. Allein auch Chamor fühlt, daß er mit seinem Antrage bei Jakob, einem Vater, nichts ausrichten werde; dem lasse sich die Ehre seiner Tochter durch nichts ersetzen; fürchtet auch wohl von Jakob durchschaut zu werden, daß die vorgespiegelten materiellen Vorteile einer Verbindung mit dem einflussreichen Gutsherrn bloße Floskeln wären. Darum wendet er sich an die jüngeren Söhne, die er durch solche Aussicht gewinnen zu können meint. Schechem aber wendet sich an Vater und Brüder: leget mir so viel ihr wollt מהר ומתן auf, Geldverpflichtung des Mannes gegen die Frau und Geschenke an die Familie. — Soweit lautet der Antrag ganz schön. Der gnädige Herr hätte nur so gnädig sein müssen, die Tochter zuerst wieder der Familie zurückzugeben und dann frei um sie zu werben. So aber, die Tochter und Schwester im Raubverließ, mit Vater und Bruder unterhandeln, heißt nur: eine formelle Zustimmung zu einer bereits vollzogenen Gewalt erschwindeln wollen.
Hamor, the prince of the land, spoke with them, saying: The soul of my son Shekhem longs for your daughter. Please, give her to him as a wife.
“The thistle that was in the Lebanon sent to the cedar” (II Kings 14:9). “The thistle that was in the Lebanon” – this is Ḥamor, father of Shekhem; “sent to the cedar” – this is Jacob. “Give your daughter to my son as a wife” (II Kings 14:9) – “The soul of my son Shekhem longs for your daughter. [Please, give her to him as a wife]” (Genesis 34:8). But the beasts of the field…passed and trampled” (II Kings 14:9) – “They killed Ḥamor and Shekhem his son by the sword” (Genesis 34:26). Who caused it? “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.”
“Ḥamor spoke with them, saying: The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter. Please, give her to him as a wife” (Genesis 34:8). “Ḥamor spoke with them, saying” – Reish Lakish said: With three expressions of fondness, the Holy One blessed be He expressed His fondness for Israel: With cleaving, with desiring, and with wanting. With cleaving – “but you who cleave [to the Lord…]” (Deuteronomy 4:4). With desiring – “It is not for your multitude that the Lord desired [you]” (Deuteronomy 7:7). With wanting – “All the nations will praise you, [as you will be a wanted land]” (Malachi 3:12). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With cleaving – “his soul cleaved [to Dina daughter of Jacob]” (Genesis 34:3). With desiring – “The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter” (Genesis 34:8). With wanting – “because he wanted Jacob’s daughter” (Genesis 34:19). Rabbi Abba bar Elisha adds two more: With love and with speech. With love – “I have loved you” (Malachi 1:2). With speech – “speak to the heart of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With love – “he loved the young woman” (Genesis 34:3), with speech – “he spoke tenderly to [al lev] the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). Do you have a person who speaks to the heart [al lev]? It is, rather, matters that calm the heart. He said to her: ‘Your father, for one field, see how much he wasted and how much money he expended. I, who have the means to give you several orchards and several fields of grain, all the more so.’ “And intermarry with us; your daughters you will give to us, and you will take our daughters” (Genesis 34:9). “Intermarry with us” – Rabbi Elazar said: An Israelite never places his finger into the mouth of an idolater first, unless the idolater first placed his finger into the mouth of the Israelite. “Intermarry with us” – “do not intermarry with them” (Deuteronomy 7:3). They said: “Intermarry with us.” They said; they demanded first. (The Malbim (on Genesis 34:9) explains that normally in cases of intermarriage the non-Jew is the one who initiated the marriage.) “Increase greatly the bridal payment and gift, and I will give in accordance with what you shall say to me, and give me the young woman as a wife” (Genesis 34:12). “Increase bridal payment [mohar] and gift [umatan].” Mohar – dowry; matan – addition. (An addition to the standard dowry.)
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT. This text is related (to Prov. 11:12): ONE WHO DESPISES HIS NEIGHBOR IS LACKING IN SENSE. Whoever scorns his neighbor is called LACKING IN SENSE. But, if that same person who was despised was a person of knowledge and understanding, he would put his hand over his mouth and be silent. Thus it is stated (ibid., cont.): BUT A PERSON OF UNDERSTANDING WILL KEEP SILENT. (Prov. 11:12:) ONE WHO DESPISES HIS NEIGHBOR IS LACKING IN SENSE. This is Hamor, (A name which means “ass” in Hebrew.) the father of Shechem, who said (in Gen. 34:8): THE SOUL OF MY SON, SHECHEM, LONGS FOR YOUR DAUGHTER. (Prov. 11:12, cont.:) BUT A PERSON OF UNDERSTANDING WILL KEEP SILENT. This is Jacob of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:5): SO JACOB KEPT SILENCE UNTIL THEY CAME. For what reason? On account of this corruption (in Gen. 34:1-2): NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, < WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB > WENT OUT…. < THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. SO HE TOOK HER, LAY WITH HER, AND VIOLATED HER >.
(Gen. 34:1:) NOW < LEAH'S DAUGHTER > DINAH … WENT OUT. This text is related (to II Kings 14:9): THE THISTLE THAT WAS IN LEBANON. This thistle was Shechem's father, Hamor. (Gen. R. 80:3; cf. Tanh., Gen. 8:7; cf. also rule 26 in the thirty-two middot of R. Eliezer b. R. Jose the Galilean.) (Ibid., cont.:) SENT TO THE CEDAR THAT WAS IN LEBANON. This is Jacob, as stated (in Ps. 92:13 [12]): THE RIGHTEOUS ONE SHALL FLOURISH LIKE THE PALM, LIKE A CEDAR IN LEBANON SHALL HE GROW. (II Kings 14:9, cont.:) GIVE YOUR DAUGHTER TO MY SON FOR A WIFE. Thus it says (in Gen. 34:8): PLEASE GIVE HER TO HIM FOR A WIFE. (II Kings 14:9, cont.:) BUT A WILD BEAST PASSED BY. These are the tribes, who have been compared to wild beasts. (See Gen. R. 99:4.) Thus it is stated (in Gen. 49:9): JUDAH IS A LION'S WHELP, (in vs. 27:) BENJAMIN IS A RAVENOUS WOLF, (in vs. 21:) NAPHTHALI IS A HIND LET LOOSE, (and in vs. 14:) ISSACHAR IS A STRONG-BONED ASS. (II Kings 14:9, cont.:) AND TRAMPLED DOWN THE THISTLE. This is Hamor and his son Shechem, whom < the tribes > killed with the edge of the sword because of Dinah, as stated (in Gen. 34:1): NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH … WENT OUT. In every place the female child is accompanied by males, but here she is accompanied by her mother. Thus, the corruption had begun with her mother.
It is written of Israel (in Deut. 7:7): THE LORD HAS DELIGHTED IN YOU AND CHOSEN YOU. It is also written (in Gen. 34:3): AND HE (Shechem) LOVED THE MAIDEN (Dinah). Now you would not know what that love was; [however, from the fact that he set his soul upon her, you do know what love was]. How much the more so in the case of the Holy One, when he said to Israel (in Mal. 1:2): I HAVE LOVED YOU! (According to Deut. 7:7:) THE LORD HAS DELIGHTED IN YOU; you do not know how. We do, however, learn from Shechem, as stated (in Gen. 34:8): THE SOUL OF MY SON, SHECHEM, LONGS FOR YOUR DAUGHTER. R. Abbahu said: We have learned from putrid secretion (i.e., mere mortals). It is written about Shechem (in Gen. 34:3): AND HIS SOUL CLUNG TO JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH; and it is written about Israel (in Deut. 4:4): BUT YOU WHO CLUNG TO THE LORD YOUR GOD ARE ALL ALIVE TODAY.
The thistle refers to Hamor, and the cedar that was in Lebanon alludes to Jacob, who was compared to a cedar, as is said” He shall grow as a cedar in lebanon (Ps. 92:13). Give thy daughter to my son for a wife refers to Shechem, for he said to him: The soul of my son Shechem longeth for your daughter (Gen. 34:8).
... “He will save him because He delights in him.” (Tehillim 22:9) R’ Shimon ben Lakish said that the Holy One expressed His love for Israel with three languages of affection, with ‘cleaving,’ with ‘desiring,’ and with ‘wanting.’ With cleaving – “But you who cleave to the Lord your God are alive…” (Devarim 4:4) With desiring – “…did the Lord desire you…” (Devarim 7:7) With wanting – “…for the Lord wants you…” (Yeshayahu 62:4) We learn all of these from that wicked one of the story of “And Dinah went out…” (Bereshit 34:1) With cleaving – “And his soul cleaved to Dinah…” (Bereshit 34:3) With desiring – “My son Shechem his soul desires your daughter.” (Bereshit 34:8) With wanting – “…because he wanted Jacob's daughter…” (Bereshit 34:19) R’ Aba bar Elisha added two more, with love and with speaking to the heart. With love, as it says “I loved you, said the Lord…” (Malachi 1:2) With speaking to the heart, as it says “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem…” (Yeshayahu 40:2) We learn these also from the story of that wicked one – “…he loved the girl and spoke to the girl's heart.” (Bereshit 34:3) “He will save him because He delights in him.”
Chamor spoke with them saying, My son, Shechem, desires your daughter. Please [Now] grant her to him for a wife.
And Hamor spake with them, saying, The soul of Shekem my son delighteth in your daughter: give her, I pray, to him to wife;
| וְהִֽתְחַתְּנ֖וּ אֹתָ֑נוּ בְּנֹֽתֵיכֶם֙ תִּתְּנוּ־לָ֔נוּ וְאֶת־בְּנֹתֵ֖ינוּ תִּקְח֥וּ לָכֶֽם׃ | 9 J | Intermarry with us: give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for yourselves: |
והתחתנו אותנו, the word אותנו here means the same as if the Torah had written either עמנו or בנו, “with us.”
בנותיכם תתנו ואת בנותינו תקחו לכם, the sons of Yaakov, on their part made intermarriage something that was in their honour, “i.e. to give and to take.” When Shechem and Chamor presented this proposal to their townspeople they reversed it to make it appear as if they were the ones bestowing honour, when they said: “we will take and we will give.” (verse 31) They did this in order to seduce their townsfolk to submit to circumcision.
In addition to this marriage proposal, Hamor also suggests a political union; perhaps he sought to make amends with the girl’s father for his son’s misbehavior. And marry with us; give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for you. The individual engagement can become a collective one. We will form one family, or at least maintain very close relations.
“Ḥamor spoke with them, saying: The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter. Please, give her to him as a wife” (Genesis 34:8). “Ḥamor spoke with them, saying” – Reish Lakish said: With three expressions of fondness, the Holy One blessed be He expressed His fondness for Israel: With cleaving, with desiring, and with wanting. With cleaving – “but you who cleave [to the Lord…]” (Deuteronomy 4:4). With desiring – “It is not for your multitude that the Lord desired [you]” (Deuteronomy 7:7). With wanting – “All the nations will praise you, [as you will be a wanted land]” (Malachi 3:12). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With cleaving – “his soul cleaved [to Dina daughter of Jacob]” (Genesis 34:3). With desiring – “The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter” (Genesis 34:8). With wanting – “because he wanted Jacob’s daughter” (Genesis 34:19). Rabbi Abba bar Elisha adds two more: With love and with speech. With love – “I have loved you” (Malachi 1:2). With speech – “speak to the heart of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With love – “he loved the young woman” (Genesis 34:3), with speech – “he spoke tenderly to [al lev] the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). Do you have a person who speaks to the heart [al lev]? It is, rather, matters that calm the heart. He said to her: ‘Your father, for one field, see how much he wasted and how much money he expended. I, who have the means to give you several orchards and several fields of grain, all the more so.’ “And intermarry with us; your daughters you will give to us, and you will take our daughters” (Genesis 34:9). “Intermarry with us” – Rabbi Elazar said: An Israelite never places his finger into the mouth of an idolater first, unless the idolater first placed his finger into the mouth of the Israelite. “Intermarry with us” – “do not intermarry with them” (Deuteronomy 7:3). They said: “Intermarry with us.” They said; they demanded first. (The Malbim (on Genesis 34:9) explains that normally in cases of intermarriage the non-Jew is the one who initiated the marriage.) “Increase greatly the bridal payment and gift, and I will give in accordance with what you shall say to me, and give me the young woman as a wife” (Genesis 34:12). “Increase bridal payment [mohar] and gift [umatan].” Mohar – dowry; matan – addition. (An addition to the standard dowry.)
(Numb. 11:16:) “Gather Me seventy man (sic) (The midrash is ignoring the fact that Hebrew uses singular nouns with large numbers in order to build an interpretation on this singular usage.) from the elders of Israel.” (Numb. R. 5:23.) This text is related (to Prov. 22:11), “The one who loves purity of heart has grace on his lips, has a king as his friend.” Why did He not say to him (in Numb. 11:16), “seventy men" (with "men" in the plural), instead of “seventy man.” It is simply that He said to him, “seventy man (ish) [with the singular ish indicating] singular individuals, (I.e. singular individuals like the one described in Prov. 22:11.) because they were to be like Me and you, as stated (Exod. 15:3:) “The Lord is a Man (ish) of war,” [and it is likewise] stated (Numb. 12:3), “Now the man (ish) Moses was very humble.” (Numb. 11:16:) “Gather Me [seventy men from the elders of Israel].” But did you not have elders before? (Numb. R. 15:24.) Here now it is written concerning Mount Sinai (in Exod. 24:9), “Then there went up Moses […] and the seventy elders of Israel”; and this parashah (with Numb. 11:16) comes after that. So where were the[se earlier] elders? It is simply that, when Israel did those things which are stated (in Numb. 11:1), “Now the people were as murmurers […] then the fire of the Lord burned against them,” they were all destroyed by fire at that time. It is simply that their burning was like the burning of Nadab and Abihu, for they also had acted with disrespect on ascending Sinai, when they saw the Divine Presence. It is so stated (in Exod. 24:11), “they beheld God, and they ate and drank.” Was there eating and drinking there? To what is the matter comparable? To a servant who attended his master while [holding] a slice of bread in his hand and taking bites from it. Similarly had they acted with disrespect as though eating and drinking. So the elders along with Nadab and Abihu deserved to be destroyed by fire on that day; but because the giving of Torah was dear to the Holy One, blessed be He, He therefore did not want to harm them and bring calamity to them on that day. This is what is written (ibid.), “But He (the Holy One, blessed be He,) did not raise His hand against the nobles of the Children of Israel.” From this you may infer that they deserved to have a hand raised [against them]. After a time, however, they were destroyed by fire. Nadab and Abihu were destroyed by fire as they entered the tent of meeting, while the elders were destroyed by fire when they were filled with lusting, as stated (in Numb. 11:4), “Then the rabble (ha'safsuf) which was in their midst became filled with lust.” Who were the rabble (ha'safsuf)? R. Simeon ben Menasya and R. Simeon bar Abba [differed on the matter]. One said, “These were the proselytes who came up with them from Egypt and who were gathered (ne'esafim) together with them as stated (in Exod. 12:38), ‘And a mixed multitude went up with them.’” But the other said, “Rabble can only be a Sanhedrin, since it is stated (in Numb. 11:16), ‘Gather (esfah) Me seventy men.’” What [else] is written there (in Numb. 11:1)? “Then the fire of the Lord burned against them and consumed them in the outskirts (qetseh) of the camp,” [i.e.,] among the selected (muqetsim) in the camp. And where is it shown that those elders who went up onto the mountain were destroyed by fire? Where it is stated (in Ps. 106:18), “And fire broke out in their company ('edah),” since company ('edah) can only be a Sanhedrin as stated (in Numb. 15:24), “And it shall come to pass that if it was done [by mistake] away from the eyes of the congregation ('edah).” (I.e. the leaders of the congregation. So Rashi on Numb. 15:24.) It is also written (in Lev. 4:13), “And if the whole congregation ('edah) of Israel (This expression was often interpreted as denoting the Sanhedrin. So Sifra to Lev. 4:13 (42: Wayyiqra parashah 4); R. Meir in Hor. 5a; Rashi on Lev. 4:13.) should err.” And so did David say (in Ps. 78:31), “When God’s anger flared up at them, He slew their sturdiest,” these were the Sanhedrin; “struck down the chosen of Israel,” these were the chosen ones that were called elders, about whom it is written (in II Sam. 6:1), “And David still added to the chosen among Israel.” Then they wept again and demanded meat. Now you might say, “What they wanted was flesh? Did it not come about that the manna became whatever they wanted inside of their mouths, as stated (in Ps. 106:15), ‘So He gave them what they asked for...’?” And in case you should say that they did not have oxen and cattle in the desert, has it not already stated (in Exod. 12:38), “And a mixed multitude went up with them and flocks and herds.” And in case you should say they ate them in the desert, is it not written (in Numb. 32:1), “Now the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had much livestock?” From here R. Simeon said, “It was not meat for which they lusted, since it says so (in Ps. 78:27), ‘And He rained down flesh (she'er) upon them like dust.’ Now she'er must denote illicit intercourse since it is stated (in Lev. 18:6), ‘None of you shall approach any close (she'er) relation to him.’ Ergo, it [really] says that they desired to permit illicit intercourse for themselves; and so it says (in Numb. 11:10), ‘Now Moses heard the people weeping for their families.’” (See Yoma 75a according to which they were weeping here because of the family relations with whom they were forbidden to have intercourse.) Thus when they desired such [relations] (ibid. cont.), “the Lord was very angry and it was bad in the eyes of Moses.” At that time Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He, (in vs. 11), “’Why have you mistreated Your servant […]?’ In the past there was one with me who would bear the burden of Israel, but now I am alone.” Thus it is written (in vs. 14-15), “I am not able to bear [all] this people alone…. So if You are dealing like this with me, please truly kill me.” At that time the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Appoint other elders instead of those elders.” It is so stated] (in vs. 16), “Gather Me seventy men.” (Numb. 11:17:) “Then I will come down and speak with you there.” [This verse is] to inform you that the day for appointing elders was as dear to the Holy One, blessed be He, as the day for the giving of Torah. (Numb. R. 15:25.) Thus it is stated (in Exod. 19:11), “for on the third day the Lord will come down”; and also (in Numb. 11:17) with reference to appointing the elders, “I will come down,” is written. To what is the matter comparable? To a king who had an orchard and hired a guard for it. Then he gave him the payment of a guard for him to guard the orchard. After a time the guard said to him, “I cannot guard all of it myself. Rather give me others to guard it with me.” The king said to him, “I have given the entire orchard into your keeping, and I have given you all the payment for guarding it; but now you would say to me, ‘Go and bring others to guard it with me.’ See I am bringing others to guard with you, but observe that I am not giving them their payment from what belongs to me. Rather it is from your payment which I have given you that they are receiving their payment.” Similarly did the Holy One, blessed be He, speak to Moses. When [Moses] said to Him, “I cannot [do everything] alone,” the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “I have given you understanding and knowledge to sustain (PRNS. Cf. Gk.: pronoos (“prudent”).) My children. Moreover, I did not want others, simply so that you would have strength and knowledge and so that you would stand alone in that greatness. But now you are the one who wants others. Be aware that they will receive [payment], not from what is Mine, but from what is yours.” It is so stated (in Numb. 11:17.), “and I will set aside some of the spirit which is upon you and put it on them [...].” Nevertheless Moses did not lack anything. You should know that after forty years He said to Moses (in Numb. 27:18, 20), “Take Joshua ben Nun …. And put some of your glory upon him.” Then what is written about Joshua (in Deut. 34:9)? “Now Joshua ben Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom.” Why? (Ibid. cont.:) “Because Moses had laid his hands upon him.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “In this world [only] individuals have prophesied, but in the world to come all Israel shall become prophets.” It is so stated (in Joel 3:1), “And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh so that your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.” (See also above Gen. 10:4; cf. Deut. R. 6:14.) So did R. Tanchuma bar Abba expound.
There is wisdom which is both beneficial and harmful to the one who possesses it. Joshua possessed wisdom that was beneficial, as it is said: Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom (Deut. 34:9). To what may this be compared? To a reservoir that supplied an entire city with water. Everyone praised it, with the exception of one man who advised them to praise the well that supplied the water (for the reservoir) instead. Similarly, while they were extolling Joshua for giving drink to Israel through his wisdom, he said to them: “Praise Moses instead,” for Moses had laid his hands upon him (ibid.). Balaam had wisdom which was harmful to him, as it is stated: The saying of him who heareth the word of God, and knoweth the knowledge of the Most High (Num. 24:23), and finally: Balaam the son of Beor they slew with a sword (ibid. 31:8).
He gives wisdom to one who possesses wisdom and understanding and knowledge in all kinds of work. Similarly, you find that this was so in the case of Joshua: Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom (Deut. 34:9), for he already possessed wisdom. This may be compared to a shopkeeper to whom a man goes to purchase wine, honey, oil, or brine. The shopkeeper smells the odor that comes from the bottle, and if it is of wine he pours wine into it, and he does likewise with honey, oil, or brine. When the Holy One, blessed be He, observes that a man has the spirit of wisdom within him, He fills him with additional wisdom. Hence He hath filled him with the spirit of wisdom, since he already possesses some.
The Temple was similarly constructed by means of these three attributes, as it is said: He was the son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, and his father was a man of Tyre, and he was filled with wisdom, understanding, and skill (I Kings 7:14). Similarly, the Temple will be rebuilt in the future with these three attributes, as is said: Through wisdom is a house builded, and by understanding it is established; and by knowledge are the chambers filled with all precious and pleasant riches (Prov. 24:3–4). Therefore, And He hath filled him with the spirit of God. Where did all this wisdom come from? From the spirit of God. And He filled him with the spirit of God alludes also to Joshua, who descended from the tribe of Ephraim, as it is written: And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom (Deut. 34:9). And it refers as well to Othniel the son of Kenaz, who came from the tribe of Judah, since it is written about him: And the spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he judged Israel (Judg. 3:10). All this happened because Moses blessed the tribe: And this for Judah, and he said: “Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in unto his people; his hands shall contend for him, and Thou shalt be a help against his adversaries” (Deut. 33:7). When they become involved in difficulties, You shall be a help to them.
ואת בנותיכם נקח לנו AND WE WILL TAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO US — You will find that in the proposition which Hamor made to Jacob (Genesis 34:9) and in the reply of Jacob’s sons to Hamor (in this verse) they (both parties to the proposition) regarded the sons of Jacob as being the more important — that they should take of the daughters of Shechem whomsoever they would select for themselves and that they should give their daughters to them (the men of Shechem) as they (Jacob’s sons) would think fit, as it is written, “and we will give our daughters’’ — as we think fit — “and we will take your daughters unto us” — whomsoever we please. When, however, Hamor and his son spoke to the inhabitants of their city (v. 21) they reversed the matter, saying, “their daughters we will take to us for wives, and our daughters we will give unto them", instead of saying “they will give their daughters to us, and they will take our daughters to themselves", in order to induce them to consent to be circumcised.
(This is a re-arranged and slightly shortened paragraph from Berakhot 8:7, Notes 157–158. In the last example, from Avodah zarah, the text in Berakhot attributes the word with ע to Rav and with א to Samuel. This also is required by the text here.) Rav says meˋabberin, and Samuel says me′abberin. He who says meˋabberin, one adds a limb (אבר) to it. And he who says me‘abberin, like a pregnant (עוברה) woman. There, we have stated (Mishnah Berakhot 8:7.) : “One does not recite the benediction over a lamp unless one has profited from its light.” Rav says yeˋutu, and Samuel says ye‘utu. He who says ye′utu, but with this we shall be a Greeable to you (Gen. 34:15.) . He who says ye‘utu, to know, to inform the weary of wisdom (Is. 50:4.) . There we have stated (Mishnah Avodah zarah 1:1.) : “Before the holidays of the Gentiles.” Rav stated ˋedehen and Samuel stated ‘edehen. He who says ˋedehen, for the day of their misfortune(אידם) is near (Deut. 32:35.) . He who says ‘edehen, they are their witnesses (עידיהם) (Any built-up area in which from one house to the next there are less than 70⅔ cubits, is considered as 4 cubits in this respect.) , etc. How does Samuel deal with Rav's reason, they are their witnesses? In the future they will bring to naught their worshippers on the Day of Judgment.
Intermarry with us. Give us your daughters, and take our daughters for yourselves.
and conjoin yourselves by marriage with us. Give your daughters to us, and take our daughters to you;
| וְאִתָּ֖נוּ תֵּשֵׁ֑בוּ וְהָאָ֙רֶץ֙ תִּהְיֶ֣ה לִפְנֵיכֶ֔ם שְׁבוּ֙ וּסְחָר֔וּהָ וְהֵֽאָחֲז֖וּ בָּֽהּ׃ | 10 J | You will dwell among us, and the land will be open before you; settle, move about, and acquire holdings in it.” |
ואתנו... וסחרוה, and trade within it.
והאחזו בה, and buy yourselves freehold property there until you will be equal to the prominent people of the town.
וסחרוה, the letter ח in this word is the reason why the Torah did not need to write the word בה, i.e. תסחרו בה, “you may trade feely in it.” The vowel kametz under the letter ח instead of the semi vowel sheva we would have expected is what saved the Torah the word, or rather the extra letter ב by adding the word בה to the word וסחרו.
וסחרוה,. Event though normally, newcomers were not allowed to engage in the kind of commerce or artisanship which would compete with that practiced by the local inhabitants. We have this principle in Baba Batra 21, where it is spelled out as the right of the local inhabitant who feels economically threatened by competition from a new immigrant. He is accorded the right to lodge a complaint against the newcomer practicing his trade in his town. [an ancient form of the policy of “closed shop.” Ed.]
And you shall live with us permanently; and the land shall be before you; live and trade in it. Use it as though it is your own land, for business or pleasure, and settle in it. So far you have managed to buy one small field in exchange for a large sum of money. Now I am offering you free residency, as well as commercial and social unification. Hamor, who was presumably sent by his son, ignored the appalling incident that led to this proposal, and with regard to the marriage he spoke like an ordinary man who wishes to set up his son with his neighbor’s daughter.
And in the ninth year, [that] of He who scatters [mazreh, alluding to Jeremiah 31:10, which has a numerical equivalent of that year] Israel: The king of Spain conquered the entire kingdom of Grenada and Grenada the great city of many people, the princess among the states [alluding to Lamentations 1:1]. And in his power and the haughtiness of his heart, his spirit changed and incurred guilt, ascribing his might to his god [alluding to Habakkuk 1:11]. And Esau said in his heart [alluding to Genesis 27:41], “How will I find favor to my god, who girded me with might [alluding to Psalms 18:33]? With what shall I begin towards my master, he gave this city into my hands? Should it not be in bringing the people walking in the dark, the lost sheep, Israel, under his wings and to bring back the wild daughter to his his religion and to his faith? Or [otherwise] to send them away from before me to another land, that they should never return to my land and be established in front of my eyes.” Therefore the command and decree of the king [alluding to Esther 4:3] went out like the decree of Medea and Persia, and the herald proclaimed in a loud voice, “You are commanded [alluding to Daniel 3:4], all you families of the House of Israel, when you pass through the water [to be baptized], you shall pray and bow to the god of the nations, so you shall eat the bounty of the land like us today and you will settle in the land and trade in it [alluding to Genesis 34:10]. But if you refuse and rebel and not utter the name of my god and you do not bring prayers to my god, get up and get out from amidst my people, from the lands of Spain, Sicily, Majorca, and Sardinia, which are under my power. And in three months, there will not be a footprint of someone called by the name Jacob and referred to by the name Israel in all the states of my kingdom!” When I was there in the courtyard of the kings’s house, I became weary with calling out; my throat dried up [alluding to Psalms 69:4]. I spoke with the king twice and three times; with my mouth did I beseech him, saying, “Will the king save [us]? Why are you doing this to your servants? Increase greatly the dowry and the gift upon us [alluding to Genesis 34:12], gold and silver and everything that each man from the house of Israel has he will give to his land.” I called my friends, the king’s confidantes, to request [help] for my people. And princes take counsel together [alluding to Psalms 2:2] to speak to the king with great force, to reverse the decrees of anger and fury and the plan that he had thought against the Jews to destroy them [alluding to Esther 9:25]. He was like a deaf viper that stops its ears [alluding to Psalms 58:5]; he responded to no one. And the queen stood at his right to mislead him; she swayed him with her eloquence [alluding to Proverbs 7:21], to fulfill his plan from start to finish. We exerted ourselves and did not rest, I had no repose, no quiet, no rest, yet trouble came [alluding to Job 3:26]. And the people heard this evil thing, and they mourned, and in every place to which the command and the decree reached, there was great mourning among the Jews [alluding to Esther 4:3]. And there was a great harsh and overcoming trembling. the likes of which had not been seen since the day of Judah’s exile from its soil to foreign soil. But everyone said to one another, “Let us be strong for the sake of our religion and for the sake of our God’s Torah, against the voice of the curser and the blasphemer, from the enemy and the avenger. If he will let us live, we shall live, and if he kills us, we shall die. We shall not profane our covenant, nor shall we let our hearts go backward. We will walk in the name of the Lord, our God. And they went with no strength, 300,000 people on foot, I being among them, from youths to the elderly, babies and women in one day [alluding to Esther 3:13] from all of the states of the king. They walked to where the wind took them, and their King went out before them, and the Lord was in front of them. One shall say, “I am the Lord’s,” another shall mark his arm “of the Lord” [alluding to Isaiah 44:5]. Some of them went to the kingdom of Portugal and to the kingdom of Narbonne, which were close to them. But behold, it was distress and darkness and outspread thick darkness [alluding to Isaiah 8:22]. And they were met with frequent and bad distress [alluding to Psalms 71:20], wreck and ruin, famine and the sword [alluding to Isaiah 51:19]. And there were some of them who made a road through the sea and a path through mighty waters [alluding to Isaiah 43:16]. But the hand of the Lord was also upon them to confound them and to destroy them. Since many of the children of the forsaken one [alluding to Isaiah 54:1] were sold as slaves and maidservants [alluding to Esther 7:4] in all the provinces of the nations. And many drowned in the Red Sea, they sank like lead in the majestic waters [alluding to Exodus 15:10). And some also were put through fire and water – since ships burnt down, and the great fire of the Lord consumed them [alluding to Numbers 11:1]. The end of the matter is that not a man was spared from His difficult judgments, some for the sword, some for captivity, and the Lord [also] placed pestilence upon them. And they became a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth [alluding to Deuteronomy 28:25) until they were wholly swept away by terrors [alluding to Psalms 73:19]. And only a few of the many remained. And it is like the statement of our ancestors: Lo, we perish; we are lost, all of us lost! (Numbers 17:27). May the name of the Lord be blessed. I have also chosen their way, the way of the ship in the heart of the seas. And I am amidst the exile, I have come with all of my household, the children are my children, the sheep are my sheep [alluding to Genesis 31:43], here in the praised city of Naples, whose kings are kings of kindness. This year, the year of you have been sojourners [gerim, alluding to Exodus 22:20, which has a numerical equivalent of that year], I spoke to my heart, “That which I have vowed will I fulfill, to write a commentary on the book of Kings, which I have not done until now.” Also because it is a time to act for the Lord, to remember the destruction of our holy and splendorous Temple and the exiles that have come over our people that are written in this book, and as I will explain, with the grace of God. Behold, if so, Hiel the Bethelite, in building Jericho, laid its foundations with his first-born and set its gates in place with his youngest [alluding to I Kings 16:34] – I am a man who has seen my poverty in the youngest of the exiles, and the expulsion that came over me, and that was my personal exile that I had from the Kingdom of Portugal. I then made the foundation and began the commentary on these four books. And in the most senior of the exiles and the saddest of them, which is this bitter hasty expulsion and this great and terrible persecution, which devoured us and discomfited us [alluding to Jeremiah 51:34] and expelled us from having a share in Spain [alluding to I Samuel 26:19] that both ears of anyone who hears about it will tingle [alluding to I Samuel 3:11], I have put the gates of the commentary of this book in place and have completed it. And I have seen fit to begin this book with two general and comprehensive prefaces about its stories.
AND YOU SHALL BE FREE (‘TIS’CHARU’) TO TRADE IN THE LAND. They altered it for the sake of peace (For we do not find that Joseph told this to his brothers.) so that Jacob would consent to send Benjamin along with them. It had been their desire to return immediately were it not that Jacob had said, My son shall not go down with you. (Verse 38 here.) Similarly, for the sake of peace, they told him Joseph’s words, ‘Leave’ one of your brothers with me, (Verse 33 here.) and they did not tell their father of their imprisonment or of Simeon’s imprisonment. It is possible that Joseph did tell them, And you shall be free to trade in the land, but Scripture does not relate it. If so, the intent of the statement is that “you will be able to bring merchandise at your will for the purpose of purchasing grain, and I will not take it, as compensation for your embarassment.” (Thus he suggested that they will be able to keep their original merchandise for sale to others, and obtain grain free.) Similarly, their saying, The man persisted in asking about ourselves, and our family, (Further, 43:7.) constitutes a motivating plea to their father, [but the event never actually took place]. It may be that when they told Joseph, We are all one man’s sons, (Verse 11 here.) he said to them, “Not so, but you have truly come to find out the condition of the land. (Verse 12 here.) Now tell me if your father is alive, and if you have another brother, for I will investigate you and know what you are.” Then they said, “We are twelve brethren, the sons of one man who is presently in the land of Canaan, for he is still alive, and the youngest one is with him, and one is gone.” This was what Judah said to Joseph: My lord asked his servants, saying, Have you a father, or a brother? (Further, 44:19.) In a similar manner Scripture, in many places, is concise about an event or the recounting thereof, as I have mentioned. (See Ramban above in Verse 21.) Now Rashi writes: “Tis’charu, you may travel round the land. All expressions of s’chorah (merchandise) and socharim (merchants) are derived from sochar, which means ‘going around,’ because the merchants go round looking for merchandise.” It would seem that the Rabbi [Rashi] (See Bereshith, Note 139.) aimed by this interpretation to guard himself against this difficulty. (Namely, that we do not find that Joseph mentioned to his brothers about being free to trade in the land. Therefore, Rashi explained the word tis’charu as giving them the right to travel around the land and buy grain always without hindrance.) He therefore explained their words as reporting only that Joseph had said that they would be permitted to travel around the land and always buy grain at their pleasure. But above, in the story of Shechem, Rashi did not so interpret the same expressions: Settle down ‘us’charuah’ (and engage in trade); (Above, 34:10. For there actual trade is referred to, while here only travelling around the land is meant. Therefore Rashi makes his comment here, and not there in the story of Schechem.) ‘v’yis’charu othah’ (and engage in trade in it). (Ibid., Verse 21.)
You will [then] live with us and the land will be open to you. Live and [do] trade in [with] it and possess it.
and dwell with us, and the land shall be before you, to dwell where you please and do business in it and possess it.
| וַיֹּ֤אמֶר שְׁכֶם֙ אֶל־אָבִ֣יהָ וְאֶל־אַחֶ֔יהָ אֶמְצָא־חֵ֖ן בְּעֵינֵיכֶ֑ם וַאֲשֶׁ֥ר תֹּאמְר֛וּ אֵלַ֖י אֶתֵּֽן׃ | 11 J | Then Shechem said to her father and brothers, “Do me this favor, and I will pay whatever you tell me. |
The young Shekhem did not wait to hear Jacob’s response from his father. Rather, he too came to their house and said to her father and to her brothers: Let me find favor in your eyes, and that which you shall say to me I will give. Unlike Hamor, who attempted to act within the bounds of decorum, Shekhem spoke out of passion.
Shechem said to her father and her brothers, Let me find favor in your eyes and what ever you say [ask of me], I will give.
And Shekem said to her father and to her brethren, Let me find grace in your sight, and what you shall tell me I will give.
| הַרְבּ֨וּ עָלַ֤י מְאֹד֙ מֹ֣הַר וּמַתָּ֔ן וְאֶ֨תְּנָ֔ה כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר תֹּאמְר֖וּ אֵלָ֑י וּתְנוּ־לִ֥י אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲרָ֖ לְאִשָּֽׁה׃ | 12 J | Ask of me a bride-price ever so high, as well as gifts, and I will pay what you tell me; only give me the maiden for a wife.” |
‘MOHAR’ (DOWRY) ‘UMATAN’ (AND GIFT). Mohar [refers to the bridal gifts given at the time of] the marriage-contract which is given to maidens, as it is written, according to the dowry of virgins, (Exodus 22:16.) these being the presents which the young men send to the maidens whom they marry. Umatan are garments or silver and gold which the groom sends to her father and her brothers. In Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis said: (80:7.) “Mohar is parnon (the wife’s settlement); matan is parapurnon (the additional settlement above the usual dowry),” these being in the language of the Jerusalem Talmud (Yerushalmi Kethuboth 5:8.) “the regular dowry” and “the usufruct estate,” that is to say, that which he gives her of his properties to be accounted as if she had brought them from her father’s house, the produce of which belongs to him. The reason for this conciliatory gesture is in order that they willingly give her to him as a wife, as the maiden did not consent to him and she steadily protested and cried. This is the sense of the verse, And he spoke comfortingly unto the damsel. (Verse 3 here.) Therefore Shechem said, Take me this young maiden to wife, (Verse 4 here.) as she was already in his house and in his power, and he feared not her brothers because he was the prince of the country and how could they take her by force out of his house? Now Shechem’s great desire was because the maiden was very beautiful. However, Scripture did not narrate her beauty as it did in the case of Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel because it did not want to mention that which was to her a stumbling-block of iniquity, (Ezekiel 18:30.) while Scripture speaks only in praise of the righteous women but not of this one. Similarly, Scripture does not mention what happened to her after her rescue from Shechem’s house. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture she stayed with her brothers, “shut up, living as widows,” (See II Samuel 20:3.) as she was considered defiled in their sight, as it is written, Because he had defiled Dinah their sister. (Verse 13 here.) Our Rabbis have differed on this matter. (Bereshith Rabbah 80:10.) The most feasible opinion is that of he who says (Bereshith Rabbah 80:10.) that Simeon took her, and upon her death, he buried her in the land of Canaan, this being in agreement with what we have said, i.e., that she was with him in his house as a widow, and she went down with them to Egypt, and there she died but was buried in the Land of Israel. Her grave is known by tradition to this day as being in the city of Arbel with the grave of Nitai the Arbelite. (Aboth 1:7. He was a leader of the Sanhedrin in the early days of the Hasmoneans. As for Dinah’s grave being near that of Nitai the Arbelite, see my Hebrew commentary, p. 190, for data from other medieval itinerants. Ramban’s testimony though is that of an eye-witness when he travelled through the land.) It is possible that Simeon brought up her remains from Egypt out of pity for her while the Israelites were still in Egypt or that the children of Israel brought them up together with the bones of her brothers — all the tribes — just as our Rabbis have mentioned. (Mechilta, Exodus 13:19.)
מהר DOWRY, refers to the Ketuba (the sum settled by the husband on his wife as set forth in the Ketuba — the marriage contract (Genesis Rabbah 80:7).
הרבה עלי מאד, as a penance he would be prepared to pay over and above the customary amount of a dowry.
Increase bridal payment and gift, and I will give in accordance with what you shall say to me. I will agree to pay any amount you see fit; and all I ask is that you give me the young woman as a wife.
הרבו עלי מאד מוהר ומתן, “demand of me much dowry, etc.” All these conciliatory offers were designed to have Yaakov’s family agree to Dinah being married to Shechem of her own free will, seeing she was already captive in the house of Shechem, and Shechem and Chamor had no reason to fear that she would be kidnapped. They only wanted a willing bride instead of an unwilling one. This is also the reason why the Torah reports that Shechem “talked to the heart of the girl.” (verse 3)
“Ḥamor spoke with them, saying: The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter. Please, give her to him as a wife” (Genesis 34:8). “Ḥamor spoke with them, saying” – Reish Lakish said: With three expressions of fondness, the Holy One blessed be He expressed His fondness for Israel: With cleaving, with desiring, and with wanting. With cleaving – “but you who cleave [to the Lord…]” (Deuteronomy 4:4). With desiring – “It is not for your multitude that the Lord desired [you]” (Deuteronomy 7:7). With wanting – “All the nations will praise you, [as you will be a wanted land]” (Malachi 3:12). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With cleaving – “his soul cleaved [to Dina daughter of Jacob]” (Genesis 34:3). With desiring – “The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter” (Genesis 34:8). With wanting – “because he wanted Jacob’s daughter” (Genesis 34:19). Rabbi Abba bar Elisha adds two more: With love and with speech. With love – “I have loved you” (Malachi 1:2). With speech – “speak to the heart of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With love – “he loved the young woman” (Genesis 34:3), with speech – “he spoke tenderly to [al lev] the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). Do you have a person who speaks to the heart [al lev]? It is, rather, matters that calm the heart. He said to her: ‘Your father, for one field, see how much he wasted and how much money he expended. I, who have the means to give you several orchards and several fields of grain, all the more so.’ “And intermarry with us; your daughters you will give to us, and you will take our daughters” (Genesis 34:9). “Intermarry with us” – Rabbi Elazar said: An Israelite never places his finger into the mouth of an idolater first, unless the idolater first placed his finger into the mouth of the Israelite. “Intermarry with us” – “do not intermarry with them” (Deuteronomy 7:3). They said: “Intermarry with us.” They said; they demanded first. (The Malbim (on Genesis 34:9) explains that normally in cases of intermarriage the non-Jew is the one who initiated the marriage.) “Increase greatly the bridal payment and gift, and I will give in accordance with what you shall say to me, and give me the young woman as a wife” (Genesis 34:12). “Increase bridal payment [mohar] and gift [umatan].” Mohar – dowry; matan – addition. (An addition to the standard dowry.)
"mohar" being a kethubah, as in (Genesis 34:12) "Impose upon me much mohar and dower, and I will give it as you tell me, but give me the maiden as a wife."
And before his sons’ return, Jacob sent two maid-servants of his daughter to take care of Dinah in Shechem’s house, and to remain with her. And Shechem the son of Hamor son of Hidekem son of Pered spoke unto his father, saying: Get me this damsel to wife. And Hamor, son of Hidekem the Hivite, went into the house of Shechem his son and he sat before him; and Hamor said unto his son Shechem: Is there not a woman among the daughters of thy land worthy to be thy wife, that thou goest to take a Hebrew woman, who is not of thy people? And Shechem replied: She is the only one which thou must get for me, for she pleaseth me best. And Hamor decided to do the will of his son, for he was dearly beloved by him. And Hamor the father of Shechem went out unto Jacob, to commune with him concerning the matter, but ere he had left the house of Shechem to go unto Jacob, the sons of Jacob had re turned from the field for they were informed of what Shechem the son of Hamor had done. And the men were greatly grieved concerning their sister, and all came home with a burning wrath even before the time of gathering in their cattle. And they came and sat before their father, with anger kindled, and they said: Verily this man deserveth death, for God the Lord of the whole earth commanded unto Noah and his children that man should neither rob nor commit adultery, and behold Shechem hath both robbed us of and defiled our sister, and not one of all the people of the city spoke a word unto him. Verily thou knowest it well that death is due to Shechem and his father and to the entire city, for what he hath done. And while they were thus deliberating in the presence of their father, Hamor the father of Shechem entered to commune with Jacob concerning the words of his son on account of Dinah, and he sat before Jacob and his sons. And Hamor spoke unto them, saying: The soul of my son Shechem longeth for your daughter. I pray ye give him her to wife, and make ye marriages with us and give your daughters unto us and take our daughters unto you. And ye shall dwell with us in our land, and we will be like one people in the land. Behold our land is very spacious, dwell and trade ye therein and get you possessions therein, and do therein as it pleaseth unto you and no one will say a word against it. And when Hamor had ceased speaking unto Jacob and his sons, Shechem his son came after him and sat before them, and Shechem spoke unto Jacob and his sons, saying: Let me find grace in your eyes to give me your daughter to wife and whatsoever you will say unto me I shall do for her. Ask me never so much dowry and gift and I will give accordingly as ye shall say unto me, and whosoever shall trespass the orders of your mouth he shall die, but give me the damsel to wife.
And in the ninth year, [that] of He who scatters [mazreh, alluding to Jeremiah 31:10, which has a numerical equivalent of that year] Israel: The king of Spain conquered the entire kingdom of Grenada and Grenada the great city of many people, the princess among the states [alluding to Lamentations 1:1]. And in his power and the haughtiness of his heart, his spirit changed and incurred guilt, ascribing his might to his god [alluding to Habakkuk 1:11]. And Esau said in his heart [alluding to Genesis 27:41], “How will I find favor to my god, who girded me with might [alluding to Psalms 18:33]? With what shall I begin towards my master, he gave this city into my hands? Should it not be in bringing the people walking in the dark, the lost sheep, Israel, under his wings and to bring back the wild daughter to his his religion and to his faith? Or [otherwise] to send them away from before me to another land, that they should never return to my land and be established in front of my eyes.” Therefore the command and decree of the king [alluding to Esther 4:3] went out like the decree of Medea and Persia, and the herald proclaimed in a loud voice, “You are commanded [alluding to Daniel 3:4], all you families of the House of Israel, when you pass through the water [to be baptized], you shall pray and bow to the god of the nations, so you shall eat the bounty of the land like us today and you will settle in the land and trade in it [alluding to Genesis 34:10]. But if you refuse and rebel and not utter the name of my god and you do not bring prayers to my god, get up and get out from amidst my people, from the lands of Spain, Sicily, Majorca, and Sardinia, which are under my power. And in three months, there will not be a footprint of someone called by the name Jacob and referred to by the name Israel in all the states of my kingdom!” When I was there in the courtyard of the kings’s house, I became weary with calling out; my throat dried up [alluding to Psalms 69:4]. I spoke with the king twice and three times; with my mouth did I beseech him, saying, “Will the king save [us]? Why are you doing this to your servants? Increase greatly the dowry and the gift upon us [alluding to Genesis 34:12], gold and silver and everything that each man from the house of Israel has he will give to his land.” I called my friends, the king’s confidantes, to request [help] for my people. And princes take counsel together [alluding to Psalms 2:2] to speak to the king with great force, to reverse the decrees of anger and fury and the plan that he had thought against the Jews to destroy them [alluding to Esther 9:25]. He was like a deaf viper that stops its ears [alluding to Psalms 58:5]; he responded to no one. And the queen stood at his right to mislead him; she swayed him with her eloquence [alluding to Proverbs 7:21], to fulfill his plan from start to finish. We exerted ourselves and did not rest, I had no repose, no quiet, no rest, yet trouble came [alluding to Job 3:26]. And the people heard this evil thing, and they mourned, and in every place to which the command and the decree reached, there was great mourning among the Jews [alluding to Esther 4:3]. And there was a great harsh and overcoming trembling. the likes of which had not been seen since the day of Judah’s exile from its soil to foreign soil. But everyone said to one another, “Let us be strong for the sake of our religion and for the sake of our God’s Torah, against the voice of the curser and the blasphemer, from the enemy and the avenger. If he will let us live, we shall live, and if he kills us, we shall die. We shall not profane our covenant, nor shall we let our hearts go backward. We will walk in the name of the Lord, our God. And they went with no strength, 300,000 people on foot, I being among them, from youths to the elderly, babies and women in one day [alluding to Esther 3:13] from all of the states of the king. They walked to where the wind took them, and their King went out before them, and the Lord was in front of them. One shall say, “I am the Lord’s,” another shall mark his arm “of the Lord” [alluding to Isaiah 44:5]. Some of them went to the kingdom of Portugal and to the kingdom of Narbonne, which were close to them. But behold, it was distress and darkness and outspread thick darkness [alluding to Isaiah 8:22]. And they were met with frequent and bad distress [alluding to Psalms 71:20], wreck and ruin, famine and the sword [alluding to Isaiah 51:19]. And there were some of them who made a road through the sea and a path through mighty waters [alluding to Isaiah 43:16]. But the hand of the Lord was also upon them to confound them and to destroy them. Since many of the children of the forsaken one [alluding to Isaiah 54:1] were sold as slaves and maidservants [alluding to Esther 7:4] in all the provinces of the nations. And many drowned in the Red Sea, they sank like lead in the majestic waters [alluding to Exodus 15:10). And some also were put through fire and water – since ships burnt down, and the great fire of the Lord consumed them [alluding to Numbers 11:1]. The end of the matter is that not a man was spared from His difficult judgments, some for the sword, some for captivity, and the Lord [also] placed pestilence upon them. And they became a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth [alluding to Deuteronomy 28:25) until they were wholly swept away by terrors [alluding to Psalms 73:19]. And only a few of the many remained. And it is like the statement of our ancestors: Lo, we perish; we are lost, all of us lost! (Numbers 17:27). May the name of the Lord be blessed. I have also chosen their way, the way of the ship in the heart of the seas. And I am amidst the exile, I have come with all of my household, the children are my children, the sheep are my sheep [alluding to Genesis 31:43], here in the praised city of Naples, whose kings are kings of kindness. This year, the year of you have been sojourners [gerim, alluding to Exodus 22:20, which has a numerical equivalent of that year], I spoke to my heart, “That which I have vowed will I fulfill, to write a commentary on the book of Kings, which I have not done until now.” Also because it is a time to act for the Lord, to remember the destruction of our holy and splendorous Temple and the exiles that have come over our people that are written in this book, and as I will explain, with the grace of God. Behold, if so, Hiel the Bethelite, in building Jericho, laid its foundations with his first-born and set its gates in place with his youngest [alluding to I Kings 16:34] – I am a man who has seen my poverty in the youngest of the exiles, and the expulsion that came over me, and that was my personal exile that I had from the Kingdom of Portugal. I then made the foundation and began the commentary on these four books. And in the most senior of the exiles and the saddest of them, which is this bitter hasty expulsion and this great and terrible persecution, which devoured us and discomfited us [alluding to Jeremiah 51:34] and expelled us from having a share in Spain [alluding to I Samuel 26:19] that both ears of anyone who hears about it will tingle [alluding to I Samuel 3:11], I have put the gates of the commentary of this book in place and have completed it. And I have seen fit to begin this book with two general and comprehensive prefaces about its stories.
Now I am lifting from on you what the mitzrim shamed you with saying: aren't they uncircumcised like us. And it will be considered a disgrace to the jews like it says: Because she is an embarrassment to us.
Their sorrows shall be multiplied which after another hasten: – viz. away from them (the holy and excellent) – the men, that is, who hasten to another god. This form, מהרו, is the only instance of its use in the Kal in the sense of "hastening"; but there is the possibility that it is used in the sense of dowry (מהר) and gift (Gen. 34:12); and as "a dowry shall he pay him for her" (ימהרנה מהר, Exod. 22:15). Or the sense in which מהרו אחר is to be taken is: I shall cleave to the holy and excellent ones and the sorrows of the men shall multiply – the sorrows, that is, of those who hasten to other men to walk in other ways which are not the ways of the Lord; and this is the correct interpretation.
AND IF A MAN ‘Y’FATEH’ — “speaks to her emotions [until she submits to him]. And so did Onkelos render it arei y’shadeil, the term shidul in Aramaic being like pitui [persuasion, seduction], in the Sacred Language. ‘MAHOR YIMHARENAH’ (HE SHALL SURELY PAY A DOWRY FOR HER) TO BE HIS WIFE — he shall assign her a marriage portion as is the manner of a man to his wife by writing her a kethubah (marriage contract), and he shall marry her.” Thus far is Rashi’s language. But this is not correct, for the term pitui [does not mean “speaking to her feelings,” as Rashi put it], but winning over another person’s will by falsehood. A similar usage of the term is found in these verses: ‘yifteh l’vavchem’ (your heart will be deceived); (Deuteronomy 11:16.) ‘vayift’ (and he seduced) my heart secretly; (Job 31:27.) if my heart ‘niftah’ (have been enticed) unto a woman. (Ibid., 9.) This is why people whose minds are not adroit in discriminating matters, and whose hearts can be easily bent by a few words at the beginning of a discussion, are called p’ta’im (simple-minded ones), just as it is said, ‘peti’ (the simple-minded) believeth every word, (Proverbs 14:15.) and he who seduces a virgin in order to have sexual relations with her, bends her will to his desire by words of falsehood, and is therefore called m’fateh (seducer). Onkelos, however, divided the term pitui into two meanings. Thus here he translated it: y’shadeil, which is an expression for cunning and effort that a person exercises towards another in order to do with him as he pleases, regardless of whether this effort is by means of words or deeds. Thus Onkelos translated: ‘vayei’aveik’ a man with him (Genesis 32:25. See Vol. 1, pp. 404-405 where Ramban discusses in brief the same theme as here.) — v’ishtadeil (and a man ‘wrestled craftily’ with him). And Yonathan ben Uziel (See Vol. 1, p. 127 Note 152.) translated: ‘v’shovavticho’ (and I will turn thee about), and put hooks into thy jaws (Ezekiel 38:4.) — ‘v’ishtadlinoch.’ And in the Targum of the Scroll of Ruth we find: Where hast thou gleaned to-day? ‘v’anah asit’ (and where wroughtest thou)? (Ruth 2:19. It is of interest to note that Ramban refers to “the Targum of the Scroll of Esther” instead of ascribing it as he had done in the preceding reference to the Targum on the Book of Ezekiel. This indicates that Ramban held them to be of different authorship. Such indeed is the prevailing opinion in modern scholarship (see P. Churgin, Targum Kethuvim, pp. 140-151).) — ‘u’lan ishtadalt l’me’bad’ (and where have you ‘endeavored’ to work)? — And she said: The man’s name with whom ‘asithi’ (I wrought) to-day is Boaz, (Ruth 2:19. It is of interest to note that Ramban refers to “the Targum of the Scroll of Esther” instead of ascribing it as he had done in the preceding reference to the Targum on the Book of Ezekiel. This indicates that Ramban held them to be of different authorship. Such indeed is the prevailing opinion in modern scholarship (see P. Churgin, Targum Kethuvim, pp. 140-151).) is translated in the Targum: ‘d’ishtadalith imei’ (with whom I ‘endeavored’). For all effort involving skill, with which a person attempts to achieve something, is called hishtadluth (endeavoring). Thus the Rabbis have said in the Mishnah: (Aboth 2:5.) “And where there are no men, hishtadeil (strive) to be a man.” And in the Gemara (Berachoth 58a.) we find: “A man should always yishtadeil (strive) to go out to welcome kings of Israel.” And in Scripture it is written: and he [i.e., the king] ‘mishtadar’ (labored) to rescue him, (Daniel 6:15.) — employing every skill [to save Daniel]. In my opinion, associated with this term [hishtadluth — striving] is the expression, rebellion ‘v’eshtadur’ (and sedition) have been made therein, (Ezra 4:19.) meaning, rebellion and “much striving.” For even in the Sacred Language these letters [the lamed and the reish of y’shadeil, y’shadeir] interchange. Thus we find: mazaloth (constellations) (II Kings 23:5.) and mazaroth; (Job 38:32.) niml’tzu (sweet), (Psalms 119:103.) and nimr’tzu (forcible); (Job 6:25.) ‘mifl’sei’ (the balancing of) the clouds, (Ibid., 37:16.) and ‘mifr’sei’ (the spreadings of) the clouds. (Ibid., 36:29.) Similarly in Aramaic: va’alu (and behold), (Daniel 7:8.) and va’aru. (Ibid., Verse 7.) Sharshereth (chain) (Further, 28:14.) is termed by the Sages shalsheleth. (Mikvaoth 10:5.) There are Mishnaic texts where it is written, “hishtadeir [instead of hishtadeil — both terms meaning ‘strive’] to be a man.” (Aboth 2:5.) It is for this reason that Onkelos renders ki y’fateh — arei y’shadeil (he will endeavor); he will attempt by devious means to invest the virgin with a sense of trust in him, by many ruses, until she submits to him. And since seduction may be achieved in many ways — sometimes with words, sometimes with money, sometimes by falsehood to mislead her, and sometimes even by truth, as when he really wishes to marry her — therefore Onkelos did not use a precise term for it, but rendered it as an expression of “endeavor.” However, in the verse, lest your heart be ‘yifteh,’ (Deuteronomy 11:16.) he used the other meaning and translated it: ‘dilma yit’ei,’ for there it means, “perhaps you will be misled.” And that which the Rabbi [Rashi] explained: “‘Mahor yimharenah’ (he shall surely pay a dowry for her) to be his wife — he shall assign her a marriage portion as is the manner of a man to his wife, by writing her a kethubah (marriage contract)” — this is not correct, for if the seducer marries her, he pays no penalty, (Verse 16, and Kethuboth 39a.) and if he divorces her after the marriage, there is no monetary obligation upon him by law of the Torah, since a kethubah is a matter of Rabbinic ordinance. Rather, mohar means gifts — the gifts which a man sends to his betrothed, jewels of silver and jewels of gold (Genesis 24:53.) and clothes for the wedding ceremony and marriage, these being called sivlonoth in the language of the Rabbis. (Kiddushin 50a.) Thus they said: “Mohari go back [upon the death of the wife].” (Baba Bathra 145a. This applies to a case where the marriage was not consumated (Even Ha’ezer 50, 4).) And Onkelos rendered the verse, And Shechem said… Multiply upon me greatly ‘mohar’ and gift (Genesis 34:12.) — “multiply upon me greatly moharin [in the plural] and gifts,” and Shechem would not have vowed to write Dinah many kethuboth. Instead, mohar means gifts, as I have explained. It is possible that the word is derived from the expression ‘m’heirah chushah’ (hasten, stay not), (I Samuel 20:38.) because the mohar is the first thing which hastens the wedding, as the groom hurries and sends these presents ahead of him in eager haste and then he comes to his father-in-law’s house to make the wedding or the feast, just as the Sages have spoken of “parties of sivlonoth” (when presents are presented to the betrothed). (Pesachim 49a.) The meaning of ‘mahor yimharenah’ to be his wife is then, that the seducer should send her presents and necessities for the wedding in order to become his wife. There is thus a hint here that both the seducer and the seduced can prevent the marriage, since Scripture uses such language rather than saying expressly that he should take her to him as his wife; for there is no commandment upon him to marry her unless he so desires, and if he does not want her to begin with, he is to pay fifty shekels of silver. (Deuteronomy 22:29. As explained further on in Ramban, this fine [stated in the case of a violator] applies also to a seducer — if he or she refuses marriage.) After that Scripture states (Verse 16 here.) that if the father refuses to give her unto him, he shall pay him money according to the ‘mohar’ which men give to virgins whom they marry. The reason for this fine is that the seducer has spoiled her reputation in the eyes of young men, thus the father will have to give her many presents and they will not give her any dowry, therefore it is right that the seducer should pay it. Our Rabbis have said (Mechilta here in the verse, and Kethuboth 10a.) that the amount of this mohar was determined by Scripture in the case of the violator to be fifty shekels of silver, (Deuteronomy 22:29.) the law of the violator and of the seducer being alike in this respect. Scripture, however, did differentiate between them in that in the case of the violator it says, and she shall be his wife… he may not put her away all his days, (Deuteronomy 22:29.) the reason [for this distinction between the violator, who must marry the maiden whom he has raped, and is forbidden to divorce her ever, and the seducer, who does not have to marry the seduced girl, but may instead pay the penalty mentioned in the Torah], is that usually it is handsome young men (Ezekiel 23:6.) who seduce virgins, and the beautiful daughters of prominent families, [in the hope of marrying them]. But since it is not proper that he should gain from his sin, [i.e., that the girl should have to marry the seducer], therefore He explained that he cannot marry her against their will [hers and that of her father], but instead must pay them. Also, because she too sinned in this matter, He did not impose it on him to have to marry her against his will, but instead it is enough if he pays the penalty [of the fifty shekels of silver], and if he marries her with her consent and that of her father, she has the same status in relation to him as all women, having no claim to a kethubah from him by law of the Torah [but only by Rabbinic ordinance]. Similarly, it is usually the sons of prominent families who rape the daughters of those less-known families who have no power against them. Therefore He said in the case of the violator, and she shall be his wife (Deuteronomy 22:29.) — against his will. And in the opinion of our Rabbis, (Kethuboth 39b.) there too [in the case of the violator] the maiden and her father can withhold consent, as it would not be correct that he should marry her against her will, and thus do her two evils. Sometimes she may be of a more honorable family than he, and it is inconceivable that she should be further disgraced by his sinful act. The fair law is thus that the decision as to the marriage of the raped maiden be left to her discretion and that of her father, and not to the violator; instead, [if she desires it] he must marry her against his will, (“Even if she be lame, even if she be blind, and even if she is afflicted with boils” (ibid., 39 a).) in order that violent men should not take liberties with the daughters of Israel. Now this law of seduction only applies to a na’arah, (A na’arah is a maiden between the age of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth — past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three years and a day to twelve years and a day.) as does the law of violation [which applies only to a girl between the ages of twelve years and a day, and twelve and a half], for there Scripture expressly stated, if a man find a ‘n’arah’ that is a virgin, (Deuteronomy 22:28.) but here He did not mention na’arah. The reason for this is that the term na’arah mentioned there [in the case of a violator], is used in order to exclude the bogereth [a woman who has passed the stage of maidenhood], who is considered an adult woman, whereas a girl who is a minor [between the ages of three years and a day and twelve years and a day], is also included under the terms of the law of violation. But here [in the case of seduction], it was not necessary to exclude a bogereth, for it is self-understood that one who seduces a bogereth pays nothing, as he did it with her mature consent. Besides, a father has no rights at all in his daughter after the days of her maidenhood, as it is written, ‘bin’ureihah’ (in her maidenhood) in her father’s house, (Numbers 30:17.) and here He said, If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, (Verse 16 here.) thus indicating that he [the father] can give her to him as a wife, seeing that he has the authority to take her betrothal-money, and this applies only when she is a minor or a na’arah, (A na’arah is a maiden between the age of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth — past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three years and a day to twelve years and a day.) just as the Rabbis interpreted: (Kiddushin 3b.) “All benefits which accrue during maidenhood belong to her father.” (There was no need for Scripture here to write na’arah to exclude a bogereth from the law of seduction, since the verse if her father utterly refuse etc. could not possibly speak of a bogereth. Hence it is self-understood that the section deals here with a na’arah, and there was no need to mention it. But in the case of violation etc.) But in the case of a violation it was necessary to write na’arah, in order to exclude a bogereth (A na’arah is a maiden between the age of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth — past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three years and a day to twelve years and a day.) from that law, because we might have thought that if she were a bogereth he should pay the fifty shekels of silver to her, [instead of to her father; it was therefore necessary to state] that it is a Scriptural decree [that if she is a bogereth he is free from that penalty], the reason being that since she is in full control of herself, she should guard herself against such a mishap. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained mohar as being an expression of “binding” [that he should bind her to him as a wife], similar in usage to the verse, Let the idols of them be multiplied ‘acheir maharu’ (who bind themselves to another god). (Psalms 16:4. It is generally translated: “that make suit unto another.” According to Ibn Ezra: “that bind (or connect) themselves with another god.” Ramban’s own interpretation of that verse follows later in the text.) But this is not correct; instead, the meaning of mohar is as I have explained it on the basis of the words of our Rabbis, of blessed memory. And in my opinion acheir maharu (Psalms 16:4. It is generally translated: “that make suit unto another.” According to Ibn Ezra: “that bind (or connect) themselves with another god.” Ramban’s own interpretation of that verse follows later in the text.) means, “those who are ‘hasty’ in thought, [from the root maheir — fast] and follow another god precipitately, without consideration and without knowledge.” In the writings of the grammarians (R’dak in Sefer Hashorashim, root acheir.) [acheir maharu is explained as meaning]: “those who give mohar (gifts) to another god,” meaning that they bring him sacrifice and offering.
נתתי אלף כסף, the distant past tense, i.e. “I had given it “ at the very beginning. The same sequence occurred when Pharaoh abducted Sarah, and the same procedure was offered by Shechem and Chamor in Genesis 34,12 as part of the offer to marry Dinah. Also, in Genesis 24,53 we find Eliezer making such generous gifts prior to obtaining Lavan’s consent for Rivkah to marry Yitzchok.
“The seducer only if he divorces her,” etc. Rav Ḥisda said, if he does not want to keep her. But if he decides to keep her, he does not give anything. Rebbi Ismael stated: “He should weigh silver appropriate for the bride-price of virgins (Ex. 22:16, speaking of the seducer. In the Babli, 29b, R. Simeon ben Laqish argues differently.) ”, which indicates that his obligation is for him that of bride-price, and bride-price is the ketubah (This implies that all his obligations are transformed into ketubah obligations due at the dissolution of the marriage; not only the 200 zuz basic fee but also the sums fixed for shame and diminution of value.) ; as it also says (Gen. 34:12.) “add for me much bride-price and gifts.”
Increase greatly the amount I must pay for the bridal dowry and gifts. I will give whatever you say, but give me the girl for a wife.
Dotation and marriage portion.
Multiply upon me greatly dowry and gift, and I will give as you shall tell me; only give me the damsel to wife.
| וַיַּעֲנ֨וּ בְנֵֽי־יַעֲקֹ֜ב אֶת־שְׁכֶ֨ם וְאֶת־חֲמ֥וֹר אָבִ֛יו בְּמִרְמָ֖ה וַיְדַבֵּ֑רוּ אֲשֶׁ֣ר טִמֵּ֔א אֵ֖ת דִּינָ֥ה אֲחֹתָֽם׃ | 13 J | Jacob’s sons answered Shechem and his father Hamor—speaking with guile because he had defiled their sister Dinah— |
במרמה, “with slyness;” the sons of Yaakov expected that only Sh’chem and his father Chamor would agree to this condition to circumcise themselves on account of their love for the girl (but they never expected that all the males of the city would do so). They reasoned that seeing that not all the males in that city would perform circumcision on themselves, they would be free to take their revenge on them. This is the mirmah that the Torah speaks about here. At any rate they were fully justified to attack the population of that city as we will explain shortly.
... This is difficult: If [only] Shechem sinned, what was the sin of the [rest of the] city [for which they deserved] to die? Rambam (Hilchot Melachim 9:14) answered that Noachides are commanded to set up courts, and [for]any sin which they violate, they are killed. Here, they witnessed the evil act [of Shechem kidnapping Dinah] and did not judge him. For this they deserved to die, for they failed to judge him. But truthfully, these words are surprising, for how could they have judged the son of their prince, since they feared him? Even though they are commanded to judge, that is when they can judge, but “G-d exempts one who is under duress” (Bava Kama 28b), and how could they have judged him? It appears that there is no difficulty [explaining why all the males in Shechem deserved to die], because [a war between] two nations is different. The Jewish people and the Canaanites are considered two nations, as it is written “and we will be one nation” (Bereishit 34:16), [implying that] initially they were not considered one nation. Therefore they were permitted to fight, like any nation who fights another nation, which the Torah permits. Even though the Torah says, “When you draw near to a city to fight it, you shall offer peace” (Devarim 20:10), that applies when they have done nothing to Israel. When they have acted against Israel, as they did here when they breached them to commit an evil act, then even though only one of them sinned, since he is part of the nation and since they instigated, it is permitted to avenge this from all of them. This is so with all wars which they encountered, like “Attack the Midianites” (Bamidbar 25:17). Even though there were many who had done nothing, this is not a [valid] distinction. Since they were members of the nation who acted wickedly against [the Jewish people], it was permitted to engage [all the Midianites] in war, and such is the case with all wars.
The sons … answered … with guile. Although their anger was provoked primarily by Shechem’s acts of kidnapping and rape, they mentioned only his lack of circumcision. This deceived him into thinking that rectifying this would satisfy them.
ויענו בני יעקב, The sons of Jacob replied, etc. We have to understand exactly what wisdom Onkelos attributes to Jacob's sons when he translates the word במרמה as "with wisdom" instead of as "with guile." At first glance it appears that the sons of Jacob simply meant to deceive Chamor and Shechem. Besides, what is meant by וידברו אשר טמא את דינה?
Actually, the cleverness of the sons when they answered Chamor במרמה consisted in that they answered him in such a way that their proposal seemed extremely plausible. Shechem and Chamor did not feel that they needed to be on guard against reprisals. The brothers lulled Chamor into a false sense of security by the very fact that they threatened to take some action if their proposal was not accepted; they thus made him believe that if the town accepted the proposal of mass circumcision the whole chapter of the rape would be closed. The word וידברו, a term describing harsh words, indicates that the brothers first harped on the fact that their sister had been sullied. By doing so they ensured that Chamor and Shechem could not accuse them of giving conflicting signals, i.e. suggesting intermarriage while at the same time condemning the people of Shechem for their immoral behaviour.
They then continued speaking in a friendly tone, saying לא נוכל, "we cannot intermarry, etc.," suggesting that they would like to but could not under existing conditions, i.e. while the males of Shechem remained uncircumcised. When they described the condition of the local inhabitants as אשר יש לו ערלה, they meant that whereas the local people were not required to circumcise themselves, it was not enough for Chamor or Chamor and Shechem alone to perform circumcision on themselves. In fact, even if they were to circumcise themselves as a voluntary act they would still be regarded by Jews as ערלים, seeing they did not fulfil a commandment by removing their foreskin.
They would consider intermarriage with the people of Shechem and the merging of the two clans only on condition that the entire male population of Shechem would be circumcised. They emphasised this in order to forestall an offer by Chamor and Shechem to circumcise only themselves and their future male offspring. The brother's entire purpose was to facilitate killing the people of Shechem with a minimum of resistance on the part of the latter. They worded their conditions so that they would not be suspected of merely tricking the people of Shechem.
ויענו בני יעקב את שכם ואת חמור אביו במרמה, “the sons of Yaakov answered Shechem and his father Chamor cleverly.” It would have been appropriate for their father Yaakov to conduct these negotiations. After all, they were in their father’s presence and they should have kept quiet. However, seeing that they felt that their honor had been besmirched and they therefore had a vested interest in the matter they did not want their father to take part in the conversation at all. When they spoke up in lieu of their father they meant to honor him. Nachmanides writes as follows: seeing that what the brothers answered was at the advice of their father and with his consent, why did Yaakov afterwards become angry at Shimon and Levi when he said “you have caused me anguish?” He had been aware that they had spoken cleverly, i.e. misleadingly, in order to succeed in obtaining Dinah’s release. Besides, Yaakov had known full well that there was no question of Dinah marrying the man who had raped her and defiled her! All the brothers had answered with the same מרמה, deceitfulness, not just Shimon and Levi. Whereas Shimon and Levi carried out the retribution by themselves their father cursed only the anger of these two brothers who had carried out the deed. Actually, the deceit had consisted in the brothers leading Chamor and Shechem to believe that if they would all circumcise themselves they would be ready to intermarry. They had assumed that the people of Shechem would never allow their leader to go through with such a plan. If, by chance, they would listen to their leaders and all circumcise themselves they would then attack the town on the third day when the inhabitants were defenseless. They would then take their sister and free her. This part of the plan enjoyed a consensus and the blessing of Yaakov. When Shimon and Levi decided to kill all the menfolk this was something which had not been part of the original plan and this aroused Yaakov’s displeasure.
ויענו בני יעקב, Yaakov himself did not utter a single word of falsehood or deceit, even though seeing that he had been the injured party he could have excused such conduct. He left the matter in his sons’ care and if they used subterfuge he did not interfere. The brothers did not consider their conduct as reprehensible for people who had defiled their sister and were still holding her captive.
AND THE SONS OF JACOB ANSWERED SHECHEM AND HAMOR HIS FATHER WITH SUBTLETY. Now Hamor and Shechem spoke to her father and her brothers, (Verse 11 here.) but the patriarch did not answer them at all as his sons spoke in his place on this matter out of respect for him for since the affair was a source of shame to them, they did not want him to speak about it at all. There is a question which may be raised here. It would appear that they answered with the concurrence of her father and his advice for they were in his presence, and it was he who understood the answer which they spoke with subtlety, and, if so, why was he angry afterwards? (Further, Verse 30. See also Ramban further, 49:5.) Moreover, it is inconceivable that Jacob would have consented to give his daughter in marriage to a Canaanite who had defiled her. Now surely all the brothers gave that answer with subtlety, while Simeon and Levi alone executed the deed, and the father cursed only their wrath. (Genesis 49:7.) [But if all the brothers shared responsibility for the answer and the plan, why did Jacob single out only Simeon and Levi for chastisement?] The answer is that the craftiness lay in their saying that every male of theirs be circumcised, (Verse 15 here.) as they thought that the people of the city will not consent to it. Even if perchance they will listen to their prince and they will all become circumcised, they will come on the third day, when they were in pain, (Verse 25 here.) and will take their daughter (“Daughter.” in Tur: “sister.”) from the house of Shechem. Now this was the advice of all the brothers and with the permission of their father, but Simeon and Levi wanted to take revenge of them and so they killed all the men of the city. It is possible that Jacob’s anger in cursing their wrath (Genesis 49:7.) was because they killed the men of the city who had committed no sin against him; they should have killed Shechem alone. It is this which Scripture says, And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father with subtlety, and spoke, because he had defiled Dinah their sister, for they all agreed to speak to him craftily because of the base deed which he had done to them. Now many people ask: “But how did the righteous sons of Jacob commit this deed, spilling innocent blood?” The Rabbi (Moshe ben Maimon) answered in his Book of Judges, (Hilchoth Melachim, IX, 14, with slight textual changes. The Book of Judges is the last of the fourteen books which comprise Maimonides’ great life work: The Mishneh Torah, or Yad Hachazakah.) saying that “sons of Noah” (Or “a Noachide,” a term denoting the human race. See Seder Bereshith, Note 222.) are commanded concerning Laws, and thus they are required to appoint judges in each and every district to give judgment concerning their six commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) which are obligatory upon all mankind. “And a Noachide who transgresses one of them is subject to the death-penalty by the sword. If he sees a person transgressing one of these seven (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) laws and does not bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the same death-penalty. It was on account of this that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem committed an act of robbery and they saw and knew of it, but they did not bring him to trial.” But these words do not appear to me to be correct for if so, our father Jacob should have been the first to obtain the merit of causing their death, and if he was afraid of them, why was he angry at his sons and why did he curse their wrath a long time after that and punish them by dividing them and scattering them in Israel? (Genesis 49:7.) Were they not meritorious, fulfilling a commandment and trusting in G-d Who saved them? In my opinion, the meaning of “Laws” which the Rabbis have counted among their seven Noachidic commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) is not just that they are to appoint judges in each and every district, but He commanded them concerning the laws of theft, overcharge, wronging, and a hired man’s wages; the laws of guardians of property, forceful violation of a woman, seduction, principles of damage and wounding a fellowman; laws of creditors and debtors, and laws of buying and selling, and their like, similar in scope to the laws with which Israel was charged, and involving the death-penalty for stealing, wronging or violating or seducing the daughter of his fellowman, or kindling his stack, or wounding him, and their like. And it is also included in this commandment that they appoint judges for each and every city, just as Israel was commanded to do, (Deuteronomy 16:18.) but if they failed to do so they are free of the death-penalty since this is a positive precept of theirs [and failing to fulfill a positive precept does not incur the death-penalty]. The Rabbis have only said: (Sanhedrin 57a.) “For violation of their admonishments there is the death-penalty,” and only a prohibition against doing something is called an “admonishment.” And such is the purport of the Gemara in Tractate Sanhedrin. (58b. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 192.) And in the Jerusalem Talmud (Not found in our editions. See my Hebrew commentary, ibid.) they have said: “With respect to Noachide laws, a judge who perverts justice is to be slain. If he took a bribe he is to be slain. With respect to Jewish laws, [if after having heard both parties] you know perfectly well what the proper legal decision should be, you are not permitted to withdraw from the case without rendering a decision, and if you know that it is not perfectly clear to you, you may withdraw from the case. But with respect to their laws, even though you know the law perfectly well you may withdraw from it.” From this it would appear that a non-Jewish judge may say to the litigants, “I am not beholden to you,” for it is only in Israel that there is an additional admonishment — “Lo thaguru’ (ye shall not be afraid) of the face of any man, (Deuteronomy 1:17.) meaning, “You shall not gather in, [i.e., restrain], your words before any man” (Sanhedrin 6b. This explanation is based upon the common root of the words thaguru and ogeir (gathering) as in the expression, gathering in summer, (Proverbs 10:5).) — and surely he is not to be slain for failing to make himself chief, overseer, or ruler (Proverbs 6:7. ) in order to judge superiors. [Ramban thus disagrees with Rambam, who writes that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty by not having brought Shechem to justice.] Moreover, why does the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] have to seek to establish their guilt? Were not the people of Shechem and all seven nations (Deuteronomy 7:1.) idol worshippers, perpetrators of unchaste acts, and practitioners of all things that are abominable to G-d? In many places Scripture loudly proclaims concerning them: Upon the high mountains, and upon their hills, and under every leafy tree, etc.; (Ibid., 12:2.) Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations, etc.? (Ibid., 18:9.) For all these abominations have the men of the land done, etc. (Leviticus 18:27.) However, it was not the responsibility of Jacob and his sons to bring them to justice. But the matter of Shechem was that the people of Shechem were wicked [by virtue of their violation of the seven Noachide laws] (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) and had thereby forfeited their lives. Therefore Jacob’s sons wanted to take vengeance of them with a vengeful sword, and so they killed the king and all the men of his city who were his subjects, obeying his commands. The covenant represented by the circumcision of the inhabitants of Shechem had no validity in the eyes of Jacob’s sons for it was done to curry favor with their master [and did not represent a genuine conversion]. But Jacob told them here that they had placed him in danger, as it is said, You have troubled me, to make me odious, (Verse 30 here.) and there, (Genesis 49:7.) [i.e., at the time he blessed the other children], he cursed the wrath of Simeon and Levi for they had done violence to the men of the city whom they had told in his presence, And we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. (Verse 16 here.) They would have chosen to believe in G-d and trust their word, and perhaps they might have indeed returned to G-d and thus Simeon and Levi killed them without cause for the people had done them no evil at all. It is this which Jacob said, Weapons of violence are their kinship. (Genesis, 49:5.) And if we are to believe in the book, ‘The Wars of the Sons of Jacob,’ (This is the Midrash Vayisu. See Eisenstein, Otzar Midrashim, p. 157, and L. Ginzberg’s, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. I, pp. 404-411.) their father’s fear was due to the fact that the neighbors of Shechem gathered together and waged three major wars against them, and were it not for their father who also donned his weapons and warred against them, they would have been in danger, as is related in that book. Our Rabbis have mentioned something of this conflict in their commentary on the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow. (Further, 48:22.) They said, (As quoted here, the comment appears in Rashi, ibid. See also Bereshith Rabbah 80:9.) “All the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them, and Jacob donned his weapons to war against them,” just as Rashi writes there. (Further, 48:22.) Scripture, however, is brief about this because it was a hidden miracle, (See Ramban above, 17:1. ) for the sons of Jacob were valiant men, and it appeared as if their own arm saved them. (Psalms 44:4.) Scripture is similarly brief about the matter of Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees, (See Ramban above, 11:58.) and it did not at all mention Esau’s wars with the Horites. Instead, Scripture mentions here that there was the terror of G-d upon the cities that were round them, (Further, 35:5.) and they did not all assemble to pursue after the sons of Jacob (Further, 35:5.) for they would have fallen upon them as the sand which is on the sea-shore in multitude. (I Samuel 13:5.) And this is the meaning of the terror of G-d, (Further, 35:5.) for the terror and dread (See Exodus 15:16.) of the military prowess they had seen fell upon them. Therefore Scripture says, And Jacob came to Luz… he and all the people that were with him, (Further, 35:6.) in order to inform us that not one man among them or their servants was lost in warfare. (See Numbers 31:49.)
במרמה WITH GUILE — cleverly
אשר טמא BECAUSE HE HAD DEFILED — Scripture (the Sacred Historian) says that there was no deception (מרמה) in this because he had defiled Dinah their sister (Genesis Rabbah 80:8).
Jakobs Söhne sprachen vor dem alten Vater, weil sie etwas sprechen wollten, was nicht ganz mit der jüdischen Ehre und Geradheit übereinstimmte. War ein Makel daran, so sollte der nur auf sie fallen können. Für sich waren sie ganz beruhigt, denn es war ja der, der טמא את דינה, und um sie aus seinen Klauen zu retten, hielten sie sich zu allem berechtigt. Seine Vorspiegelungen zogen sie gar nicht in Erwägung.
במרמה, they demanded that the people circumcise themselves expecting them to refuse. Alternatively, they thought that Shechem and Chamor, although prepared themselves to circumcise themselves, would not be able to convince the townsfolk to follow their example.
וידברו, אשר טמא; they said that the kind of ipso facto voluntary circumcision which Shechem and his father were willing to perform on themselves was not relevant after Shechem had already defiled their sister. They considered this as in the category of אתנן זונה, offering the price paid to a whore as a sacrifice on G’d’s altar.
Jacob himself did not respond. This might have been due to his grief over the incident, or he had possibly developed a passive personality over the years, perhaps as a result of his encounter with the angel. The sons of Jacob answered Shekhem and Hamor his father with guile, and spoke in their father’s name. They spoke with cunning, as he, Shekhem, had defiled Dina their sister. In contrast to Shekhem and Hamor, who ignored the rape and acted as though they were presenting a normal marriage proposal, Jacob’s sons emphasized the insult, so that the severity of the harm would be taken into account in the subsequent agreement.
ויענו בני יעקב את שכם ואת חמור אביו במרמה, “the sons of Yaakov answered Shechem and his father Chamor speaking with cleverness, etc.” Nachmanides writes that although both Chamor and Shechem had addressed both Yaakov and his sons, only the sons replied, Yaakov remaining totally silent. Seeing that they felt that their father had been greatly insulted by what happened, they did not want him to get involved in the discussion at all. Nachmanides’ explanation presents us with a problem, as it appears from the plain text as if the sons of Yaakov had spoken at the instigation of their father and with his complete approval. In fact, Yaakov appears to have been fully aware of the intent of the brothers for the men of Shechem to become so weakened by their circumcision that they could be killed without putting up a fight. Seeing that the brothers said what they said in Yaakov’s presence, we must assume that their answer was inspired by their father. What is difficult to understand is Yaakov’s anger at Shimon and Levi’s conduct afterwards! Furthermore, it is quite inconceivable that Yaakov would give his consent to Dinah being married to a Canaanite, especially to a Canaanite who had already defiled her before marriage! There can be no question that the entire family was united in their answer and the reason for their answer. If so, why was Yaakov angry only at Shimon and Levi? The only thing that was objectionable was that Shimon and Levi, in their desire to avenge their sister’s rape, vented their rage on all the citizens of the town, instead of restricting themselves to punishing only Shechem. We must understand that when the verse tells us “they answered במרמה, “with cleverness,” this did not refer to their intention at that time to kill the whole town but they contemplated one of two scenarios unfolding. 1) If the people of Shechem would agree to circumcise themselves, this would afford the brothers an opportunity to rescue their sister without encountering much opposition due to the weakened state of the males of that city. 2) If the people would refuse to circumcise themselves. Shechem would then be obliged to release Dinah. Failing his doing so, they would kill Shechem only. Another difficulty in the whole episode is what made the righteous sons of Yaakov spill innocent blood? Maimonides, addressing this problem, argues that mankind had been obliged to institute a proper judiciary and to try and convict people who had broken their laws by the death penalty. Whenever a person who had committed a violation of the seven Noachide laws went untried and unpunished, every member of society had the right or duty to execute such a person by the sword. Seeing that all the people of Shechem had condoned Dinah’s rape by not trying Shechem, Shimon and Levi did not do anything wrong in killing them.. Although most of the 7 Noachide commandments are negative commandments, i.e. “don’ts,” the commandment to have a judiciary is a positive commandment, and as such the principle of the existence of the commandment is equivalent to the sinner having been forewarned and exposed himself to execution by violating the commandment does not apply here. Failure to establish courts, while a violation of the commandment, does not result in the violator becoming guilty of the death penalty. After all, the inhabitants of the land of Canaan were guilty of many severe sins such as idolatry, incest etc., but this did not authorize Yaakov’s sons to play G’d’s executioner. On the other hand, raping one of their family members was a crime committed directly against Yaakov’s family, and this is why they were within their rights, basically, to avenge this wrong when there was no court that would do so. The people of Shechem were blindly obedient to their leader, not caring that by doing so they breached the covenant G’d had made with mankind after the deluge, a covenant based on the agreement to observe the 7 Noachide commandments that apply uniformly to all of mankind. Yaakov’s anger was based solely on his sons having exposed him to the danger of being killed by hugely superior forces of the surrounding region. He also was angry at the brothers having violated their own undertaking to live peacefully with these people on condition that they circumcise their males, a condition which they had fulfilled. These people had not harmed them individually or collectively at all, and their dishonouring their promise would ruin Yaakov’s reputation in the entire region.
Rabad disagrees with Rambam regarding the above case and states that the slave is to be sold to a non-Jew but is not to be executed. Rabbi Joseph Rosen, in his commentary on the Rambam, Ẓafnat Pa'aneaḥ, explains Rabad's position in the following manner: with the lapse of the Sanhedrin and the abrogation of capital punishment among Jews, Jews can no longer impose capital punishment upon non-Jews, even though the latter remain obligated to do so in administering their own system of law. Moreover, Ramban, in his commentary on Genesis 34:13, disagrees with Rambam and states that there is no statutory obligation requiring non-Jews to impose punishment upon transgressors. Imposition of capital punishment, he maintains, is discretionary under the Noachide Code. The injunction, "Thou shall not stand in fear of a man," does forbid a member of the Bet Din to refuse to sit in judgment; however this admonition applies only to instances when the defendant is a Jew. Since in Ramban's opinion a non-Jew, if he so desires, may decline to sit in judgment, it follows, according to this view, that Jewish courts have the same prerogative.
Jewish thought—and law—is based upon an entirely different set of premises. Man is bound by divinely imposed imperatives which oblige him to be concerned with the needs of his fellow. Some of these obligations are entirely personal. Others either could not possibly be discharged by any person acting independently or, if directed to individuals, would constitute an inordinate burden. Hence such obligations become the responsibility of society at large. According to Nachmanides, (Commentary on the Bible, Gen. 34:13.) the very first divinely commanded system of law, the Noachide Code, contains a single positive commandment, dinim, which translates into a general obligation to promulgate laws and to establish standards regulating the manifold areas of interpersonal intercourse. Jewish law recognizes not only the reciprocal dependency of members of the human race, but also that the human condition requires that the governing authority, acting as the representative of society as a whole, be endowed with the broad powers necessary for the promotion of social welfare.
As has been shown earlier, non-Jews may be given instruction with regard to matters pertaining to the Noachide Code. (See above, note 6.) Rabbi Weinberg rules that lectures before a non-Jewish audience on matters of jurisprudence are unquestionably permissible since non-Jews are bound to fulfill the commandment of dinin, which is one of the Seven Noachide Commandments, and encompasses Torah laws relating to all matters pertaining to ownership of property and financial liability. (The specific nature of the miẓvah of dinin is the subject of controversy between Rambam and Ramban. Ramban, in his commentary on the Bible, Genesis 34:13, understands the commandment as a general obligation with regard to the establishment of laws and regulations governing commercial and interpersonal behavior essential to the maintenance of a social order, e.g., laws governing theft, fraud, prompt payment of wages, bailment, etc. Teshuvot Rema, no. 10 and Teshuvot Ḥatam Sofer, VI, no. 14, maintain that in these areas Jewish law is incorporated in the Noachide Code in all its details by virtue of the commandment concerning dinin. Rambam understands dinin as binding Noachides to punish transgressors for infractions of the first six Noachide commandments. Nevertheless, Ḥatam Sofer, basing himself upon Teshuvot Rema, avers that Rambam does not reject as binding upon Noachides the obligations recognized by Ramban under the rubric of dinin. Ḥatam Sofer maintains that, according to Rambam, all such matters are subsumed under the commandment banning theft. While Rabbi Weinberg’s reference to dinin is obviously a reference to Ramban’s position as understood by Teshuvot Rema and Teshuvot Ḥatam Sofer, it is also substantively reflective of Ḥatam Sofer’s understanding of Rambam’s position regarding the normative obligations of Noachides, although for Rambam such obligations flow from the prohibition against theft rather than from the miẓvah of dinin. It should, however, be noted that R. Naphtali Zevi Yehudah Berlin, Ha‘amek She’elah, She’ilta 2:3, understands Ramban to be of the opinion that, while non-Jews are commanded to establish a system of jurisprudence and tort liability, the detailed formulation of such a system is left to their discretion and need not reflect the provisions of Torah law which are binding upon Jews. This is also the position of R. Iser Zalman Meltzer, Even he-Azel, Hilkhot Malveh ve-Loveh 27:1.)
The obligations and powers of non-Jewish courts are markedly different. Gentiles are not bound by the 613 commandments revealed to Jews at Sinai but are obligated to obey the "Seven Commandments of the Sons of Noah." The Noachide Code is primarily restrictive rather than prescriptive in nature and bans reprehensible activities such as murder, theft, sexual immorality, etc. The last in this series of commandments is known as "dinin." The specific nature of this precept is the subject of disagreement among early rabbinic authorities. Ramban, in his commentary on the Bible, Genesis 34:13, understands this commandment as a general obligation with regard to the establishment of laws and regulations essential to the maintenance of a social order, e.g., laws governing commerce and interpersonal behavior, laws banning theft and fraud, laws regulating payment of wages, bailment, etc. (Teshuvot Rema, no. 10 and Teshuvot Ḥatam Sofer, VI, no. 14, maintain that in these areas Jewish law in all its details is incorporated in the Noachide Code by virtue of the commandment concerning dinin; Ha‘amek She’elah, She’ilta 2:3, asserts that while non-Jews are commanded to establish a system of jurisprudence, the detailed regulations of such a system are left to their discretion. Even he-Azel, Hilkhot Malveh ve-Loveh 27:1 appears to accept the latter view.) Rambam understands the substance of this commandment to be significantly different. Rambam, Hilkhot Melakhim 9:14, formulates this obligation as follows:
Rambam's position may be understood on the basis of a responsum authored by Rabbi Moses Sofer, Teshuvot Hatam Sofer, Likkutim, no. 14. The primary question addressed by Hatam Sofer in that responsum is whether a non-Jewish judge may accept a bribe. His response is that, although the biblical injunction "Thou shalt not take a bribe" (Deuteronomy 16:19.) is addressed to Jews and not to Noahides, nevertheless, a Noahide is commanded to render a true and just verdict and hence he dare not accept a bribe for purposes of subverting justice. (For further discussion of bribery under the Noahide Code see Ramban, Commentary on the Bible, Genesis 34:13; R. Joseph Saul Nathanson, Teshuvot Sho’el u-Meshiv, Mahadura Kamma, I, no. 230; Encyclopedia Talmudit, vol. III, p. 355, note 256; R. Bernard Chavel, Peirush Ramban al ha-Torah, I, 192, s.v. u-be-Yerushalmi; R. Jonathan Eibeschutz, Urim ve-Tumim 9:1; R. Joshua Leib Diskin, Teshuvot Maharil Diskin, II, Kuntres Aḥaron, no. 5, sec. 223.) A judge who knowingly renders an unjust judgment, opines Hatam Sofer, is guilty of a capital crime under the Noahide Code. Accordingly, he rules that a Jew who presents a bribe to a non-Jewish judge, not only wrongs his adversary, but is also guilty of "placing a stumbling-block before the blind" in causing the judge to issue an unjust decision. Hatam Sofer then proceeds to distinguish between civil actions and criminal proceedings. Since bribery of a gentile is forbidden only if the bribe is designed to assure a favorable judgment without regard to the merits of the case, a gift designed to assure only impartial deliberation and expeditious disposition of the case is not prohibited. (In contradistinction to the law governing Noahide judges, a Jew may not accept a gift from a litigant even if it is only of trivial value, even if any attempt to influence the verdict is expressly disavowed, and even if gifts of equal value are presented by both parties. See Rambam, Hilkhot Sanhedrin 23:1 and 23:5.) Accordingly, rules Hatam Sofer, a bribe designed to assure acquittal in a criminal proceeding cannot be forbidden since
Yet another theory explaining the principle dina de-malkhuta dina is advanced by Rashi in his commentary on Gittin 9b. The Mishnah declares that all civil instruments executed by non-Jewish courts are valid for purposes of Jewish law even though the attesting witnesses are gentiles. Included in that category are deeds to real property that serve to give legal effect to the transfer and which, ostensively, must be signed by competent Jewish witnesses to do so. Bills of divorce similarly executed are explicitly declared by the Mishnah to be invalid, presumably because of the absence of qualified attesting witnesses. Rashi endeavors to resolve the problem by indicating that, although gentiles are not subject to the provisions of biblical law concerning divorce, they are bound by the Noahide Code which includes a commandment concerning "dinin." Rambam, Hilkhot Melakhim 9:14, defines dinin as an obligation to enforce the other provisions of the Noahide Code by appointing judges and other law enforcement officials while Ramban, Commentary on the Bible, Genesis 34:13, defines "dinin" as commanding the establishment of an ordered system of jurisprudence for the governance of financial, commercial and interpersonal relationships.
The Ramban (commentary to Bereishit 34:13 and 49:5-6) strongly disagrees with the Rambam’s opinion. While he believes that Shimon and Levi were justified in killing Shechem and Chamor, he argues that the killing of the other males of Shechem was entirely unjustified. The Ramban presents two basic arguments for his position. Firstly, the residents of Shechem did nothing wrong to Yaakov’s family. The Ramban asserts that the residents of an area do not deserve death for failure to control the evil actions of their leader. He adds that even if the people did in fact deserve to die due to other violations of the Noahide laws, Shimon and Levi were not authorized to execute such punishment.
The Maharal (Gur Aryeh to Bereishit 34:13) adopts a compromise approach between the Rambam and the Ramban. On the one hand, he agrees with the Ramban that the people of Shechem cannot be held accountable for the actions of their leader, arguing that their failure to execute dinim was due to coercion by their leaders.
A nochri may be killed for failing to run a just society (dinim). The Rambam (Hilchot Melachim 9:14), on this basis, justifies Shimon and Levi’s assassination of all of the males in Shechem (Breishit 34). The Rambam believes that all of the males in the city were guilty of failing to punish those who kidnapped and imprisoned Dinah. The Ramban (Breishit 34:13 and 49:5-6), who disagrees with the Rambam’s evaluation of this episode, does not criticize the Rambam regarding this particular point. (For a more thorough discussion of this topic and its halachic implications, see Gray Matter 3:211-223.) It seems that he agrees that a legitimate authority may hold a nochri responsible to do whatever is in his power to help the functioning of a just society, which includes insuring that innocent people are not murdered. Thus, a legitimate authority may torture an individual in order to extract information that will insure justice by preventing murder.
Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem and Ḥamor his father with guile, and spoke, as he had defiled Dina their sister” (Genesis 34:13). “Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem…” – what do you think, that there is deceit here? The Divine Spirit says: “As he had defiled Dina their sister…” “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace for us” (Genesis 33:14). “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace” – Rabbi Neḥemya said: Where do we find that the foreskin is called disgrace? It is from here, as it is stated: “As it is a disgrace.” “Are their livestock and their property and all their animals not ours? We only must accede to them, and they will live with us” (Genesis 34:23). “Their livestock and their property” – they thought to despoil them, and were despoiled. “All who emerged from the gate of his city heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son; every male, all who emerged from the gate of his city, was circumcised” (Genesis 34:24). “[They] heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son…” – one of them would enter the city bearing his burden, and they would say to him: ‘Go and be circumcised.’ He would say: ‘Shekhem is marrying and Magbai is circumcised?’ (Magbai is a generic name. Just because Shekhem is marrying, I should get circumcised?)
This story is a very ancient legend, also mentioned in the Book of Jubilees (chapter 37) which was composed by a Jew from Alexandria during the Second Temple period. There, as in Midrash Vayisu, it is said that Jacob himself killed Esau in his battle against him with the help of his sons. However, in the Book of Jasher, it is narrated that this battle took place after Jacob's death and then Esau was killed to fulfill Rebecca's prophecy "Why should I be bereft of both of you on one day?", and that Judah was his slayer. Similarly, this is described in the Jerusalem Talmud (Ketubot chapter 1 and Gittin chapter 5), with variations in the Babylonian Talmud (Sotah 13), in the Sifrei Devarim chapter 33, in Targum Jonathan Genesis 3, in Pirkei De-Rabbi Eliezer (chapter 39), in Midrash Shocher Tov (Psalms 18), where it is said that Esau's death was at the hands of Hushim, the son of Dan. Nevertheless, even in the Vayisu narrative, it is not entirely clear, as it says that Jacob wounded him, and Esau died from his wounds in the town of Arudin, and some say he did not die there. The legend of this war is in external books like the "Wills of the Twelve Tribes", specifically in "Judah's Will" (see Kautzsch Apocrypha vol. 2 pages 97, 107, 471), which originate from the Essenian scholars of Alexandria, and are not considered credible, so they were not accepted by our sages. Regarding this, Ramban (Nachmanides) said: "If we believe in the Book of the Wars of the Sons of Jacob (Midrash Vayisu)...", indicating that he did not see it as authoritative and had doubts about its veracity.
And Jacob prosecuted his journey toward Haran, and he reached Mount Moriah, and he tarried there over night near the city of Luz. And the Lord appeared there unto Jacob that night, and he said unto him: I am the Lord, the God of Abraham, thy father, and the God of Isaac, the land wherein thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; and behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and I will cause thy enemies to fall down before thee, and when they shall wage war against thee they shall never pre vail over thee; and I will bring thee back unto this land in joy and gladness, with children and with great wealth. And when Jacob awoke from his sleep he was exceedingly joyful at the vision which he had seen, and he called the name of that place Bethel. And Jacob arose from that place much rejoiced, and when he walked his feet felt light to him for gladness, and he went thence to the land of the sons of the East, and he came to Haran and seated himself by the shepherd's well; and he met there several men coming from Haran to feed their sheep, and Jacob inquired of them concerning their home, and they said: We are from Haran; and he said unto them: Know ye Laban, son of Nahor? and they said: We know him, and behold, Rachel, his daughter, cometh with the sheep of her father. And while he yet spake with them Rachel came with her father's sheep, for she was a shepherdess. And Jacob saw Rachel, the daughter of Laban, his mother's brother, and he kissed her and lifted up his voice and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was Rebekah’s son, her father's sister, and Rachel ran and told it to her father. And Jacob wept exceedingly because he had nothing whatsoever to bring unto the house of Laban. And when Laban heard of the arrival of Jacob, his sister's son, he ran to meet him, and he embraced him, and kissed him, and "brought him to his house, and he gave him meat and he ate. And Jacob told him all that his brother Esau had done unto him, and what his son Eliphaz did unto him on his journey. And Jacob abode at Laban's house the space of a month, eating and drinking in the house of Laban. And finally Laban said unto Jacob: Tell me what shall thy wages be, for why shouldst thou serve me for naught? And Laban had no sons, only daughters, and his wives and hand-maids were still barren in those days. And these are the names of Laban's daughters, which his wife Adinah had borne unto him: the name of the oldest was Leah, and the name of the youngest was Rachel. And Leah was tender eyed, but Rachel was beautiful and well favored, and Jacob loved her. And Jacob said unto Laban: I will serve thee seven years for Rachel, thy youngest daughter. And Laban was satisfied, and Jacob served Laban seven years for Rachel, his daughter. And it was in the second year of Jacob's dwelling in Haran, which was the seventy-ninth year of Jacob's life, that Eber, the son of Shem, died, and he was four hundred and sixty-four years old when he died. And when Jacob heard that Eber died, he grieved greatly, and he wept and mourned over him for many days. And in the third year of Jacob's dwelling in Haran, Bosmath, daughter of Ishmael, Esau’s wife, bear unto him a son, and Esau called his name Reuel; and in the fourth year of Jacob’s dwelling in the house of Laban, the Lord remembered Laban, for the sake of Jacob, and sons were born unto him; and these are the names of his sons born unto him in those days: His first born was Beor, and his second was Alib, and his third was Horash. And the Lord gave unto Laban wealth and honor, and sons and daughters, and the man increased exceedingly, for the sake of Jacob. And Jacob served Laban, his mother's brother, in those days in all sorts of work and labor in the house and in the field, and the blessing of God was in everything that belonged unto Laban, both in the house and in the field. And in the fifth year of Jacob’s dwelling in Haran, Judith, daughter of Beeri, Esau’s wife, died in the land of Canaan; and she had no sons, but two daughters. The name of the oldest was Marnith, and the name of the youngest was Puith. And when Judith died, Esau went to Seir to hunt in the field as heretofore, and Esau dwelt in Seir for many days. And in the sixth year of Jacob’s dwelling in Haran, Esau took Abalibamah, daughter of Zebon the Hevite, to wife, in addition to his other wives, and Esau brought her unto the land of Canaan; and Abalibamah conceived and bear unto Esau three sons: Jaush, and Jaalon, and Korah. And there was a feud in those days in the land of Canaan, between the herdsmen of Esau and the herdsmen of the inhabitants of the land of Canaan. For Esau’s cattle and his wealth were too abundant to dwell in the land of Canaan, in the house of his father, and the land of Canaan could not bear him by reason of his cattle. And when Esau saw that the feud with the inhabitants of the land was increasing, he arose with his wives, and his sons, and daughters, and with all belonging unto him, and all his cattle and other property accumulated in Canaan, and he went away from the inhabitants of the land to locate in the land of Seir. Thus Esau and all that were his came to dwell in Seir. And now and then Esau would go to see his father and mother in the land of Canaan. And Esau intermarried with the Horites, and he gave his daughters to the sons of Seir, the Horite. And he gave Marzith his oldest daughter to Anah, the son of Zebon, his wife's brother, and Puith he gave to Azar, the son of Bilhan, the Horite. And Esau dwelt in the mountain, he and his children, and they were fruitful, and they multiplied greatly. And in the seventh year when Jacob’s servitude, in which he was bound to Laban, was completed, Jacob said unto Laban: Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled. And Laban was willing to do so; and Laban and Jacob gathered together all the people of the place, and they prepared a feast. And in the evening Laban came to the house, and later came Jacob with all the people of the feast, when Laban put out all the lights that were in the house. And Jacob said unto Laban: What causeth thee to do these things unto us? And Laban replied: Such is the custom in our land. And after wards Laban took Leah, his daughter, and brought her unto Jacob. And Jacob came unto her, and he did not know that it was Leah. And Laban gave his maid servant Zilpah to his daughter, Leah, for a hand-maid. And all the people of the feast knew what Laban was doing unto Jacob, but they told not one word of it to Jacob. And all the neighbors came that night to Jacob's house, and they ate and drank, and made merry before Leah with music and dancing, and they cheered Jacob, exclaiming: Hilleah, hilleah (it is Leah). And Jacob hearing their words, understood them not, for he thought such was the custom among them. And the neighbors spoke these words before Jacob in the night, when all the lights in the house were put out by Laban. And in the morning when it dawned, Jacob turned unto his wife, and behold it was Leah that lay resting on his bosom. And Jacob said: Now I understand what caused our neighbors to call unto me last night, Hilleah. Yes they told it unto me, but I knew it not. And Jacob said unto Laban: What is this thou hast done unto me? did I not serve with thee for Rachel, wherefore then hast thou beguiled me and given me Leah? And Laban answered unto Jacob, saying: It must not be so done in our country to give the younger into marriage before the first born; but if thou desirest to have her sister also, take her for the service which thou wilt serve with me yet seven years. And Jacob did so, and he took Rachel also to wife, and he served seven more years for Rachel. And Jacob came to Rachel likewise, and he loved Rachel more than Leah; and Laban gave her his maid-servant Bilhah, for a hand-maid. And when the Lord saw that Leah was hated, the Lord visited her, and she bear unto Jacob four sons in those days, and these were their names: Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah, and she ceased bearing afterwards. And Rachel was barren in those days, she had no children. And Rachel envied her sister Leah, and seeing that she bear no children to Jacob, she took her handmaid Bilhah, and she bear two sons unto Jacob, Dan and Naphtali. And when Leah saw that she had ceased bearing, she also took her hand maid, Zilpah, and gave her unto Jacob for a wife. And Jacob came to Zilpah also, and she too bear unto Jacob two sons, Gad and Asher. And Leah conceived again, bearing unto Jacob in those days two sons and one daughter, and their names were: Issachar and Zebulon, and Dinah, their sister. And Rachel continued in her barrenness in those days, and Rachel prayed unto the Lord, at that time, saying: Oh Lord God remember me and visit me, I pray Thee, for now my husband will abandon me, because I have borne no children unto him. Oh Lord, hear my cries before thee and see my misery and give me offspring like unto one of the hand-maids, that I may escape further reproach. And the Lord hearkened unto Rachel and she conceived and bear a son, and she said: God hath taken away my reproach. At that time Rebekah, Jacob’s mother sent unto Jacob her nurse Deborah, daughter of Uz, and two of Isaac’s servants with her. And they came unto Jacob to Haran, and they said unto him: Rebekah sends us unto thee that thou shouldst return to thy father's house to the land of Canaan. And Jacob listened to them as to what his mother had spoken, and at that time the seven years which Jacob was to serve Laban for Rachel were fulfilled. And at the end of fourteen years of Jacob's dwelling in the land of Haran Jacob said unto Laban: Give me my wives and my children and let me go to my land, for my mother hath sent unto me from the land of Canaan that I should return unto my father's house. And Laban replied unto him: Not so, I pray thee, but if I have found favor in thine eyes do not leave me; appoint me thy wages and I will give it, and tarry with me. And Jacob said unto him, this thou shalt give me for my wages. I will pass through all thy flocks this day, removing thence all the speckled and spotted cattle, and all the brown cattle among the sheep, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and of such shall be my hire. And if thou wilt do this thing for me, then I shall return to feed thy flocks and to keep them. And Laban did accordingly, and he removed from his flocks all that Jacob had spoken of, and gave them to him. And Jacob placed into the hands of his sons all that was removed from Laban's flocks, and Jacob attended to the remainder of Laban's flocks. And the servants of Isaac, which were sent unto Jacob saw that Jacob would not return with them into the land of Canaan, and they went away from him returning to the land of Canaan. But Deborah remained in Haran with Jacob, and would not return to the land of Canaan with the servants of Isaac. And Deborah dwelt with Jacob’s wives and children in Haran. And Jacob continued serving Laban for six more years and whenever the sheep brought forth, Jacob removed from their midst all that were speckled and spotted as he had agreed upon with Laban. And Jacob continued doing so for six years, and the man increased exceedingly, and he possessed cattle, and man servants and maid-servants, and camels and asses. And Jacob had two hundred herds of cattle, every head of which was of a very large size, beautiful in appearance and very fruitful. And all the people of the land desired to pro cure some of Jacob’s cattle, for it was very, very prosperous. And many of the sons of man came to purchase some of Jacob’s stock and Jacob gave them a sheep for a man-servant or for a maid-servant. Whatsoever Jacob asked from them they gave him. And Jacob attained wealth, and honor, and possessions through these sales to the sons of man; and the sons of Laban envied him on account of that distinction. And it came to pass after some days, that Jacob heard the words of Laban’s sons, saying: Jacob hath taken away all that was our father's; and of that which was our father's hath he gotten all his glory and the Lord appeared unto Jacob at the end of six years saying unto him: Return into the land of thy fathers and to thy kindred, and I will be with thee. Then Jacob rose up and set his sons and his wives upon camels, and he went away to the land of Canaan, to his father Isaac. And Laban knew nothing of Jacob’s leaving, for Laban was at that time away to shear his sheep. And Rachel had stolen the images that were her father's, and she took and concealed them upon the camel on which she sat. And this is the manner after which images like these were prepared. They took a man that was the first born and put him to death and took all the hair off his head, and then the head was salted with salt and anointed with oil. And afterwards they took a small plate of copper or of gold and wrote “the name” upon it and placed the plate under his tongue; and then the head was brought into the house and lights were kindled around it, and they worshipped it and bowed down before it. And when they bowed down to it the head spoke to them, concerning all that they would inquire of it, through the power of “the name’” under its tongue. And some people make those images in the likeness of man, of gold and of silver, and they go to them at certain times known to them, and the idols will attract the power of the stars, and tell them all about future things. And the images which Rachel stole from her father were of the latter kind. And Rachel stole those images of her father so that he should not be able to ascertain whither Jacob had gone. And when Laban returned home he asked for Jacob and his household and they could not be found, and he went seeking his images to find out whither Jacob had gone. And Laban went to other images and making inquiries they told him that Jacob had fled to the house of his father in Canaan. And Laban rose up and took all his brethen with him and all his servants, and he pursued Jacob and he overtook him on mount Gilead. And Laban said to Jacob: What hast thou done, that thou hast stolen away unawares to me, and hast carried away my daughters as captives taken with the sword. Where fore didst thou flee away secretly, and hast not suffered me to kiss my sons and my daughters and to send them away with gladness; and wherefore hast thou stolen my gods? And Jacob replied: For I said, peradventure thou wouldst take the daughters from me by force and now with whomsoever thou findest thy gods let him not live. And Laban searched for the images, looking through the entire tent of Jacob and through all the furniture, but he found them not. Laban said unto Jacob: Let us make a covenant, I and thou, and let it be for a witness between me and thee. If thou shall afflict my daughters, or if thou shalt take other wives beside my daughters, and may the Lord be a witness between me and thee concerning these things. And they gathered up stones and made of them a heap, and Laban said: This heap is a witness between me and thee. And he called the name of that heap Galeed. And Jacob and Laban offered up sacrifices on the mount, and they ate there together by the heap of stones, and they remained there all night. And early in the morning Laban arose and he wept over his daughters and he kissed them, and he returned to his home. And he sent hastily his son Beor, who was then seventeen years of age, and with him Abihoref, the son of Uz, the son of Nahor, and ten men, and they hastened and passed Jacob on the way, and they went by another road to the land of Seir. And they came unto Esau, saying unto him: Thus saith thy kinsman and relative Laban, thy mother's brother, the son of Bethuel: Hast thou heard what thy brother hath done unto me? For he came naked unto my house, and I went to meet him and I brought him with honors into my house. And I made him great, and I gave him for wives my two daughters and two of my maid servants. And the Lord blessed him for my sake, and he increased exceedingly, and he got sons and daughters and servants. And he hath also procured great many flocks and herds, and camels and asses and gold and silver in great plenty. And when he saw the abundance of his wealth, he went while I was away shearing my sheep, and he ran away secretly. And he sat his wives and children upon camels and he took along all his cattle and all the property which he hath gotten in my land, and turned his countenance to go to Isaac his father into the land of Canaan. And he did not even suffer me to kiss my daughters and their children, but he carried away my daughters like captives taken by the sword, and he stole also my gods and ran away. And now I have left him in the mountains near the river Jabbok with all that is his; he lacketh nothing. And now if it be thy desire to go unto him thou canst find him there, and thou canst do unto him whatsoever pleaseth thee best. And Laban's messengers went and told unto Esau all these words. And when Esau heard the words of Laban's messengers, his anger was kindled against his brother, and he remembered his hatred and his wrath burned within him. And Esau hastened and gathered together his sons and his servants and the people of his household, sixty men, and he assembled likewise all the sons of Seir the Horite, and their people, three hundred and forty men, and he went with this number of four hundred men, to smite his brother Jacob. And Esau divided this number into several bands. And he took the sixty men of his sons and servants and the people of his household in one band, and intrusted them to Eliphaz his oldest son. And the remaining bands he intrusted to the care of the six sons of Seir the Horite, placing every man over his family and their children. And the entire camp moved ahead with Esau among them, who urged them on to great speed. And Laban's messengers, after having left Esau, went into the land of Canaan to the house of Rebekah, the mother of Jacob and Esau and they said unto her: Be hold Esau thy son went with four hundred men against his brother Jacob; for he hath heard of his coming, and therefore he went to wage war with him and to kill him and to take away all that he hath. And Rebekah sent hastily seventy-two men of Isaac's servants to go and meet Jacob, for she said Esau might perhaps surprise him on the road when meeting him. And those messengers went and they met Jacob on the road on the opposite side of the brook Jabbok, and Jacob saw them and he exclaimed: This camp is sent to me from God, and he called the name of that place Mahanaim. And Jacob recognized all his father's men, and he kissed and embraced them and came together with all of them, and inquired concerning his father and mother, and they said: All is peace with them. And the messengers said unto Jacob: Thy mother Rebekah sent us to thee, saying: I have heard that thy brother Esau hath gone to meet thee on the road with men from the midst of the sons of Seir the Horite. Now therefore my son, listen unto my voice and reflect what thou art to do. And when he meeteth thee entreat him, and do not speak unto him harshly, and give him gifts from whatsoever thou findest in thy hands, wherewith the Lord hath favored thee graciously. And when he inquires of thee concerning thy matters and affairs do not withhold it from him, maybe he will thus be turned from his anger and thou wilt save thyself and all those that are with thee, for it is in thy place to give him respectful answers as he is the oldest brother. And when Jacob heard the words of his mother as told unto him by the messengers, Jacob lifted up his voice and he wept a great weeping and he did at once according to the command of his mother.
In the story in Bereishit there is considerable debate as to how to interpret Yaakov Avinu’s silence. Should we interpret Yaakov Avinu as silently acquiescing to Shimon and Levi’s claim (as Rambam (Hilchot Melachim 9:14.) believes)? On the other hand, perhaps Yaakov Avinu withheld his response until his dying moments when he rebuked Shimon and Levi once again for their violence at Shechem (as Ramban (Bereishit 34:13 and 49:5-6. ) believes).
Ramban disagrees (in his commentary to Gen. 34:13). The principle of collective responsibility does not, in his view, apply to non-Jewish societies. The Noahide covenant requires every society to set up courts of law, but it does not imply that a failure to prosecute a wrongdoer involves all members of the society in a capital crime.
Not only does the text not demonise the people of Shechem, it also does not paint any of Jacob’s family in a positive light. It uses the same word – “deceit” (Gen. 34:13) – of Simeon and Levi that it has used previously about Jacob taking Esau’s blessing and Laban substituting Leah for Rachel. In its description of all the characters – from the gadabout Dina to her excessively violent rescuers, to the plundering other brothers and the passive Jacob – the text seems written deliberately to alienate our sympathies.
As for the solution to the twenty-sixth question, (1. The broad outlines of the arguments mentioned in this chapter are also found, in the abbreviated form, in the MS of the Retuḳot Kesef, fol. 16b. The question dealt with in this chapter is evidently one that relates to the morality of the actions of Jacob’s sons in the incident of the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) it was clarified by Him who gave the Torah, when at the conclusion of His words He stated with reference to all of them, (2. “Them” here evidently refers to the male inhabitants of the town of Shechem.) “because they had defiled their sister,” (3. Gen. 34:27.) having said of Shechem alone at the outset that “he had defiled Dinah their sister.” (4. Gen. 34:13. He means that the Torah itself implicates the Shechemites and implies their guilt by using the plural form in describing the defilement of Dinah.)
This way of interpreting the story, if correct, entails a significant conclusion. We know that Judaism involves collective responsibility (kol Yisrael arevim ze bazeh, “All Israelites are responsible for one another,” Shevuot 39a). But it may be that being human also involves collective responsibility. Not only are Jews responsible for one another – so are we all, regardless of our faith or lack of it. So, at any rate, the Rambam argued, though Ramban disagreed. (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 9:14; Ramban to Genesis 34:13, s.v. verabbim.)
SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. Jacob is saying that they possess the attribute of kinship for their hearts were inflamed concerning their sister. (Ibid., 34:25-26.) He is thus stating in their defense that they acted as they did out of their brotherly zeal, thus suggesting [that were it not for this extenuating circumstance], they would have been deserving of great punishment and their sin would have been unforgivable since what they did to the people of Shechem was an act of violence. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he is saying that Simeon and Levi are real brothers, uniting in fraternity and brotherhood in counsel and deed. Now I have already explained (Ibid., 34:13.) that Jacob was angry with Simeon and Levi for having committed violence when they killed the people of the city of Shechem, for they (The people of the city committed no wrong. It was Shechem who violated Dinah, and the people were not in a position to protest his action.) had not sinned against them at all. They even made a covenant with them and they were circumcised, thus being enabled to return to G-d and become included within the people of the household of Abraham, part of the souls that they had gotten in Haran. (Above, 12:5. A reference to the proselytes whom Abraham and Sarah had brought “beneath the sheltering wings of the Shechina” (Rashi, ibid.)) Jacob was additionally angry with them lest people say that the matter was done at his suggestion, thus creating a profaning of G-d’s Name, as people will say that the prophet has committed violence and plunder. This is the intent of the verse, Let my soul not come into their council— (Verse 6 here.) this is an excuse for he was not in their council when they answered the people of Shechem with subtlety, (Above, 34:13.) and he was not united in their assembly when they came upon the people of the city and killed them. It was for this reason that he cursed their anger and wrath. (Verse 7 here.) And so did Onkelos translate: “My soul was not in their council when they assembled to strike, etc.”
FOR IN THEIR ANGER THEY SLEW A MAN AND IN THEIR SELF-WILL THEY DISABLED AN OX (‘SHOR’). The meaning of this is that they committed violence in their wrath in that they were angry at Shechem, and it was to satisfy their own desire and not because of the guilt or sins of the slain. Now Onkelos says that the word shor (ox) should be understood as shur (wall) with a shuruk, (The phonetic equivalent oo. Thus the word should be understood as shur (wall) rather than shor (ox). The Torah-script has no vowel signs, and for the sake of interpretation, a difficult word may sometimes be interpreted as if it were vowelled differently than the traditional reading.) as in the verse, Daughters treaded on the wall (‘shur’). (Verse 22 here.) Thus Onkelos translated the word shor in the present verse as “the wall of the enemy,” similar in expression to the verse: Mine eye also hath gazed on them that lie in wait for me (‘b’shuroi’). (Psalms 92:12. Ramban is thus suggesting that the enemy lies in wait for me behind his fortified walls.) The meaning of the verse is thus: “and they uprooted a city surrounded with a wall, slaying their children and women after having killed the men of the city.” The word ikru (disabled) would then be similar in use to the verse, Ekron shall be rooted up (‘tei’akeir’). (Zephaniah 2:4.) Others (Mentioned in the commentary of R’dak in the name of Rabbi Yaakov the son of Rabbi Elazar.) have explained that the ox, which is the largest of cattle, is an allusion to Hamor and his son Shechem, the prince of the country, (Above, 34:2.) just as in the verses: His firstling bull, majesty is his; (Deuteronomy 33:17.) Ye kine of Bashan, that are in the mountain of Samaria. (Amos 4:1.) Similarly do the verses surname the great princes “rams” (Exodus 15:15. Eilei Moab is generally translated, “the mighty men of Moab,” but literally it means “the rams of Moab.”) and “he-goats.” (Isaiah 14:9. Atudei eretz is generally translated, “the chief ones of the earth,” but literally it means “the he-goats of the earth.”) The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the verse is to be understood in its usual sense as stating that in their anger they killed each man of whom they were wrathful; and in their self-will, after their anger had been calmed by the slaying of the men, they uprooted all oxen, this being an allusion to their cattle and their possessions, including everything that was in the home and everything in the field. Now Jacob mentioned this in order to state that he had no part in all these secret deliberations of theirs, even in the removal of the cattle and possessions, or any aspect of the spoiling and plundering of the people of the city of Shechem. The word ikru [in the expression, ikru shor], has the same meaning as in the verse: Thou shalt hemstring (‘te’akeir’) their horses. (Joshua 11:6.) But the expression and purport is all one.
And they too (Our verse indicates that others had also practiced deception but does not tell us who it was. Rashi proceeds to tell us who else had deceived them.) proceded with deception just as the sons of Yaakov dealt with trickery with Chamor, the father of Shechem, who was a Chivite. (The Givonim were a branch of Chivites, who were related Shechem who had raped Dinah the daughter of Yaakov. They remembered how their relatives were tricked by the sons of Yaakov and were subsequently killed by the two son of Yaakov. Thus the Gevonim felt justified in perpetrating their deception. (See Bereishis 34:1-26).) The people of Givon were descendents of the Chivites, as it is said in this context.
“Jacob’s sons answered” [34:13]. The children of Jacob answered. Bahya writes here. Why did the children answer for their father? The explanation is that the children honored their father, since their father was ashamed and could not respond, out of being disgraced. Thus, the children had to answer with deceit. They answered with wisdom. The children of Jacob thought: we can certainly do something deceitful, since our sister Dinah was defiled. The deceit was that the children of Jacob said: the whole city should circumcise their foreskins. Perhaps only the household of Hamor and Shechem would be willing and the others in the city would not want to do so. The children of Jacob thought: we will kill the whole city along with Shechem and Hamor, because they did not observe what we demanded of them. If they will all circumcise themselves, then we will come on the third day after their circumcision and will kill them. So write Hizkuni and Bahya. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 34:13–14; Bahya, Genesis, 34:13.)
Concerning The Violation Of Dina's Chastity. 1. Hereupon Jacob came to the place, till this day called Tents (Succoth); from whence he went to Shechem, which is a city of the Canaanites. Now as the Shechemites were keeping a festival Dina, who was the only daughter of Jacob, went into the city to see the finery of the women of that country. But when Shechem, the son of Hamor the king, saw her, he defiled her by violence; and being greatly in love with her, desired of his father that he would procure the damsel to him for a wife. To which desire he condescended, and came to Jacob, desiring him to give leave that his son Shechem might, according to law, marry Dina. But Jacob, not knowing how to deny the desire of one of such great dignity, and yet not thinking it lawful to marry his daughter to a stranger, entreated him to give him leave to have a consultation about what he desired him to do. So the king went away, in hopes that Jacob would grant him this marriage. But Jacob informed his sons of the defilement of their sister, and of the address of Hamor; and desired them to give their advice what they should do. Upon fills, the greatest part said nothing, not knowing what advice to give. But Simeon and Levi, the brethren of the damsel by the same mother, agreed between themselves upon the action following: It being now the time of a festival, when the Shechemites were employed in ease and feasting, they fell upon the watch when they were asleep, and, coming into the city, slew all the males (38) as also the king, and his son, with them; but spared the women. And when they had done this without their father's consent, they brought away their sister.
The sons of Yaakov answered Shechem, and his father Chamor, with guile [cleverness], when they spoke; because he had defiled their sister, Deenah.
But the sons of Jakob answered Shekem. and Hamor his father with subtilty, and so spake, because he had polluted Dinah their sister,
| וַיֹּאמְר֣וּ אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם לֹ֤א נוּכַל֙ לַעֲשׂוֹת֙ הַדָּבָ֣ר הַזֶּ֔ה לָתֵת֙ אֶת־אֲחֹתֵ֔נוּ לְאִ֖ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־ל֣וֹ עׇרְלָ֑ה כִּֽי־חֶרְפָּ֥ה הִ֖וא לָֽנוּ׃ | 14 J | and said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who is uncircumcised, for that is a disgrace among us. |
This is also (ibid. 3:9), “Honor God with your wealth.” Specifically honor, for the concept of honor is dependent upon it [the Holy Tongue]. This is because the reverse of honor is shame and disgrace, which are associated with the genitalia. As is brought in the Tikkunim (Tikkuney Zohar #58, p.92a): “They were not embarrassed” (Genesis 2:25) —”embarrassment applies specifically to the genitalia.” And sexual immorality is synonymous with blemishing the Covenant, the concept of the foreskin, as this would be a disgrace to us.”
7. Now when the heart, which corresponds to the vav, the Tablets, is immersed in evil loves—i.e., disgrace and humiliation, which are called “the foreskin of the heart” (cf. Deuteronomy 10:16) —it is then an aspect of the shattered Tablets. And disgrace corresponds to the foreskin, as in (Genesis 34:14), “We cannot… give our sister to a man who is uncircumcised, for that is a disgrace to us.”
We see, therefore, that conflict—i.e., when a man is disgraced by others— an aspect of hunger. And this hunger—i.e., the aspect of conflict/disgrace—corresponds to the foreskin, as is written (Genesis 34:14), “ for that is a disgrace to us.” For the foreskin comprises three evil forces surrounding the covenant of peace, . And when the foreskin is broken, covenant of peace is revealed. For when there is peace below, he has peace Above, “in .” And when there is peace Above, then the world has a revelation and a great increase of satiation. As it is written concerning Yosef (Genesis 47:19), “Give us seed grain, that we may live!”
Whatever disgrace a person suffers stems from the aforementioned three kelipot. This is the reason Dinah's brothers said to the inhabitants of Shekhem, “We cannot… give our sister to a man who has an orlah (foreskin), as this is a disgrace to us” (Genesis 34:14) .
כי חרפה היא לנו, “for it is something shameful in our eyes.” Their argument was as follows: “if you do not circumcise yourselves as part of the bargain then one fine day you will declare all of us as baaley mum, cripples or deformed because we lack a foreskin.”
A REPROACH. It will be a reproach for generations. (Cherez interprets I.E. to mean that future generations will look down upon us. They will ask, how could they give their sister to an uncircumcised man?) This is the meaning of because he had wrought a vile deed in Israel (v. 7). (According to I.E. the vile deed refers to having intercourse with an uncircumcised male (Weiser). Israel in verse 7 refers to a later time when there was a people of Israel. It was then shameful to recall that Dinah had slept with an uncircumcised man (Joseph ben Eliezer Ha-Sephardi).)
[13. AND SPOKE BECAUSE HE HAD DEFILED.] And spoke to Shechem who had (asher) defiled their sister. (The Hebrew reads: va-yedabberu, asher timme et dinah achotam which literally means: and they spoke who had defiled Dinah their sister. This makes no sense. Hence I.E. points out that Shechem, who is mentioned in the first part of the verse (et shechem), is also the object here. We should thus read it as if it were written: va-yedabberu et shechem asher timme et dinah achotam, viz., and spoke to Shechem who had defiled their sister. It should be noted that according to this interpretation, asher means who.) We may interpret our verse in this manner because we find Scripture stating, dabbero le-shalom (Gen. 37:4), which is to be rendered: speak peaceably unto him (Gen. 37:4). (I.E. claims that dabber et Shechem is grammatically similar to dabbero. For an explanation of their linguistic similarity see Filwarg. See also notes to Gen. 37:4. For alternate interpretations see Weiser, Cherez and Krinsky.) On the other hand asher may mean because. In this case the Bible is telling us that they answered with guile because (asher) he had defiled Dinah their sister. (Cherez.)
TO ONE THAT IS UNCIRCUMCISED. One whose sexual member is uncircumcised. (The Hebrew literally reads: to one who has an orlah, hence I.E.’s interpretation.) The meaning of the term orlah (uncircumcised) is something which is heavy. Aral (uncircumcised), in uncircumcised (aral) lips (Ex. 6:12), and arelah (dull), in their ear is dull (arelah) (Jer. 6:10), are similar. An orlah is something which lays heavy because it is an unnecessary appendage. (Krinsky. In the case of the foreskin the heaviness is physical. In the case of lips and ears, metaphoric. I.E. renders “uncircumcised lips” as heavy lips. There is, as it were, a burden on the lips which makes speaking difficult. The same applies to the ears.) Those who say that Abraham blemished himself by undergoing circumcision, and thereby violated God’s charge to him, and be thou whole (Gen. 17:1), err. The opposite is true. (By circumcision Abraham became “whole.” His impediment was removed. So Cherez and Filwarg. For an alternate interpretation see Weiser.) Proof of this can be offered from the animal kingdom. (Animals have no foreskin. We thus see that it is an unnecessary appendage.) As to their query, why remove that which God created, we respond that God also created the umbilical cord. (We thus see that God created appendages that require removal (Weiser).)
לתת את אחותינו, “to give our sister.” Afterwards they spoke of “we will take our daughter.” In the first instance they spoke on their own behalf, whereas later on they spoke on behalf of their father. It is possible that the word “our daughter” is used here in a sense similar to “our sister,” as we find in Kings II 8,18 where Yoram the son of King Yehoshaphat of Yehudah is reported to have taken a daughter of king Achav of Israel as a wife although Achav did not have a daughter. The word “daughter” there clearly refers to “sister.” This is also the way Targum Yonathan translates it.
ויאמרו ...כי חרפה היא לנו, to be intermarried with the uncircumcised, seeing that our males are all circumcised.
חרפה הוא THAT WERE A DISGRACE — Amongst us it is somewhat of a blot on our pedigree, for if one wishes to revile another, he says to him: “You are an uncircumcised person”, or “the son of an uncircumcised person”. The word חרפה always means “reviling”.
כי חרפה היא לנו, it would appear that none of the circumcised men among us were fit to marry our sister.
The malicious guile in their response lies in the following suggestion. They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as in our eyes the uncircumcised state is not merely a physical matter, but it is a disgrace for us . 11 Therefore, it is impossible to speak of marriage at this stage.
“It is a disgrace among us” [34:14]. The children of Jacob said: it is a disgrace for us to give our daughters to someone who is uncircumcised. It will be thrown in our faces that we have a defect in our bodies, with the foreskin. Therefore, if you want to intermarry with us, let us be equal with the circumcision. So writes Hizkuni. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 34:14.)
When Bereshit Rabbah 48 tells us that Abraham sits at the entrance of purgatory and prevents any circumcised Jew from being consigned to that detination, the meaning is that between the combined effects of circumcision, (physical) and Torah (spiritual), the fate that is reserved for the uncircumcised could not possibly be in store for circumcised Jews. Rabbi Eleazar in the opening statement quoted refers to the triple effect of speech, mind, and hearing, and that is the reason he quotes the three verses from scripture. The first verse refers to the lack of power of speech, someone who boasts of the wrong attributes (Jeremiah 9,22). The second, Goliath, lacks brains or he would not blaspheme (Samuel I chapter 17). The third are the daughters of the uncircumcised who refuse to listen to the voice of mussar, moral instruction, and who rejoice when they hear that the representative of moral values (Saul) has been slain (Samuel II chapter 1). As a diamond sparkles best when in a suitable setting, so the purest soul unless placed in a superior body cannot perform at optimal ability. This is why a baal mum, a physically blemished person must not perform temple service. Otherwise, his physical blemish might affect his soul, thus preventing him from drawing down from on high all the blessings that the priest ought to channel to his people. Because it is the purpose of the commandments to refine those who perform them, man was not born circumcised, so as not to deny him the effects performance of that mitzvah would have on the development of his personality.
Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem and Ḥamor his father with guile, and spoke, as he had defiled Dina their sister” (Genesis 34:13). “Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem…” – what do you think, that there is deceit here? The Divine Spirit says: “As he had defiled Dina their sister…” “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace for us” (Genesis 33:14). “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace” – Rabbi Neḥemya said: Where do we find that the foreskin is called disgrace? It is from here, as it is stated: “As it is a disgrace.” “Are their livestock and their property and all their animals not ours? We only must accede to them, and they will live with us” (Genesis 34:23). “Their livestock and their property” – they thought to despoil them, and were despoiled. “All who emerged from the gate of his city heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son; every male, all who emerged from the gate of his city, was circumcised” (Genesis 34:24). “[They] heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son…” – one of them would enter the city bearing his burden, and they would say to him: ‘Go and be circumcised.’ He would say: ‘Shekhem is marrying and Magbai is circumcised?’ (Magbai is a generic name. Just because Shekhem is marrying, I should get circumcised?)
Another interpretation (of Gen. 30:23): GOD HAS TAKEN AWAY < MY SHAME >. (See above, 7:12, and the note there.) In the hour that Rebekah gave birth to Jacob and Esau, two daughters were born to Laban. They sent letters to each other, saying: You have given birth to two daughters; and I, to two sons. Let us give them to each other. When Leah heard about Esau's conduct, she would cry; but, when Rachel heard about Jacob's conduct she would be happy. [Where is it shown that Leah cried? Where it is stated] (in Gen. 29:17): AND LEAH'S EYES WERE WEAK. The interpreter of R. Jose interpreted < the verse as follows > : (Cf. Gen. R. 70:16.) What is the meaning of WEAK? Bleary {i.e., circular}. (I.e., Leah had dark circles under her eyes.) R. Johanan said to him: You did not interpret well. Then what is the meaning of WEAK (rakkot)? Long (arukkot), because all that the Holy One gave her (through her children) was long < -lasting > : high priesthood, kingship, and anointing oil. Then, when Leah gave birth for Jacob, Rachel was depressed, saying: Perhaps Esau will take her, (The text should probably be emended from “her” to “me” in agreement with Rashi’s interpretation of Gen. 30:22. According to Rashi, Rachel feared that Esau might take her if Jacob divorced her for being childless.) since I have not given birth to a child. But when she had given birth to Joseph, she said (in Gen. 30:23): GOD HAS TAKEN AWAY MY SHAME. Now there is no shame but foreskin, as stated (concerning foreskin in Gen. 34:14): FOR THAT IS SHAME TO US. (Gen. 30:24:) SO SHE CALLED HIS NAME JOSEPH (Yosef), SAYING: MAY THE LORD ADD (yosef) ANOTHER SON FOR ME. The Holy Spirit foresaw < here > that she would only bear one other son.
THE TRIALS OF ABRAHAM (continued) THE eighth trial (was as follows): "And when Abram was ninety-nine years old" (Gen. 17:1), the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Until now thou hast not been perfect before Me; but circumcise the flesh of thy foreskin, and "walk before me, and be thou perfect" (ibid.). Moreover, the foreskin is a reproach, as it is said, "For that is a reproach unto us" (Gen. 34:14), because the foreskin is more unclean than all unclean things, as it is said, "For henceforth there shall no more || come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean" (Isa. 52:1). For the foreskin is a blemish above all blemishes. Circumcise the flesh of thy foreskin and be perfect.
A pious man is so called because he has a sense of shame, for the word 'hassid' or 'pious' means 'white', for the translation of 'stork' (Hassidah) in Aramaic is "hawaeita" meaning "the white one", as you note in Leviticus 11:19, and similarly in Isaiah 29:22: "Neither shall his face now become white" (with shame), and the Aramaic translation of "herpah" (shame) is hisda (same as Hassid), as you will note in Genesis 34:14. And all of this for what reason? That the Hassid or pious person must bear shame in order to fulfill the Torah, and he must remove shame from his face at performing any precept. Then he is called a Hassid or "pious one", and thus he attains to prophecy as it is written: "Then didst Thou speak in vision to Thy pious ones" (Ps. 89:20). And through his sense of shame he will attain to true reverence of God, as it is written: "In order that His awe be upon your faces and you do not sin" (Exod. 20:20). What kind of awe or fear of God can be seen in a person's face? You must surely say, "A sense of shame" (which causes the face to change color) (Nedarim 20a).
AND IF A MAN ‘YIKACH’ (SHALL TAKE) HIS SISTER. Scripture mentions the term kichah [“taking,” which generally denotes the taking of a woman as a wife] in the case of a sister, although betrothal to her is not valid, because a brother and sister sleep together in one house, and when his desire overpowers him, he takes her and draws her to himself, and he does not have to come to her as one does to a woman who is a harlot. Similarly it is the way of Scripture to use the term “taking” in the case of all those with whom one remains alone, for a wife and her mother, (Verse 14.) [a wife] and her son’s daughter and her daughter’s daughter, (Above, 18:17.) a wife and her sister, (Ibid., Verse 18.) and a brother’s wife (Further, Verse 21.) are all [found] with him in one house [hence Scripture uses the term “taking” in each of these cases]. For a similar reason Scripture uses this expression in the following verse, A man shall not ‘take’ his father’s wife. (Deuteronomy 23:1.) The expression and he see her nakedness is an euphemism, since Scripture modifies its expression in speaking of forbidden relationships. Sometimes it calls sexual intercourse “uncovering of nakedness,” as it says in the case of most of the forbidden women, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness, for it is the way of those who commit fornication to uncover her skirts, similar to that which is said, and I will uncover thy skirts upon thy face; (Nahum 3:5.) and at times it calls it “entering,” thus: If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her; (Deuteronomy 22:13.) to come in unto us; (Genesis 19:31.) and he came in unto her, and she conceived by him. (Ibid., 38:18.) Many times Scripture calls it “lying,” and here it refers to it as “seeing,” since brother and sister lodge together and there is no need for uncovering of skirts. Similarly Scripture uses the euphemism “knowing,” as in the following expressions: And the man knew Eve his wife; (Ibid., 4:1.) and he knew her again no more; (Ibid., 38:26.) a virgin, neither had any man known her. (Ibid., 24:16.) And Scripture states [here in the verse before us] and she see his nakedness, meaning to say that she too desired his nakedness in her heart and consented thereto. Now it mentions these expressions only in the case of a sister, because in all forbidden relations when a man approaches a woman for the purpose of uncovering her nakedness, it is generally with her consent, and otherwise she can remove herself from him and cry for help, but in the case of a brother [and sister] who lodge together, it may be that it was done without her knowledge, and therefore Scripture mentioned that she too “saw his nakedness.”
IT IS ‘CHESED.’ In the opinion of the commentators (Rashi and R’dak (in Sefer Hashorashim, root chesed).) chesed here means “shame,” because all people will naturally be ashamed of this ugly sin, this being used here as in the Aramaic language, for Onkelos translated, for that were ‘a disgrace’ unto us, (Genesis 34:14.) “for that were chisudo unto us.” Yonathan ben Uziel also translated and I will lay it for ‘a reproach,’ (I Samuel 11:2.) “[and I will lay it for] chisudo.” And in the language of the Sages [we find]: (Ruth Rabbah 7:11.) “Because shechasdo (he shamed him) in public.” Similarly, lest he that heareth it ‘y’chasedcha’ (Proverbs 25:10.) means “lest he cause you shame upon your revealing the secret of another.” And they shall be cut off in the sight of the children of their people. The intention thereof is as follows: “You have done this secretly, but G-d will reveal your sin by bringing upon you a punishment before all the children of your people.” He mentioned this with reference to a sin which is done in utmost secrecy, but it applies as well to all [sins punishable by] excision, as I have mentioned. He hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity. This means that if he had uncovered his sister’s nakedness against her will, he alone shall bear his iniquity, as Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented. But in my opinion the expression he hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity means that each one of those mentioned [will bear the iniquity], just like the expression for he hath made naked his near kin; they shall bear their iniquity. (Verse 19.) The correct interpretation of the word chesed [it is ‘chesed’] appears to me to be according to its plain sense [“goodness,” “kindness”]. So also is the opinion of our Rabbis. (Torath Kohanim, Kedoshim 11:9. “It is ‘chesed.’ And if you should say: ‘But Cain did marry his sister!’ It is for this reason that Scripture states, it is ‘chesed’ [an act of kindness — done by the Creator in order that the world be built up], for the world from its very start was created only by kindness, as it is said, The world was built up through kindness” (Psalms 89:3).) The verse is thus stating that the brother’s kinship is kindness, (I.e., a brother’s kinship to his sister should express itself in kindness, as that is the essence of kinship, whereas he has acted to the contrary.) and it is not proper for the uncovering of nakedness. Thus in the case of other relations Scripture mentions that the reason [for the prohibition of sexual intercourse] is because they are next of kin, but in the case of a brother [and sister] it mentions as the reason the kindness which should be among them. The word ish [and if ‘a man’ shall take his sister] thus draws along with it a similar word [so that the expression it is ‘chesed’ becomes “it is ish chesed,” meaning: “it is a man who should have acted kindly to her, but he did the contrary, and hence his punishment is severe”]. Or it may be that [the expression it is ‘chesed’] is like: and I am prayer (Psalms 109:4.) [which means: “and I am ‘a man of’ prayer”; for thou art precious things (Daniel 9:23.) [which means: “for thou art ‘a man of’ precious things”]; Behold, I am against thee, O arrogance (Jeremiah 50:31.) [which means: “‘man of’ arrogance”], in all of which cases the word ish (man) is missing [and here too that word is omitted, as if it were to say: “it is ish chesed,” as explained above]. Or it may be that Scripture in these cases refers to these men by their qualities [as if to say, “kindness personifies the brother,” “I am all prayer,” “he is all preciousness,” or “arrogance personified”. Thus Scripture is stating, And if a man shall take his sister … and see her nakedness … he is [to have been] the man of kindness, and they shall be cut off, for he hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity. Thus He mentioned that the brother should have been the merciful man who doeth good to his own soul, but he was cruel and troubled his own flesh. (Proverbs 11:17.) For he should have done the kindness to her that brothers do, to give her in marriage to a husband, but he blemished and troubled her. Scripture ascribes the fault in such cases to the male, just as it is said, he hath uncovered his brother’s [wife’s] nakedness; they shall be childless (Verse 21.) [and likewise here too it states, ‘he’ hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness]. Similarly it is my opinion that the expression, lest he that heareth it ‘y’chasedcha’ (Proverbs 25:10.) means “lest he that hears it will remove from you all kindness, because you have not shown kindness to your friend who entrusted you with his secret.” [The word y’chasedcha here meaning “remove kindness”] is like: l’dashno (Exodus 27:3.) [the root of which deshen in its primary sense means “to cover with ashes,” but also has the opposite meaning of “removing the ashes”]; and all mine increase ‘t’shareish’ (Job 31:12.) [which, in its ordinary form, would mean “to take root,” but also has the opposite meaning of “rooting out”], and similar cases. [Likewise, y’chasedcha which is of the root chesed, kindness, means in the verse quoted “remove kindness,” and does not mean “shame.”] For it appears to me unlikely that the word chesed in the Sacred Language should bear such opposite meanings [as “kindness” and “shame”], when Scriptural texts abound in the praise of chesed and use it in prayers. The term chisudo, however, in Aramaic is another matter. Even that language differentiates between the two usages; “kindness” is translated chisdo, (Genesis 39:21: and He showed him ‘chased’ Onkelos translates: “and He showed him [Joseph] chisdo” (mercy, kindness).) and “shame” is translated chisudo. (As Onkelos translated in Genesis 34:14 [mentioned above].) Now Rabbeinu Chananel (See Exodus, Vol. II, p. 106, Note 45, on Rabbeinu Chananel. It is of interest here to add that in view of the fact that Ramban quotes an interpretation of Rabbeinu Chananel on a verse in the Book of Proverbs, it would seem to indicate that Rabbeinu Chananel’s exegetic activity extended also to the Scriptural books in the division of the Writings, in addition to those on the Pentateuch and the Prophets. See my introduction to “Peirushei Rabbeinu Chananel al Ha’torah,” Mosad Harav Kook, 1972.) wrote that ‘chesed’ to any people is sin (Proverbs 14:34.) means “reproach” [i.e., that sin is “a reproach” to any people]. But in my opinion this too is an expression of contrast [as will be explained]. For “righteousness” and chesed are mentioned in that verse [thus: Righteousness exalteth a nation, but ‘chesed’ to any people is sin], these being twin terms mentioned in all places, as for example: he that followeth after righteousness and ‘chesed;’ (Ibid., 21:21.) that I am the Eternal who exercises ‘chesed,’ justice, and righteousness in the earth. (Jeremiah 9:23.) Rather, the meaning of the verse in my opinion is as follows: “Righteousness if practiced exalteth a nation, but ‘chesed’ (mercy, kindness) is a reproach to any people if it fails to practice it.” Thus the verse is stating that upon righteousness and mercy depends the elevation or the decline of any people. Or it may be [that the verse is] stating: “Righteousness exalts any individual nation that practices it, while many nations sin by their failure to do mercy.” A similar example of such a verse is the one immediately preceding it: In the heart of him that hath discernment, wisdom resteth; but in the inward part of fools it maketh itself known, (Proverbs 14:33.) the meaning of which is that “it makes itself known that [wisdom] is not there,” for all who see them recognize by their deeds that they are fools and there is no understanding in them. (Deuteronomy 32:28.) These two verses [thus express their thoughts in their second half] in a negative manner. (Thus: Mercy is a reproach to any people if it does not practice it. In the inward part of fools it makes itself known that wisdom does not rest therein.) Emor
חסד הוא IT IS A WICKED THING — It is an Aramaic expression, the Hebrew חרפה (disgrace) being in that language חסודא (cf. Onkelos on Genesis 34:14). A Midrashic explanation of it (of חסד הוא) is; If you should say, "But Cain married his sister!" then I reply, Cain's case was an exceptional one; an act of kindness (חסד) was done by the Omnipresent in order that His world might be built up through him (i. e. He made the propagation of the human race possible through this union), as it is said (Psalms 89:3) "The world was built up through חסד, loving-kindness" (Sifra, Kedoshim, Chapter 11 11; Sanhedrin 58b).
“Jacob’s sons answered” [34:13]. The children of Jacob answered. Bahya writes here. Why did the children answer for their father? The explanation is that the children honored their father, since their father was ashamed and could not respond, out of being disgraced. Thus, the children had to answer with deceit. They answered with wisdom. The children of Jacob thought: we can certainly do something deceitful, since our sister Dinah was defiled. The deceit was that the children of Jacob said: the whole city should circumcise their foreskins. Perhaps only the household of Hamor and Shechem would be willing and the others in the city would not want to do so. The children of Jacob thought: we will kill the whole city along with Shechem and Hamor, because they did not observe what we demanded of them. If they will all circumcise themselves, then we will come on the third day after their circumcision and will kill them. So write Hizkuni and Bahya. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 34:13–14; Bahya, Genesis, 34:13.)
They said to them, We cannot do such a thing—to give our sister [in marriage] to an uncircumcised man, for that is a disgrace to us.
and said to them, We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who is uncircumcised, because that would be a disgrace to us.
| אַךְ־בְּזֹ֖את נֵא֣וֹת לָכֶ֑ם אִ֚ם תִּהְי֣וּ כָמֹ֔נוּ לְהִמֹּ֥ל לָכֶ֖ם כׇּל־זָכָֽר׃ | 15 J | Only on this condition will we agree with you; that you will become like us in that every male among you is circumcised. |
אך...נאות, we would be willing.
נאות לכם means WE WILL CONSENT UNTO YOU: it has the same meaning as (2 Kings 12:9) ויאותו “and they consented”.
להמול means TO BE CIRCUMCISED — It is not an active infinitive (Kal), but a passive infinitive (Niphal).
נֵאות, wie נאות ein Hebel heißt, mit dem etwas in Bewegung gesetzt wird, also אות: das geistige Mittel, womit irgend eine Erkenntnis bewirkt wird. Niphal, daher: sich als Mittel hingeben, als Brücke, damit ein anderer, האות etwas erreiche.
Sie sahen nur die Alternative: Entweder, dies geschieht nicht, und das war das Wahrscheinlichste, denn sie konnten keinen natürlicheren Einwand finden, die Verschwägerung mit dem Herrn des Landes abzulehnen; oder es geschieht: dann konnten sie in dem geschwächten Zustande der Umgebung ihre Schwester befreien. In allem dem lag noch nichts sehr Tadelnswertes; denn eine Schwester aus so schmählichen Zuständen zu retten, sind alle rechtlichen Mittel erlaubt.
Will we be reconciled with you. Rashi is saying that נאות does not mean נויה (beauty) or נאוה (habitation). For if so, in v. 22 it should not have written יאותו לנו but ינאו לנו, which is the correct conjugation for נוי.
To be circumcised. I.e., it is in the passive form, not the active. This is because the root is מול, and if [it was active] it would be written לָמול. And if the root is נמל, then it would be written לִנְמוֹל.
Only with this will we accede to you: If you become like us to have every male among you circumcised. Since it is a disgrace for us to be uncircumcised, we cannot become like you. Consequently, you must agree to become similar to us.
Rabbi said: Isaac circumcised Jacob, and Esau; and Esau despised the covenant of circumcision just as he despised the birthright, as it is said, "So Esau despised his birthright" (Gen. 25:34). Jacob clung to the covenant of circumcision, and circumcised his sons and his grandsons. Whence (do we know) that the sons of Jacob were circumcised? Because it is said, "Only on this condition will the men consent unto us to dwell with us… if every male among us be circumcised, as they are circumcised." (Gen. 34:22). Another text says, "Only on this condition will we consent unto you: if ye will be as we be" (Gen. 34:15). Hence thou canst learn that the sons of Jacob were circumcised. The sons of Jacob circumcised their sons and their grandsons. They gave it to them as an inheritance for an everlasting statute, until Pharaoh the Wicked arose and decreed harsh laws concerning them, and withheld from them the covenant of circumcision. And on the day when the children of Israel went forth from Egypt all the people were circumcised, both young and old, as it is said, "For all the people that came out were circumcised" (Josh. 5:5).
HALAKHAH: “The following are the holidays of the Gentiles,” etc. (A reformulated parallel is in Berakhot8:7, Notes 157–160.) Rav said ‘edehen and Samuel said `edehen. He who said ‘edehen, they are their witnesses (Is.44:9.) . He who said `edehen, for the day of their misfortune is near (Deut. 32:35.) . Rav said me`abberim, and Samuel said me‘abberin (The technical term for intercalation in the calendar, adding a month.) . He who said me`abberin, one adds a limb to it. He who said me‘abberin, like a pregnant woman. Rav said ye`utu, and Samuel said, ye‘utu (The condition for a benediction over fire at the end of the Sabbath is that one have use of it.) . He who said ye`utu, but with this we shall be agreeable to you (Gen. 34:15.) . He who said ye‘utu, to know, to inform the weary of wisdom (Is. 50:4.) .
“One does not recite the benediction over a lamp unless one has profited from its light.” Rav says y’utu, and Samuel says y‘utu (Under the influence of Accadic, Babylonian Jews early on had lost the difference between aleph (’) and ayin(‘) (and he, ḥet); they re-acquired the differences only later under the influence of Arabic. Similarly, under the influence of Greek, in the speech of most Galileans also aleph and ayin had become silent. Since the Mishnah was transmitted orally, there was no difference in pronunciation between the two silent consonants and the interpretation of the words depended on whether one was imagining one or the other. The particular case here is not discussed in the Babli. The examples from Eruvin and Avodah zarah are discussed following these Mishnayot in the Babli where at other places one also finds examples of a silent ח (Beẓah35b) and switches between ס (s) and צ (ss) (Bava qama 116b). In most cases, roots of Rabbinic expressions are sought in Biblical Hebrew.) . He who says y’utu, (Gen. 34:15) “But with this we shall be agreeable (nē’ôt) to you.” He who says y‘utu, (Is. 50:4) “To know, to inform (lā‘ût) the weary of wisdom.” There (Mishnah Erubin 5:1) we have stated: How does one complete cities (“Completion” is the determination of a rectangle oriented NS, EW whose edges are distant 2000 cubits from the last house of the city in that direction.) ? Rav says m’abbrin, and Samuel says m‘abberin. He who says me’abberin, one adds a limb (אבר) to it. And he who says me‘abberin, like a pregnant (עוברה) woman. There (Mishnah Avodah Zarah 1:1) we have stated: Before the holidays of the Gentiles159 (One may not trade with them.) . Rav says ‘êdêhen and Samuel says ’êdêhen. He who says ’êdêhen, (Deut. 32:35) “For the day of their misfortune (אידם) is near.” He who says ‘êdêhen, (Is.44:9) “They (The idols. In the Babli (Avodah zarah 2a), the interpretation of this verse takes up several pages.) are their witnesses (עידיהם), may they neither see nor know, so that they may come to naught.” How does Samuel deal with Rav’s reason? They are their witnesses, in the future they will bring to naught their worshippers on the day of judgment.
This is the only way we will consent to you: if you will be like us, circumcising all your males.
But in this we will accede to you, if you will be as we are by circumcising every male.
| וְנָתַ֤נּוּ אֶת־בְּנֹתֵ֙ינוּ֙ לָכֶ֔ם וְאֶת־בְּנֹתֵיכֶ֖ם נִֽקַּֽח־לָ֑נוּ וְיָשַׁ֣בְנוּ אִתְּכֶ֔ם וְהָיִ֖ינוּ לְעַ֥ם אֶחָֽד׃ | 16 J | Then we will give our daughters to you and take your daughters to ourselves; and we will dwell among you and become as one kindred. |
ונתנו את בנותינו לכם, "and then we will give our daughters to you, etc." Here the brothers displayed great astuteness. As a rule, swindlers prefer to be very vague when describing the conditions under which they enter into commitments; not only that, but they usually leave the other party many loopholes in order to lure that party into entering into the desired contract. The sons of Jacob reversed this procedure in order to remove any doubt from the people of Shechem that they were being tricked. They offered their daughters in marriage without reservations and explained that as a result they themselves would marry the local girls. All of this was designed to convince Chamor and his people that their intentions were honourable.
ונתנו, with a dagesh in the second letter נ to double it. The meaning is the same as the regular future ניתן “we will give.” A similar construction of this verb is found in Lamentations 5,6 מצרים נתנו יד, meaning the same as נתננו, “we hold out a hand to Egypt.”
וְנָתַנּוּ THEN WILL WE GIVE — The second נ has a Dagesh because it serves the purpose of two -נs - וְנָתַנְנוּ (cf. Rashi on Genesis חנני 33:11).
ואת בנותיכם נקח לנו AND WE WILL TAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO US — You will find that in the proposition which Hamor made to Jacob (Genesis 34:9) and in the reply of Jacob’s sons to Hamor (in this verse) they (both parties to the proposition) regarded the sons of Jacob as being the more important — that they should take of the daughters of Shechem whomsoever they would select for themselves and that they should give their daughters to them (the men of Shechem) as they (Jacob’s sons) would think fit, as it is written, “and we will give our daughters’’ — as we think fit — “and we will take your daughters unto us” — whomsoever we please. When, however, Hamor and his son spoke to the inhabitants of their city (v. 21) they reversed the matter, saying, “their daughters we will take to us for wives, and our daughters we will give unto them", instead of saying “they will give their daughters to us, and they will take our daughters to themselves", in order to induce them to consent to be circumcised.
We will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters for us, and we will live with you, and we will become one people.
“We will take your daughters to ourselves” [34:16]. Rashi writes. The children of Jacob said: you should take our daughters that we will give you and we will have the choice to take your daughters that we will want. However, Shechem and Hamor came to their friends in the city to convince them to circumcise themselves. They said: we will have the choice to take the daughters of Jacob’s children that we want to have, only let us observe the circumcision. (Rashi, Genesis, 34:16.)
... This is difficult: If [only] Shechem sinned, what was the sin of the [rest of the] city [for which they deserved] to die? Rambam (Hilchot Melachim 9:14) answered that Noachides are commanded to set up courts, and [for]any sin which they violate, they are killed. Here, they witnessed the evil act [of Shechem kidnapping Dinah] and did not judge him. For this they deserved to die, for they failed to judge him. But truthfully, these words are surprising, for how could they have judged the son of their prince, since they feared him? Even though they are commanded to judge, that is when they can judge, but “G-d exempts one who is under duress” (Bava Kama 28b), and how could they have judged him? It appears that there is no difficulty [explaining why all the males in Shechem deserved to die], because [a war between] two nations is different. The Jewish people and the Canaanites are considered two nations, as it is written “and we will be one nation” (Bereishit 34:16), [implying that] initially they were not considered one nation. Therefore they were permitted to fight, like any nation who fights another nation, which the Torah permits. Even though the Torah says, “When you draw near to a city to fight it, you shall offer peace” (Devarim 20:10), that applies when they have done nothing to Israel. When they have acted against Israel, as they did here when they breached them to commit an evil act, then even though only one of them sinned, since he is part of the nation and since they instigated, it is permitted to avenge this from all of them. This is so with all wars which they encountered, like “Attack the Midianites” (Bamidbar 25:17). Even though there were many who had done nothing, this is not a [valid] distinction. Since they were members of the nation who acted wickedly against [the Jewish people], it was permitted to engage [all the Midianites] in war, and such is the case with all wars.
הן עם אחד, they are all of one mind, as in Genesis 34,16 והיינו לעם “let us become a single nation.”
we were delivered Heb. נִתַּנוּ, like נִתַּנְנוּ. The “dagesh” in the “nun” is instead of another “nun,” like (II Chron. 14:10): “for we rely (תִשְּׁעַנוּ) on You,” like נִשְּׁעַנְנוּ. (Gen. 34:16): “... then we will give (וְנָתַנוּ) our daughters,” like וְנָתַנְנוּ.
We extended [a hand]. נָתַנּוּ is] the same as נָתַנְנוּ. The dagesh in the nun takes the place of the second nun, as in, “for all is from You, and from Your hand we have given נָתַנּוּ it to You,” (I Divrei Hayomim 29:14. ) and as in, “and we will give וְנָתַנּוּ our daughters to you.” (Bereishis 34:16. )
“And numerous” - as it is stated, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field, and you increased and grew and became highly ornamented, your breasts were set and your hair grew, but you were naked and barren.” (Ez. 16:7) “And he became there a nation” - This teaches that Israel was distinguishable there: The interpretation of Israel being distinguishable is based solely on the word goy, nation. (When the text in Deuteronomy says that Israel became a “nation” it means that they remained distinguishable from the Egyptians.) The Maggid interprets gadol atzum, “great, powerful” as a reference to, “And the children of Israel multiplied and swarmed.” (Ex. 1:7) Rav, numerous, is interpreted as, “I have given you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field…” (Ez. 16:7) The Maggid suggests that this verse in the First Fruit declaration contains four descriptive adjectives: nation, great, powerful, and numerous that describe four wondrous qualities of the Israelites when they were in the Egypt. First, they remained a goy, “a nation;” that is, they always remained a distinctive nation unto themselves, separate from the Egyptians. During the two hundred and ten years that they were enslaved they never mixed with the Egyptians while living among them. Most other peoples that live among another nation, become one people with them. They stop practicing their own customs and they become like the other people. This is what Shechem and Chamor said to the people at the city gate (Gen. 34:21) and what Jacob’s sons said to the people of Shechem, “Then we will give our daughters to you and we will take your daughters for us and we will live with you and we will become nation.” (Gen. 34:16) But this did not happen to the Israelites living in Egypt. They did not change their Jewish names, nor their language, nor their faith, nor their unique manner of dress the many years that they dwelled among the Egyptians. Moses, our teacher said, “Has God ventured to take a nation from the midst of another nation.” (Deut. 4:34) Israel and Egypt remained separate nations, one from the other. This is how the Maggid interprets the word goy. “This teaches that Israel was distinguishable there.” A distinguishable sign refers to the customs that made them recognizable and set them apart. They were distinguishable and recognizable from the Egyptians in all their customs and thoughts. Further, he interpreted the word gadol, “great,” as a reference to the increase of Israel’s population. According to the ways of the world, nations increase by adopting people from other nations, as in the verse, “And many people of the land became Jews…” (Esther 8:17) But this was not the case in Egypt. Though they remained distinguishable and separate, yet they miraculously increased in number. Balaam took note of this in his prophecy, “As I see them from the mountain tops, gaze on them from the heights, there is a people that dwells apart, not reckoned among the nations, who can count the dust of Jacob…” (Num. 23:9-10) I understand this to mean: other nations increase by other groups joining them, but this nation is not like them. I have seen that they branched off from, “Their mountain tops,” the Patriarchs and “from the heights,” the Matriarchs. They have had a direct set of roots one from the other so that they were a “people that dwells apart,” and no outsider ever infiltrated them. This is what Balaam meant when he said, “They are not reckoned among the nations. Nations that do not mix with others, do not increase, but this people increases without limits. Balaam said, “Who can count the dust of Jacob?” All of this is an interpretation of the word “gadol.” The Maggid now offers a separate interpretation of the word, atzum, “mighty.” It means that they were strong and robust. The sages already offered this interpretation regarding the verse, “They grew numerous and strong, most exceedingly,” (Ex. 1:7) to mean that they increased in number. That is, the women did not miscarry and each woman gave birth to sextuplets, as it Scripture states, “multiplied and swarmed and grew numerous.” Each of these verbs is plural and therefore represents (at least) two. Thus, they add up to six. However, since twins are generally weakly because by nature they divide into two, therefore twins tend to be smaller and feebler; it is only though God’s compassion that many twins are born from the same womb. Yet, despite this, these children were hardy and strong limbed. Three explanations were brought based on the adjectives in this verse: first, that the Israelites were distinguishable (goy)… second that they grew populous (gadol), and third that they were strong (atzum)… But there is one more descriptive word used for the Israelites, rav, numerous, for the Israelites fourth characteristic. All children in their infancy face many dangers and die of illnesses because they are tender, as Jacob said to Esau, “My lord knows that the children are frail…if they are driven hard a single day, all the flocks will die.” (Gen. 33:13) Even so, while they were in Egypt this was not so for the Israelite children. They did not suffer from the trauma of exile…and they continue to grow like weeds. That is why, the Maggid brings the verse, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field…” Ezekiel was saying that these children grow on their own like plants that come forth from the earth, bursting forth in various colors without any labor or effort. No artist can create something as beautiful as they are. So too, the Israelites grew in all their beauty without training or education as they were born naturally complete. The verse states, “You increased and grew and became highly ornamented, your breasts were set and your hair grew.” This verse speaks of the fate of the body and it beauty, and its characteristics which are described as “highly ornamented.” This is the case even though they “were naked and barren,” that is, lacking in Torah learning and ethical characteristics which govern a person’s actions. The sages have already taught us that when it came time to give birth in Egypt the daughters of Israel were fearful lest the Egyptians try to take their children and cast them into the Nile River. They would go out into the field and give birth to them under a tree so that no one would hear their cries. About this it is said, “I have aroused you under the apple tree; there your mother was in labor with you; there she who bore you was in labor.” (Song 8:5) They would leave their babies there and return to nurse them, and the babies would grow up on their own among the bushes, as it is said, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field.” The verse continues, “Your breasts were set;” this is a reference to Moses and Aaron who were like two breasts which God prepared for Israel. “Your hair grew” is a reference to the twelve tribes, who were already worthy of being redeemed. “But you were naked and barren.” They were barren of commandments. They were like a bride and the Holy One was the groom. We have now answered the questions in the fifty-third, fourth, fifth and sixth gates. However one should note that the Maggid uses the expression milamed, “This is to teach…” twice, in response to the passage, “He resided there,” and “They became a nation” since these two explanations were based on logical inference from the verse In Deuteronomy 26 in the style of the Torah portion and the meaning of the verses. There was nothing specific explaining them as in the other verses which are expounded.
[Then] we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters for ourselves. We will live together with you, and we will become one people.
And we will give our daughters to you, and will take your daughters to us, and dwell with you, and be one people.
| וְאִם־לֹ֧א תִשְׁמְע֛וּ אֵלֵ֖ינוּ לְהִמּ֑וֹל וְלָקַ֥חְנוּ אֶת־בִּתֵּ֖נוּ וְהָלָֽכְנוּ׃ | 17 J | But if you will not listen to us and become circumcised, we will take our daughter and go.” |
OUR DAUGHTER. They spoke thus because she was a minor. (Since Dinah was a minor they could threaten, then we will take our daughter, and we will be gone.) They referred to Dinah as our daughter because they spoke on behalf of Jacob.
We will take our daughter and go. Since Shechem was unaware that relations with the uncircumcised was a disgrace to them, there was nothing to avenge. With this answer they accomplished three things: 1) They concealed their desire for revenge. 2) They convinced him that circumcision was the only way to acquire Deenah. 3) They gave the impression that if everyone were circumcised they would stay.
ואם לא תשמעו, "If you are not agreeable, etc." This was also a clever move. They did not threaten retaliatory action for the rape of their sister but only told Chamor that in that case they would take their sister and leave the region. They made it clear that they did feel insulted and that therefore they could not consider remaining in a region where rape went unopposed. On the other hand, if the people were to circumcise themselves en masse this would show a change of heart on their part towards the laws of sexual purity. It was the brothers' astuteness that caused Chamor to tell his people that the family of Jacob were sincere (verse 21).
The brothers also intended to speed up a decision by Chamor and Shechem personally when they held out the prospect of "we will take our daughter and leave." Perhaps Chamor thought that as soon as Dinah would be removed from the region the brothers would prepare to take their revenge.
ואם לא...בתנו, as we explained on 34,9
ולקחנו את בתנו, even though she is at this point in time locked up in your house we will liberate her from you.
והלכנו, with all our wealth which you would otherwise benefit from.
If you do not heed us, to be circumcised, we will take our daughter home, and we will go. Since the brothers are speaking in their father’s name, they call Dina their daughter. 12
ולקחנו את בתינו, “we will take our houses, etc.” They did not threaten to liberate their sister by force. The reason they did not was because they were speaking on behalf of their father.
But if you do not listen to [obey] us to be circumcised, we will take our daughter and go.
But if you will not hearken to us to be circumcised, we will take our daughter by force and will go.
| וַיִּֽיטְב֥וּ דִבְרֵיהֶ֖ם בְּעֵינֵ֣י חֲמ֑וֹר וּבְעֵינֵ֖י שְׁכֶ֥ם בֶּן־חֲמֽוֹר׃ | 18 J | Their words pleased Hamor and Hamor’s son Shechem. |
Their statement was favorable in the eyes of Hamor, and in the eyes of Shekhem son of Hamor. They concluded from the response of Jacob’s sons that their proposal had been accepted on the condition that they circumcise themselves.
Their words were agreeable in the eyes of Chamor, and in the eyes of Shechem, the son of Chamor.
And their words were pleasing in the eyes of Hamor, and in the eyes of Shekem, the son of Hamor.
| וְלֹֽא־אֵחַ֤ר הַנַּ֙עַר֙ לַעֲשׂ֣וֹת הַדָּבָ֔ר כִּ֥י חָפֵ֖ץ בְּבַֽת־יַעֲקֹ֑ב וְה֣וּא נִכְבָּ֔ד מִכֹּ֖ל בֵּ֥ית אָבִֽיו׃ | 19 J | And the youth lost no time in doing the thing, for he wanted Jacob’s daughter. Now he was the most respected in his father’s house. |
והוא נכבד מכל בית אביו, “and he was the most revered person of his father’s family.” He knew that they would not refuse his request.
DEFERRED NOT. Echar (deferred) is not of the same grammatical form as va-echar (and stayed) in and stayed (va-echar) until now (Gen. 32:5). (Both words look alike and are identically vocalized.) Our word is a third person pi’el perfect following the paradigm of berakh (did curse) in Naboth did curse (berakh) God and the King (I Kings 21:13). (However, echar in Gen. 32:5 is a first person kal imperfect (Weiser). Here the alef is a root letter. In Gen. 32:5 the root alef is missing, for the alef therein is a first person kal prefix (Filwarg).)
ולא...לעשות הדבר, to gather together the men of his town and to speak with them.
והוא נכבד, seeing that he was highly esteemed. he was able to persuade the citizens of his town to circumcise themselves for his and their sake.
(1) LOST NO TIME. From the same root as (Exod. 22:28), "Do not put off," which is a pi'el, like (Exod. 23:24), "smash" [t'shaber].
(2) AND HE WAS RESPECTED. And people heeded him.
(19-24) Es erscheint als etwas ganz Ungeheuerliches, daß eine ganze freie Bürgerschaft sich bereit finden lasse, sich zu beschneiden, damit er die Dina behalte! Ein ungewöhnlicher, nur hier, und zwar wiederholt vorkommender Ausdruck zur Bezeichnung dieser Ortsbewohner dürfte in dieser Beziehung vielleicht einige Aufklärung bieten. Wiederholt werden sie V. 24 יוצאי שער עירו genannt. Eine städtische Bevölkerung heißt sonst: באי שער העיר. So bei Abraham (Kap. 23, 11 u. 48), wo eine städtische Volksversammlung, ein Gemeinderat, über den Fall zu entscheiden hatte. Der Ausdruck יוצאי שער עירו scheint fast darauf hinzuweisen, daß die Bewohner der Stadt Schechem größtenteils Bauern, Landleute waren, die ihr Beruf täglich hinaus aufs Land führte. Demgemäß waren bielleicht Chamor und Schechem Gutsherren der ganzen Gegend, die Leute von ihnen abhängig und ihnen hörig, gewöhnt, sich dem Herbsten zu unterwerfen.
והוא נכבד, in spite of his high reputation he did not hesitate to agree to circumcise himself, because he had taken such a liking to the daughter of Yaakov.
The lad did not tarry to perform the matter, because he desired Jacob’s daughter. And he was more respected than all the house of his father. It would seem that Shekhem was the firstborn, his father’s heir.
Moses’s error had also been that he had believed in the supremacy of natural law as dictated by the intellect. He had to be taught that this was not so. In the word az, referring to the past, he wished to atone for his erstwhile error. The end of the Midrash quoted at the outset, namely that the righteous can achieve atonement with the very thing that constituted their error, expresses the same thought as what had prompted Moses to commence the shirah, song with the word az. This song is divided into five sections, each representing a distinct concept. 1) The need to give thanks to the Lord. 2) Acknowledging the mastery G-d displays over His creation.(verses 3-6) 3) The reputation G-d acquired due to His personal intervention in the fate of individuals as well as nations, plus the fact that despite His involvement in minutiae, His stature does not suffer from a decline in image, (verse 7-13) 4) Proof that everything that happened was intentional, not accidental, (verses 14-16) 5) The declaration that G-d’s power is eternal and will extend into all future eras, i.e. "the Lord will rule forever more."
Man's actions can be the result of three distinct causes. They can be the result of free choice made intellectually; they can be the result of man liking the activity he performs, or they can be the result of the immediate benefit he expects to derive fom his action. A further cause prompting man to act, is an inner urge, which does not bother to rationalise the purpose and sense of one's actions, as long as the action serves to gratify the urge that has prompted it. When a sailor, whose ship is about to founder, throws the cargo overboard in order to lighten the weight of the ship, and in order to avoid sinking the whole ship, he acts from a choice made intellectually, despite the fact that he resents either of the two options that had been open to him. This is similar to the halachic dilemma faced by people who need to violate a commandment in order to survive. Some such decisions must be based on the principle of yehareg ve-al ya-avor, rather be killed than become guilty of that violation; others will be based on the principle ya-avor ve-al yehareg, better to sin and survive than forego the chance of performing other mitzvot through having permitted himself to be killed. These options are discussed in Sanhedrin 76. If Isaac loved Esau because the latter would bring him venison, then an activity which would result in Isaac receiving such venison can be said to have originated in a feeling of love. Such an activity involves more of one's desire plus planning, than the one described previously. When a person is in the grip of lust or similar emotion however, he becomes so irrational that he will pay any price to satisfy his lust or greed. Chamor and Shechem are examples of people who made unreasonable concessions on behalf of their townspeople in order to satisfy the lust to possess Dinah, Jacob's daughter. (Genesis 34,11-19) In order to better comprehend the last example, picture a driver, a carriage and horses. Although the driver is in charge of the carriage, should the horses become unmanageable, the carriage will be drawn in the direction the horses want, and the driver will be powerless to prevent this, as long as carriage and horses are coupled together. In this parable, the horse represents the will, the lust, the urge; the carriage represents the person; the driver represents the choice made intellectually, the ability to discriminate, the gift man has been equipped with. The relationship of G'd to Zion is not based only on bechirah, choice between relative evils, but as the Psalmist 132, 13, terms it "for G'd has chosen Zion because He wanted it as His residence." The choice of the Jewish people as the chosen people, was dictated by intellectual considerations, but it was re-inforced by the Divine equivalent of ta-avah, an almost overpowering urge. This is underlined in the verse that follows "This is My rest forever, here I will dwell for I have desired it." In Deut. 10,15, Moses describes it as follows: "G'd took a strong liking to your forefathers, to love them; and He chose their descendants after them, more than all other nations, as of this day." This shows that the love sprang from a strong liking G'd had developed towards them, based on their conduct. However, the love for the descendants is due to His choosing them (bachar) in comparison with other nations who were on a lower level, morally. That this is so, is confirmed in Song of Songs, where we read that Israel is "like a lily among thorns, so is My partner among the daughters." (Song of Songs 2,2) The terms chashak, love, choice, are used in descending order of preference. The first one is natural, unreasoning; the second one is deliberate, planned, but based on sound reason for the attraction. The third one is something forced upon one, in which one makes the best of a given situation. Of the many expressions of G'ds love for the Jewish people which are recorded in the Torah, some stem from relatively mild forms of love. None express a stronger bond of love than the setting aside of the mo-adim, the holydays that enable us to commune with G'd, and be in the presence of the shechinah, like children in the company of their father in joy and happiness.
“Ḥamor spoke with them, saying: The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter. Please, give her to him as a wife” (Genesis 34:8). “Ḥamor spoke with them, saying” – Reish Lakish said: With three expressions of fondness, the Holy One blessed be He expressed His fondness for Israel: With cleaving, with desiring, and with wanting. With cleaving – “but you who cleave [to the Lord…]” (Deuteronomy 4:4). With desiring – “It is not for your multitude that the Lord desired [you]” (Deuteronomy 7:7). With wanting – “All the nations will praise you, [as you will be a wanted land]” (Malachi 3:12). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With cleaving – “his soul cleaved [to Dina daughter of Jacob]” (Genesis 34:3). With desiring – “The soul of my son Shekhem desires your daughter” (Genesis 34:8). With wanting – “because he wanted Jacob’s daughter” (Genesis 34:19). Rabbi Abba bar Elisha adds two more: With love and with speech. With love – “I have loved you” (Malachi 1:2). With speech – “speak to the heart of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2). And we learn it from the portion of this wicked one: With love – “he loved the young woman” (Genesis 34:3), with speech – “he spoke tenderly to [al lev] the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). Do you have a person who speaks to the heart [al lev]? It is, rather, matters that calm the heart. He said to her: ‘Your father, for one field, see how much he wasted and how much money he expended. I, who have the means to give you several orchards and several fields of grain, all the more so.’ “And intermarry with us; your daughters you will give to us, and you will take our daughters” (Genesis 34:9). “Intermarry with us” – Rabbi Elazar said: An Israelite never places his finger into the mouth of an idolater first, unless the idolater first placed his finger into the mouth of the Israelite. “Intermarry with us” – “do not intermarry with them” (Deuteronomy 7:3). They said: “Intermarry with us.” They said; they demanded first. (The Malbim (on Genesis 34:9) explains that normally in cases of intermarriage the non-Jew is the one who initiated the marriage.) “Increase greatly the bridal payment and gift, and I will give in accordance with what you shall say to me, and give me the young woman as a wife” (Genesis 34:12). “Increase bridal payment [mohar] and gift [umatan].” Mohar – dowry; matan – addition. (An addition to the standard dowry.)
... “He will save him because He delights in him.” (Tehillim 22:9) R’ Shimon ben Lakish said that the Holy One expressed His love for Israel with three languages of affection, with ‘cleaving,’ with ‘desiring,’ and with ‘wanting.’ With cleaving – “But you who cleave to the Lord your God are alive…” (Devarim 4:4) With desiring – “…did the Lord desire you…” (Devarim 7:7) With wanting – “…for the Lord wants you…” (Yeshayahu 62:4) We learn all of these from that wicked one of the story of “And Dinah went out…” (Bereshit 34:1) With cleaving – “And his soul cleaved to Dinah…” (Bereshit 34:3) With desiring – “My son Shechem his soul desires your daughter.” (Bereshit 34:8) With wanting – “…because he wanted Jacob's daughter…” (Bereshit 34:19) R’ Aba bar Elisha added two more, with love and with speaking to the heart. With love, as it says “I loved you, said the Lord…” (Malachi 1:2) With speaking to the heart, as it says “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem…” (Yeshayahu 40:2) We learn these also from the story of that wicked one – “…he loved the girl and spoke to the girl's heart.” (Bereshit 34:3) “He will save him because He delights in him.”
Neither hath He hid His face from him; But when he cried unto Him, He heard: – (שָׁמֵעַ here) is perfect of the verb of the form (חָפֵץ in) "because he had delight (חָפֵץ) in Jacob's daughter" (Gen. 34:19).
There are seven types of [false] Pharisees: the Shechemite Pharisee, the Nakfaite Pharisee, the Miktzoite Pharisee, the Machobaite Pharisee, (The false Pharisees mentioned by their locales are meant to indicate a specific type of false piety. The members of Shechem, for example, agreed to circumcise themselves, but only so their prince could marry Jacob’s daughter (see Genesis 34).) the Pharisee for the sake of a profession, the Pharisee who was obligated by marriage, the Pharisee driven by lust, and the Pharisee driven by fear.
The young man did not delay doing the thing, because he desired the daughter of Yaakov. He was the most honored person in his father’s house.
And the young man delayed not to do the thing; because he wished for the daughter of Jakob; and he was more honourable than all his father's house.
| וַיָּבֹ֥א חֲמ֛וֹר וּשְׁכֶ֥ם בְּנ֖וֹ אֶל־שַׁ֣עַר עִירָ֑ם וַֽיְדַבְּר֛וּ אֶל־אַנְשֵׁ֥י עִירָ֖ם לֵאמֹֽר׃ | 20 J | So Hamor and his son Shechem went to the public place (public place Lit. “gate.”) of their town and spoke to their town council, (their town council Heb. ’anshe ‘iram; NJPS “their fellow townsmen,” trad. “the men of their city.” Cf. Ruth 3.11; 4.1–2. See the Dictionary under ’ish.) saying, |
Lit. “gate.”
ויבא...אל שער עירם, this is where they would hold an assembly of the elders of the town together with the other influential citizens as was the custom pertaining to all matters of common concern. We find examples of such conduct both in Deuteronomy 25,7 and in Ruth 4,1. where the word השערה means that this is the place where assembles were held.
Hamor and Shekhem his son came to the gate of their city. Generally, behind the gate of a city there was a square, where its important residents would convene. 13 And they spoke with the men of their city, presenting the deal to them. They omitted Shekhem’s love for Dina, which did not concern the city residents, and which would certainly not have helped convince them to undertake such an extreme measure as circumcision. Rather, they laid out before them only the political and commercial elements of the deal, saying:
MISHNA: One may wash the baby on Shabbat, both before the circumcision and after the circumcision. And one may sprinkle hot water on him by hand but not with a vessel, in order to depart from the usual manner in which this is done. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: One may wash the baby on the third day following his circumcision, even if that third day occurs on Shabbat. On the third day following circumcision, the baby is considered to be in danger, as it is stated with regard to the men of Shekhem, who were circumcised: “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25). This teaches us that on the third day the pain of circumcision poses a danger.
When the local leaders (local leaders Or “locals.” Heb. ’anshe ha-maqom; NJPS “the men of the place.” Cf., e.g., Gen. 34.20; Judg. 8.15–17. See the Dictionary under ’ish.) asked him about his wife, he said, “She is my sister,” for he was afraid to say “my wife,” thinking, “The local leaders might kill me on account of Rebekah, for she is beautiful.”
And now, daughter, have no fear. I will do in your behalf whatever you ask, for all the (Lit. “gate of my people.”) elders of my town-c know what a fine woman you are.
Chamor and his son, Shechem came to the gate of their city, and they spoke to the men of their city saying,
And Hamor and Shekem his son came to the gate of their city, and spake with the men of the gate of their city, saying,
| הָאֲנָשִׁ֨ים הָאֵ֜לֶּה שְֽׁלֵמִ֧ים הֵ֣ם אִתָּ֗נוּ וְיֵשְׁב֤וּ בָאָ֙רֶץ֙ וְיִסְחֲר֣וּ אֹתָ֔הּ וְהָאָ֛רֶץ הִנֵּ֥ה רַֽחֲבַת־יָדַ֖יִם לִפְנֵיהֶ֑ם אֶת־בְּנֹתָם֙ נִקַּֽח־לָ֣נוּ לְנָשִׁ֔ים וְאֶת־בְּנֹתֵ֖ינוּ נִתֵּ֥ן לָהֶֽם׃ | 21 J | “These people (people (So NJPS.) Lit. “participants whose involvement defines the depicted situation.” See the Dictionary under ’ish.) are our friends; let them settle in the land and move about in it, for the land is large enough for them; we will take their daughters to ourselves as wives and give our daughters to them. |
ONE. We begin with a benediction (This letter was written in reply to the “good tiding…referring to the completion of the whole Talmud,” etc.; the author, therefore, responds firstly with a benediction, in accordance with the Talmudic precept (Berachot 59b) that one is to laud G–d for glad tidings. Cf. Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 221:1; Seder Birchot Hanehenin, by the author, ch. 12.) to bless and to give thanks to the L–rd, for He is good: (Par. Psalms 106:1; etc.) my soul has heard and was revived (Par. Isaiah 55:3.) by a good tiding—there is no Good but Torah, (Avot 4:3; Berachot 5a.) the Torah of the L–rd is whole (Par. Psalms 19:8.) —referring to the completion of the whole Talmud in most cities and congregations of the men of our chasidic brotherhood. (In Hebrew אנשי שלומים (שלומינו), this is a term used to denote particular groups in general, and especially in frequent use among Chasidim, when referring to their own group(s). The term is of Biblical origin, cf. Jeremiah 38:22; Obadiah 1:7; cf. also Genesis 34:21. The study of the complete Talmud, to which this letter refers, was not an incidental occasion. R. Schneur Zalman demanded of his followers that this should be done annually, in every city and, where so applicable, by every congregation; see Kuntres Acharon, Essay 9.) Gratitude for the past, and a request for the future: may G–d grant and continue to strengthen their hearts among the mighty (Par. Amos 2:16, though relating it to Avot d’R. Nattan 23:1: “The mighty are none others than the mighty in Torah.”) with the might of Torah (See Derech Eretz Zuta, ch. 4: “There is no might but in Torah.” See also Bamidbar Rabbah 10:8.) in like manner from year to year and make known to mankind the might of the Oral Torah (See previous note; also, in the scheme of the sefirot, the Oral Torah is related to the sefirah of gevurah—cf. Zohar I:253a; ibid. III:257a; et passim.) and its strong (עוז) power. (Lit.: וכחה עוז—“and her strong power.” The Torah is referred to as “power” and “strength” (Zohar II:58a and Nitzutzei Orot, by R. Chaim David Azulai, ad loc.; cf. below, note 42); see Likkutei Amarim, Part I, ch. 36.)
רחבת ידים, “enough large places:” we find the word: יד used in this sense also in Deuteronomy. 23,13 ויד תהיה לך, “you shall have a small place there” and explained in this sense by Ibn Ezra.
PEACEABLE. They are at peace. (In other words, shelemim (peaceable) is an adjective (Weiser, Krinsky).)
LARGE ENOUGH. Yadayim (enough) (I.E. renders rachavat yadayim (large enough) as large places, i.e., the land is large enough for both of us.) is to be rendered places, as in Thou shalt have a place (yad) (Deut. 23:13).
שלמים הם אתנו, "they are at peace with us." They do not harbour hatred against us that we should have to be afraid they are out to trick us.
When the Torah quotes Chamor and Shechem as saying: "we will take their daughters for ourselves," this was a clever ploy by Chamor and Shechem who wanted to make their own people believe them that Jacob's sons harboured no enmity because they considered the local people superior, so much so that they looked forward to intermarry with them.
האנשים האלה שלמים הם אתנו, they are quite peaceful towards us even though I raped their sister; the reason is that they are anxious to live side by side with us and to become one people. They are asking for a very minor concession on our part, that all out males must circumcise themselves as they are all circumcised themselves. He argued that acceptance of such a demand would not deprive his townsfolk of anything of value. In return for complying with their demand his countrymen would become co-owners of the extensive property of Yaakov’s family רחבת ידים לפניהם. Even though they do possess extensive herds and flocks, the land is more than adequate to support these animals without our having to limit the grazing land allocated to our livestock.
THESE MEN ARE PEACEABLE WITH US. The men of the city thought that they hated them as they saw them dejected, and it angered them very much. Perhaps they guarded themselves against them and installed in their city bars and doors, for Jacob’s sons were mighty men and valiant men for the war. (Jeremiah 48:14.) But now Hamor and his son Shechem told them, “Do not fear and do not keep distant from them for they are whole-hearted with us.”
שלמים means peaceable and whole hearted.
והארץ הנה רחבת ידים FOR THE LAND, BEHOLD, IT IS LARGE ENOUGH (literally, wide-handed) — the metaphor is that of a man whose hand is large and generous, and the idea is: “You will lose nothing if they dwell and trade in the land, for much merchandise is brought here and there are no buyers for it”.
שלמים הם אתנו, they are of a totally peaceful disposition towards us. They do not intend to revenge themselves for the indignity their family has suffered.
These men are peaceful with us, and it is beneficial for us that they will live in the land and trade in it; behold, the land is spacious before them. Shekhem was a small city at the time, surrounded by large tracts of land, so there was plenty of room for everybody. Their daughters we will take as wives for us, and our daughters we will give to them. In a rhetorically persuasive tactic, Hamor and Shekhem adjusted their proposal to Jacob, in which they said: Give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for you (verse 9). It can be inferred from their original statement that Jacob’s family would have the discretion with regard to proposals of intermarriage, whereas here they indicate that the residents of Shekhem would have the choice. 14
שלמים הם אתנו, “they are of a peaceful disposition toward us.” Chamor and Shechem made this statement as the people of their town believed that Dinah’s family now hated everyone in their town, having had visual evidence of the faces of Yaakov’s sons after the rape of their sister.
רחבת ידים, “the land is big enough,” according to Ibn Ezra this is a reference to the many areas in the region which offered good pasture.
The shemittah sabbatical agricultural year legislation, referred to in the Torah in several places, (Parshat Mishpatim, Behar, Re-ay) is therefore of extreme importance. Disregard of it brings in its wake a host of punishments including national exile. This is somewhat difficult to understand, since if the purpose of the legislation is agricultural, i.e. teaching us that working the soil in rotation restores the earth's fertility, non observance would produce poor crops and be a punishment in itself. On the other hand, it is difficult to fathom why G'd should be more jealous of the state of the earth, than of sins which appear far more serious. It seems therefore, that the shemittah legislation is to alert us to the important truth that ownership of the land is an asset to our development towards our national and individual spiritual goals only, when such ownership is used in the way the Torah wishes it to be used. Just as the week, i.e. six working days plus one Sabbath testify to the fact that there is one Creator, so do six years of work on the land plus one year of rest, shemittah, remind us that ownership rests with G'd, and that we have to fulfil His commandments. Once one accepts that creation had been ex nihilo, it follows that the Creator is entitled to be the lawgiver. The Torah spells out that the purpose of shemittah is "for G'd," and that our function in taking advantage of the land is basically le-ochlah, to fulfil our physical needs, not as in the case of the gentile, our greed. Chamor, the king of Shechem refers to the purpose of land, when he describes it as "being capable of accomodating all the requirements of the sons of Jacob." (Genesis 34,21). This is an attitude which is quite different from the Torah viewpoint. The requirement in that year to release all monetary debts, is a further clear indication that material wealth must never be allowed to become an end in itself. The seven times seven years yovel legislation is representative of an entire "world," a complete cycle. "He shall serve him le-olam, means until the completion of the cycle, until the yovel year. This is a reminder to man that just as he has to return to the earth at the end of his life, so the idea of a rejuvenation of the land, restoring it to original ownership, keeps alive the idea that we ourselves are not on this earth litzmitut, permanently. The commandments concerning treatment of "slaves" who had become such due to having lost their financial independence, is stated here to enlist our empathy. Once we have realised that our own hold on life is tenuous, that our possessions are transient, we can appreciate better that the "slave" deserves humane treatment from us. The same applies to the laws governing unfair financial dealings, overcharges etc. The fact that G'd is prepared to demonstrate that He supervises our welfare by providing excess yield by our fields in the year preceding the shemittah, is further encouragement to observe the commandment. Ignoring the shemittah, legislation then, expresses disregard of our entire philosophy. This is why the consequences are commensurate, not disproportionate to the sin committed. The Talmud Erchin 30, draws our attention to the fact that the consequences of disregarding even regulations that are only peripheral to the actual shemittah observance, can be most severe. If someone deals in produce that has been grown illegally during the shemittah year, he may wind up having to sell himself into slavery to keep body and soul together. Our long national exile is due to our having failed to observe the shemittah legislation.
“And the earth abides forever” (Ecclesiastes 1:4). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: The verse should have said only: “The earth passes and the earth comes, but the generation abides forever.” (This would indicate that the earth is transient, and the people last forever.) Which was created for the sake of the other, was the earth created for the sake of the generation, or was the generation created for the sake of the earth? Was it not the earth [that was created] for the sake of the generation? Rather, because the generation did not perform the duties [assigned to it by] the Holy One blessed be He; therefore, it wastes away. The earth, because it performs the duties [assigned to it by] the Holy One blessed be He; therefore, it does not waste away. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: It is written: “For like the days of the tree will be the days of My people” (Isaiah 65:22). Tree means nothing other than Torah, as it is stated: “It is a tree of life for those who grasp it” (Proverbs 3:18). Which was created for the sake of the other; the Torah for the sake of Israel, or Israel for the sake of the Torah? Was it not the Torah [that was created] for the sake of Israel? Rather, the Torah that was created for the sake of Israel exists for ever and ever; Israel, for whose sake [everything] was created, all the more so. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: A kingdom enters and a kingdom leaves, but Israel stands forever; that is: “The earth abides forever.” Rabbi Shmuel in the name of Rabbi Pelatya of Naveh derived it from this verse: “Yehonatan son of Gershom son of Menashe, he and his sons were priests for the tribe of Dan until the day of the exile of the land” (Judges 18:30). Does a land go into exile or wander? Rather, these are Israel, who are called land, as it is stated: “All nations will praise you; as you will be a land of delight” (Malachi 3:12) – you will be called a land of delight. Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish: Everything that the Holy One blessed be He created in man, He created its parallel for the earth. Man has a head and the earth has a head [rosh], as it is stated: “[He had not yet made earth and fields, or] the beginning [rosh] of the dust of the world” (Proverbs 8:26). Man has eyes [einayim] and the earth has eyes, as it is stated: “They will cover the face [ein] of the earth” (Exodus 10:5). A person has ears and the earth has ears, as it is stated: “Listen, earth” (Isaiah 1:2). Man has a mouth and the earth has a mouth, as it is stated: “The earth opened its mouth” (Numbers 16:32). Man eats and the earth eats, as it is stated: “A land that consumes its inhabitants” (Numbers 13:32). Man drinks and the earth drinks, as it is stated: “[But the land]…by the rain of the heavens it drinks water” (Deuteronomy 11:11). Man vomits and the earth vomits, as it is stated: “So the land will not vomit [you out]” (Leviticus 18:28). Man has hands and the earth has hands [yadayim], as it is stated: “The land is spacious [raḥavat yadayim]” (Genesis 34:21). Man has thighs and the earth has thighs [yerekhayim], as it is stated: “I will gather them from the ends [miyarketei] of the earth” (Jeremiah 31:8). Man has a navel [tabbur] and the earth has a navel, as it is stated: “Dwellers in the middle of [betabbur] the earth” (Ezekiel 38:12). Man has nakedness and the earth has nakedness, as it is stated: “To see the nakedness of the land you have come” (Genesis 42:9). Man has feet and the earth has feet, as it is stated: “And the earth abides [omadet] forever” (Ecclesiastes 1:4). (The term omadet literally means standing, implying that it has feet.) What is omadet? Ma’amedet. Rabbi Aḥa and the Rabbis, Rabbi Aḥa said: It fulfills [ma’amedet] its duties. The Rabbis said: It produces [ma’amedet] its food. Rabbi Shimon ben Yosei ben Lakoneya said: Because in this world a person builds a building and another spends time in it, [a person] plants a sapling and another eats [its produce]. But in the future, they will not build and another will settle, they will not plant and another will eat, as it is stated: “For like the days of the tree will be the days of My people, and My chosen will outlive their handicraft” (Isaiah 65:22).
And also in the case of Pharaoh, he was gnashing his teeth against Moses. Now he had said to them (the Israelites, in Exod. 5:17): YOU ARE LAZY, LAZY! R. Judah b. R. Simon said: What is the meaning of LAZY? He said to them: You are holy. (Ibid., cont.:) THAT IS WHY YOU SAY: LET US GO AND SACRIFICE TO THE LORD. The Holy One said (in Exod. 9:13): GO EARLY IN THE MORNING and make known to Pharaoh that he is nothing. {See, he is going out to the water.} (Exod. 9:13, cont., & 14:) THUS SAYS THE LORD [THE GOD OF THE HEBREWS]: LET MY PEOPLE GO TO WORSHIP ME. FOR THIS TIME …. He said to them: LET MY PEOPLE GO TO WORSHIP ME. Then it will be good for you; but if not, FOR THIS TIME …. It is written (in Job 36:22): WHO IS A TEACHER LIKE HIM (i.e., like the Holy One), who teaches the wicked to repent? He said to Pharaoh (in Exod. 9:19): NOW SEND BRING UNDER SHELTER YOUR LIVESTOCK …. And what is written (in vs. 18)? BEHOLD, AT THIS TIME TOMORROW I WILL RAIN DOWN ,…. Then after that I will bring the locust, as stated (in Exod. 10:4–5): BEHOLD, TOMORROW I WILL BRING LOCUSTS ON YOUR TERRITORY, AND THEY SHALL COVER THE EYE (A more common translation would be SURFACE, but the midrash understands the Hebrew literally here to mean EYE.) OF THE EARTH. Our masters have said: Just as a woman has a head, so does the earth have a head. Thus it is stated (in Prov. 8:26): <…> NOR THE HEAD OF THE DUST OF THE WORLD. (In the context of Proverbs these words mean that the Holy One had not yet made A BEGINNING in creating THE DUST OF THE WORLD. Similarly other verses in this paragraph are understood more literally than in some translations.) And just as a woman has ears, so does the earth have ears. Thus it is stated (in Is. 1:2): AND GIVE EAR, O EARTH. And just as a woman has eyes, so does the earth have eyes. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 10:5): AND THEY SHALL COVER THE EYE OF THE EARTH. And just as a woman has a mouth, so does the earth have a mouth. Thus it is stated (in Numb. 16:32): AND THE EARTH OPENED ITS MOUTH . And just as a woman has arms, so does the earth have arms. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 34:21): FOR BEHOLD, THE LAND HAS BROAD ARMS. And just as a woman has a navel, so does the land have a navel. Thus it is stated (in Ezek. 38:12): WHO DWELL ON THE NAVEL OF THE EARTH. Just as a woman conceives and gives birth, so does the earth. Thus it is stated (in Is. 66:8): CAN A LAND PASS THROUGH LABOR IN A SINGLE DAY? IS A NATION BORN ALL AT ONCE? This refers to Israel, because the Holy One brought them and had them enter Jerusalem ALL AT ONCE. And Jerusalem was astounded, as stated (in Is. 49:21): AND YOU WILL SAY IN YOUR HEART: WHO HAS BORNE ME {ALL} THESE? The Holy One said to them: By your life, in short while I am gathering your Dispersion, for so has Isaiah said (while addressing Zion in Is. 49:18): LIFT UP YOUR EYES ROUND ABOUT AND SEE. THEY ARE ALL ASSEMBLED, ARE COME TO YOU.
Adam and Eve, who were the cause of the drop of semen becoming smelly, were also instrumental in Adam ejaculating semen for one hundred and thirty years without that semen impregnating his wife. Instead, that semen turned into a variety of evil spirits, thus necessitating additional refinement צירוף, and תקונים. The exile in Egypt was the first step designed to remove impurity from the holy seed of the descendants of Jacob who resembled the spiritual beauty of Adam before he had sinned. Jacob's first drop of semen was intended to impregnate Rachel, whom he thought he had married under the wedding canopy. It was Joseph who kept alive the covenant with G–d, and therefore the descent to Egypt of Jacob's entire family was orchestrated through Joseph. The area in which this refinement was to take place was one called ערות הארץ, a part of the earth in which shame resides. The earth is perceived as being similar to a human being in that it has a head, eyes, arms, legs, as well as parts corresponding to the private parts of a human being, מקום ערוה. Our sages deduce this from such verses as Proverbs 8, 26: ראש עפרות תבל, "the head of the clumps of dust in the world;" earth is also described as רחבת ידים "possessed of generous hands" (Genesis 34,21). Scripture speaks of the earth's טבור, "navel." There are many similar metaphors which describe parts of the earth. This means that though earth is one continuous mass, entity, it possesses many parts just as a human being, who is a unit, has many parts. Just as various organs in the human body perform different functions and possess different degrees of importance, so earth has many parts, each of which performs a different function.
I will reveal to you another mystery. There are occasions when a pure soul is very closely attached to an impure soul and the pure soul is unable to exert a spiritually positive influence on the impure soul. The latter remains as it is until the time comes to be freed from its body. We have an example of something like that in the soul of Rabbi Chaninah ben Tradyon whose soul [obviously long before it inhabited the body of that scholar, Ed.] reputedly was attached to that of Shechem, son of Chamor (who had raped Dinah). This is alluded to in the Torah by the letters in the word רחבת ידים (Genesis 34,21) which form the initals of the name of Rabbi Chanina ben Tradyon, as explained by Rabbi Chayim Vittal in his commentary on the relevant verse in Genesis (Likutey Torah). [I have seen this text and it is somewhat different from what the author quotes. Ed.] This soul of Rabbi Chaninah had not exerted a positive influence on the soul of Shechem so that when the latter committed the rape of Dinah the soul of Rabbi Chaninah departed from him and found its mate in the soul of Dinah whose soul had previously been described as נידה, i.e. as polluted. This is the mystical dimension of the words ותדבק נפשו בדינה, "his soul cleaved to Dinah the daughter of Jacob" (Genesis 34,3). You will do well to keep this principle in mind. Sometimes you find a holy soul mixed in amongst those that belong to the domain of the קליפה, the spiritually negative forces. Such a soul may exert a spiritually positive influence on other souls in its environment, driving out the evil resident within those souls or at least weakening it. These are the souls who eventually become proselytes by their own efforts such as Ruth the Moabite and Naamah the Ammonite who became the mother of King Rechavam.
In order to understand these verses a short introduction will enable us to gain a deeper insight into the ways of the Torah. We perceive Adam as a tree from which all the holy souls that would ever enter the world were suspended. When Adam sinned, evil assumed a limited rule in our world and captured many of these holy souls. According to our Kabbalists it has been the task of the Jewish people to rescue as many of these holy souls who are kept prisoners within the קליפה (forces of negative spirituality), using the holy Torah and G'd's commandments all of which G'd has implanted in our midst as our weaponry. On occasion, even a close personal attachment such as the rape of a person containing a holy Jewish soul and the impure soul of a Gentile may result in a new life of a positive kind. Shechem's deep-seated attachment to Dinah, the daughter of Jacob whom he had raped may be an example of such a phenomenon (Genesis 34,33). According to Kohelet Yaakov, Dinah infused Shechem with part of her holy soul, something which eventually resulted in the emergence and liberation of the soul of Rabbi Chanina ben Tradyon. This is alluded to in the word רחבת in רחבת ידים (Genesis 34,21) the letters of which are an acronym of the respective first letters in the name דבי חנינה בן תרדיון.
“And numerous” - as it is stated, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field, and you increased and grew and became highly ornamented, your breasts were set and your hair grew, but you were naked and barren.” (Ez. 16:7) “And he became there a nation” - This teaches that Israel was distinguishable there: The interpretation of Israel being distinguishable is based solely on the word goy, nation. (When the text in Deuteronomy says that Israel became a “nation” it means that they remained distinguishable from the Egyptians.) The Maggid interprets gadol atzum, “great, powerful” as a reference to, “And the children of Israel multiplied and swarmed.” (Ex. 1:7) Rav, numerous, is interpreted as, “I have given you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field…” (Ez. 16:7) The Maggid suggests that this verse in the First Fruit declaration contains four descriptive adjectives: nation, great, powerful, and numerous that describe four wondrous qualities of the Israelites when they were in the Egypt. First, they remained a goy, “a nation;” that is, they always remained a distinctive nation unto themselves, separate from the Egyptians. During the two hundred and ten years that they were enslaved they never mixed with the Egyptians while living among them. Most other peoples that live among another nation, become one people with them. They stop practicing their own customs and they become like the other people. This is what Shechem and Chamor said to the people at the city gate (Gen. 34:21) and what Jacob’s sons said to the people of Shechem, “Then we will give our daughters to you and we will take your daughters for us and we will live with you and we will become nation.” (Gen. 34:16) But this did not happen to the Israelites living in Egypt. They did not change their Jewish names, nor their language, nor their faith, nor their unique manner of dress the many years that they dwelled among the Egyptians. Moses, our teacher said, “Has God ventured to take a nation from the midst of another nation.” (Deut. 4:34) Israel and Egypt remained separate nations, one from the other. This is how the Maggid interprets the word goy. “This teaches that Israel was distinguishable there.” A distinguishable sign refers to the customs that made them recognizable and set them apart. They were distinguishable and recognizable from the Egyptians in all their customs and thoughts. Further, he interpreted the word gadol, “great,” as a reference to the increase of Israel’s population. According to the ways of the world, nations increase by adopting people from other nations, as in the verse, “And many people of the land became Jews…” (Esther 8:17) But this was not the case in Egypt. Though they remained distinguishable and separate, yet they miraculously increased in number. Balaam took note of this in his prophecy, “As I see them from the mountain tops, gaze on them from the heights, there is a people that dwells apart, not reckoned among the nations, who can count the dust of Jacob…” (Num. 23:9-10) I understand this to mean: other nations increase by other groups joining them, but this nation is not like them. I have seen that they branched off from, “Their mountain tops,” the Patriarchs and “from the heights,” the Matriarchs. They have had a direct set of roots one from the other so that they were a “people that dwells apart,” and no outsider ever infiltrated them. This is what Balaam meant when he said, “They are not reckoned among the nations. Nations that do not mix with others, do not increase, but this people increases without limits. Balaam said, “Who can count the dust of Jacob?” All of this is an interpretation of the word “gadol.” The Maggid now offers a separate interpretation of the word, atzum, “mighty.” It means that they were strong and robust. The sages already offered this interpretation regarding the verse, “They grew numerous and strong, most exceedingly,” (Ex. 1:7) to mean that they increased in number. That is, the women did not miscarry and each woman gave birth to sextuplets, as it Scripture states, “multiplied and swarmed and grew numerous.” Each of these verbs is plural and therefore represents (at least) two. Thus, they add up to six. However, since twins are generally weakly because by nature they divide into two, therefore twins tend to be smaller and feebler; it is only though God’s compassion that many twins are born from the same womb. Yet, despite this, these children were hardy and strong limbed. Three explanations were brought based on the adjectives in this verse: first, that the Israelites were distinguishable (goy)… second that they grew populous (gadol), and third that they were strong (atzum)… But there is one more descriptive word used for the Israelites, rav, numerous, for the Israelites fourth characteristic. All children in their infancy face many dangers and die of illnesses because they are tender, as Jacob said to Esau, “My lord knows that the children are frail…if they are driven hard a single day, all the flocks will die.” (Gen. 33:13) Even so, while they were in Egypt this was not so for the Israelite children. They did not suffer from the trauma of exile…and they continue to grow like weeds. That is why, the Maggid brings the verse, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field…” Ezekiel was saying that these children grow on their own like plants that come forth from the earth, bursting forth in various colors without any labor or effort. No artist can create something as beautiful as they are. So too, the Israelites grew in all their beauty without training or education as they were born naturally complete. The verse states, “You increased and grew and became highly ornamented, your breasts were set and your hair grew.” This verse speaks of the fate of the body and it beauty, and its characteristics which are described as “highly ornamented.” This is the case even though they “were naked and barren,” that is, lacking in Torah learning and ethical characteristics which govern a person’s actions. The sages have already taught us that when it came time to give birth in Egypt the daughters of Israel were fearful lest the Egyptians try to take their children and cast them into the Nile River. They would go out into the field and give birth to them under a tree so that no one would hear their cries. About this it is said, “I have aroused you under the apple tree; there your mother was in labor with you; there she who bore you was in labor.” (Song 8:5) They would leave their babies there and return to nurse them, and the babies would grow up on their own among the bushes, as it is said, “I have made you to be numerous as the vegetation of the field.” The verse continues, “Your breasts were set;” this is a reference to Moses and Aaron who were like two breasts which God prepared for Israel. “Your hair grew” is a reference to the twelve tribes, who were already worthy of being redeemed. “But you were naked and barren.” They were barren of commandments. They were like a bride and the Holy One was the groom. We have now answered the questions in the fifty-third, fourth, fifth and sixth gates. However one should note that the Maggid uses the expression milamed, “This is to teach…” twice, in response to the passage, “He resided there,” and “They became a nation” since these two explanations were based on logical inference from the verse In Deuteronomy 26 in the style of the Torah portion and the meaning of the verses. There was nothing specific explaining them as in the other verses which are expounded.
These men are completely at peace with us. Let them live in the land and [do] trade in [with] it. The land has ample room to be open to them. We will take their daughters for wives, and we will give them our daughters.
These men are friendly with us; and they may dwell in the land and do business in it; and the land, behold, it is broad (in) limits before them; let us take their daughters to us for wives, and give our daughters to them.
| אַךְ־בְּ֠זֹ֠את יֵאֹ֨תוּ לָ֤נוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים֙ לָשֶׁ֣בֶת אִתָּ֔נוּ לִהְי֖וֹת לְעַ֣ם אֶחָ֑ד בְּהִמּ֥וֹל לָ֙נוּ֙ כׇּל־זָכָ֔ר כַּאֲשֶׁ֖ר הֵ֥ם נִמֹּלִֽים׃ | 22 J | But only on this condition will their representatives (their representatives NJPS “the men.” Cf. note on v. 21.) agree with us to dwell among us and be as one kindred: that all our males become circumcised as they are circumcised. |
Only this shall be befitting us when (V. L.: for… to be not.) all our engagements with mundane affairs are not for their own sake but in order to vivify the souls, the portions of G–d, and to supply what they lack out of gratuitous kindness. For thereby we give the form (The creature (man).) a semblance to its Former (The Creator.—Cf. Bereishit Rabbah 27:1.) —“the L–rd is One,” for the chesed of G–d endures at all time (Psalms 52:3 (cf. Rashi, ad loc.).) —a true chesed (Chesed shel emet, in Hebrew, signifying a gratuitous kindness (cf. Rashi on Genesis 47:29), continuous, ceaseless, and absolute (cf. Likkutei Torah, Massei 93b-c).) —to animate the universe and all that fills it, every single moment. It is just that according to the Torah a man’s wife and children take precedence over all others, (See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251.) except (From here to end of paragraph inserted according to L. H.) for the saints of that generation—who take precedence over one’s children and the saints of the Land of Israel take precedence over the saints in the Diaspora, (See Sifrei, Deuteronomy 116; Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251 (see also Pitchei Teshuvah, ad loc., par. 4).) [aside of the fact that they did not leave anyone in the Diaspora comparable to themselves], (While the previous seems to be a general Halachic statement, these latter words appear to refer specifically to the Chasidic leaders (including the author’s master and colleague, R. Menachem Mendel of Vitebsk) who ascended to the Holy Land accompanied by their families and numerous followers.) and suffice this for the initiated.
WILL THE MEN CONSENT. Ye’otu (consent) comes from the same root as ya’atah (befitteth) in For it befitteth (ya’atah) Thee (Jer. 10:7). (According to I.E. its root is yod, alef, tav (Krinsky).) The yod prefix is vocalized with a tzere (Rather than a chirik (Cherez).) to compensate for the missing first root letter. (The yod.)
BE CIRCUMCISED. The word be-himmol (be circumcised) has already been explained. (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 17:10.) Shechem and Hamor had evil designs on Jacob and his sons for they said, Shall not their cattle and their substance and all their beasts be ours (v. 22)? (They had intentions of later robbing them of their possessions. Thus both sides plotted against each other (Weiser).)
בהמול means by every male of us being circumcised (infinitive Niphal).
Only with this condition will the men accede to us, to live with us, to become one people, with every male being circumcised, as they are circumcised. There should be no such clear physical distinction between the two populations.
Rabbi said: Isaac circumcised Jacob, and Esau; and Esau despised the covenant of circumcision just as he despised the birthright, as it is said, "So Esau despised his birthright" (Gen. 25:34). Jacob clung to the covenant of circumcision, and circumcised his sons and his grandsons. Whence (do we know) that the sons of Jacob were circumcised? Because it is said, "Only on this condition will the men consent unto us to dwell with us… if every male among us be circumcised, as they are circumcised." (Gen. 34:22). Another text says, "Only on this condition will we consent unto you: if ye will be as we be" (Gen. 34:15). Hence thou canst learn that the sons of Jacob were circumcised. The sons of Jacob circumcised their sons and their grandsons. They gave it to them as an inheritance for an everlasting statute, until Pharaoh the Wicked arose and decreed harsh laws concerning them, and withheld from them the covenant of circumcision. And on the day when the children of Israel went forth from Egypt all the people were circumcised, both young and old, as it is said, "For all the people that came out were circumcised" (Josh. 5:5).
die Priester das Fell benutzen. שיאותו ebenso Berachot VIII, 6. Im Jeruschalmi wird dort neben שיאותו (Gen. 34, 22) auch die Lesart שיעותו von עות (Jes. 50, 4) gebracht.
But only on these terms will the men consent to live with us, to become one people: every male among us must be circumcised, just as they are circumcised.
But in this only will the men accede to us, to dwell with us, and to be one people, by every male of us being circumcised as they are.
| מִקְנֵהֶ֤ם וְקִנְיָנָם֙ וְכׇל־בְּהֶמְתָּ֔ם הֲל֥וֹא לָ֖נוּ הֵ֑ם אַ֚ךְ נֵא֣וֹתָה לָהֶ֔ם וְיֵשְׁב֖וּ אִתָּֽנוּ׃ | 23 J | Their cattle and substance and all their beasts will be ours, if we only agree to their terms, so that they will settle among us.” |
מקניהם, this is one of 3 instances where the letter י after the נ is missing in this word. As spelled, the word means “they are cattle.” [Ibn Ezra sees in this a hint that the people of Shechem saw in Yaakov’s family and belongings prospective property of theirs, placing man and beast on the same footing. Ed.]
‘MIKNEIHEM’ AND THEIR SUBSTANCE AND ALL THEIR BEASTS. The reason for referring to cattle by the word mikneihem is that beasts of the herds which are in the field are called mikneh — [from the root kanah, which means “acquire”] — because whether they are clean or unclean, they are the mainstay of a man’s substance, just as it is written, Behold, the hand of the Eternal is ‘b’miknecha’ (upon thy cattle) which are in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the herds, and upon the flocks. (Exodus 9:3.) And those which do not constitute a herd, as, for example, single beasts in the house, are not called mikneh, and they are included in the term, and all their beasts. It may be that [mikneh and “all their beasts” both refer to the same cattle], and the redundancy is for the purpose of emphasis, meaning, and all their beasts which were very numerous.
אך נאותה להם LET US CONSENT UNTO THEM in this matter, and because of this they will dwell with us.
To this matter and, as a result, they will settle with us. Rashi is answering the question: The verse seems to implythat the sons of Yaakov asked for consent to live with them. But it was just the opposite!
Aren’t their livestock and their property and all their animals ours? We will devour them economically and culturally, and we will thereby enrich ourselves. We only must accede to them, and they will live with us. This ethnic and economic merge does not require us to pay a heavy price; all it takes is the fulfillment of one small condition.
מקנהם וקניים וכל בהמתם, “their cattle, their chattels and all their livestock.” According to Nachmanides the word מקנה refers to animals which form part of the herd, and which represented the backbone of the family’s wealth. Animals that were not part of carefully supervised herds, are called בהמות, i.e. stray animals tagging along. It is also possible that the reason why Chamor spoke both about מקנה and about בהמות was to emphasise that the livestock of Yaakov’s family was extremely numerous.
Although as a rule the parable is used to help the reader or listener understand a difficult subject by means of illustrating concepts familiar to him, there are occasions when the parable is used in reverse. An example of the former usage is the verse "as a father chastises his son, so does the Lord chastise you." (Deut. 8,5.) On the other hand, the line "you will be like G'd, knowing good and evil," (Genesis 3,5) is an example of the use of the parable in reverse. Although we have no concept of the essence of G'd, we do understand the concepts of "good" and "evil;" ergo it helps to define G'd by saying that this knowledge is one of His attributes. Or, as the Talmud Berachot 10, says "just as G'd fills the universe, so does our soul fill our body." The subject "G'd" can be brought closer to our understanding, although the essence of G'd remains a mystery. Drawing conclusions from the known microcosm regarding the nature of G'd, the great unknown, is only possible with the aid of the Torah, G'ds revealed law. Since Greek philosophers have no such terms of reference they cannot draw any valid conclusions. The latter, observing three kinds of life in our world, i.e. plants, animals and humans, and noting that man comprehends all three kinds of life, concluded that man has three souls, one each to enable him to comprehend the various forms of life respectively. They did not realise that a single soul can govern all three aspects of life, (provision of food, motion and intelligent planning) Shimon the Just tells us that since man is heir to such a tripowered soul, one that governs vegetable, animal and human abilities, he must therefore assume a threefold moral obligation corresponding to his endowments. These obligations are the promotion of Torah, Avodah, i.e. service in matters relating to the man/G'd relationship and the performance of kind deeds, i.e. building social relationships with his fellow human beings. This is a suitable introduction to the whole tractate of Avot. When the Talmud says "the kingdom of earth is similar to the kingdom of Heaven," (Berachot 58) the meaning may well be that just as we find in the "upper" world both purely spiritual beings as well as bodies, (galaxies) although the essence of that world is spiritual, abstract, so we find in our "lower" world creatures possessed of spiritual capabilities, although by definition these creatures belong to an essentially physical world. Human beings have been equipped with a soul to aid them in performing their physical functions properly, just as the galaxies have been equipped with bodies to enable them to perform their spiritual functions properly. At the same time, just as there are completely disembodied spirits in the "upper" world, so there are completely lifeless bodies in our "lower" world, such as stones etc. Just as the planets in the galaxies have bodies to help them perform the tasks assigned to them by the Creator, so the animal kingdom has a kind of "soul" to help it perform the task assigned to it by the Creator in the scheme of things in our world. It is however, impossible to classify the soul of man as having been designed to serve his body, else one would have to believe that man's soul perishes at the same time his body dies, seeing it has no longer a function to perform. In that latter event, man would hardly possess an advantage over the animals. Rather, man is to be viewed as the counterpart to the angels, who appear in human form on occasion, i.e. equipped with a body, in order to perform a task that requires them to become visible to man. We refer to such apparitions as have been granted to Hagar, Lot, Gideon, Manoach and others. In all those instances, the bodies were corollaries to the angels' spirits. By the same token, man, or especially Jews, have been given a body to assist their souls to perform their tasks. The task of the Jewish people is to perform a mission on behalf of G'd, and the task of the High Priest is to do the same in an even more intensive and specific manner. The High Priest wears the special garments when he performs service in the holy Temple. These garments are worn only once, and were not passed on even to his successor. They had to be removed immediately upon termination of the respective service performed in the Temple. Angels appeared in one kind of human garb only once, since each angel was entrusted with only one mission at a time. A number of Midrashim elaborate on this parallel between the "upper" world and our own world down here. (Vayikra Rabbah 21) Once we accept this comparison, the statement that the Jewish people are to be a kingdom of priests illustrates the functions we are to perform even better. The function of the Jewish people is to act as messenger/priest for mankind. We are given a special equipment to help us perform this task, i.e. Torah etc. If we abuse this equipment for personal advancement instead of employing it to perform our tasks, we are guilty of treason both vis a vis G'd and vis a vis mankind. Our punishment in such an eventuality will reflect the severity of the crime.
Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem and Ḥamor his father with guile, and spoke, as he had defiled Dina their sister” (Genesis 34:13). “Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem…” – what do you think, that there is deceit here? The Divine Spirit says: “As he had defiled Dina their sister…” “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace for us” (Genesis 33:14). “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace” – Rabbi Neḥemya said: Where do we find that the foreskin is called disgrace? It is from here, as it is stated: “As it is a disgrace.” “Are their livestock and their property and all their animals not ours? We only must accede to them, and they will live with us” (Genesis 34:23). “Their livestock and their property” – they thought to despoil them, and were despoiled. “All who emerged from the gate of his city heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son; every male, all who emerged from the gate of his city, was circumcised” (Genesis 34:24). “[They] heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son…” – one of them would enter the city bearing his burden, and they would say to him: ‘Go and be circumcised.’ He would say: ‘Shekhem is marrying and Magbai is circumcised?’ (Magbai is a generic name. Just because Shekhem is marrying, I should get circumcised?)
And Simeon and Levi answered cunningly unto Hamor and Shechem his son, saying: We will do unto you according to what you have said; behold our sister is in your house, and we want you only to keep away from her until we send to consult our father Isaac, for we can do nothing without his consent because he knoweth the ways of our father Abraham and whatsoever he will say unto us we will tell you, we shall not withhold it from you. And Simeon and Levi said these words unto Hamor and his son, to find a pretext and to consult as to what should be done with Shechem and his city in that matter. And when Shechem and his father heard the words spoken by Simeon and Levi it pleased them exceedingly, and they started on their way home. And when they were gone the sons of Jacob spoke unto their father saying: Verily thou knowest the judgment of death is due to these wicked men and to their city, for they have transgressed the words of God which he had commanded to Noah and his sons and his seed after him forever; for he hath defiled our sister Dinah, and such an outrage should never have been done in our midst. And now let us deliberate and decide what has to be done, and how we can find a pretext in order to kill all the inhabitants of this city. And Simeon said unto them: The best advice in this matter is to request them to circumcise every male among them even as we are circumcised, and if they decline to do so we shall take our daughter from them and go away. And in case they consent and do so, then when they are sore, we will come over them with our swords as if they were a quiet and confiding people, and we will slay every male among them. And Simeon’s advice was pleasing in their eyes, and Simeon and Levi decided to act upon it. And in the morning Shechem and his father, Hamor, came once more unto Jacob and his sons, to speak concerning Dinah, and to hear what answer the sons of Jacob had to give to their offer. And the sons of Jacob spoke unto them cunningly, saying: We told all your words unto our father, Isaac, and he was pleased with your offer, but he admonished us, saying: , Thus did Abraham, my father, command me according to the will of God, the Lord of the whole earth,—whenever any man, not of thy own sons, desires to take one of thy daughters to wife, that man and all the male persons of his people must be circumcised even as we are circumcised, and then only can we give him our daughters to wife. And now we have made known to thee all the words of our father, for verily we cannot do the thing thou hast spoken unto us, to give our daughter to a man that is not circumcised, as we regard it a shame. But in this will we consent unto you, to give you our daughter and we will take your daughters for ourselves, and to dwell in your midst and be like one people as you have spoken, if you will listen unto us and consent to become like unto us, and circumcise every male among you, even as we are circumcised. But if you do not listen unto us, to circumcise every male among you as we are circumcised according to the commandment of our Lord, then we will come to you and take our daughter from you and go away.
אשר תשים לפניהם WHICH THOU SHALT PUT BEFORE THEM — God said to Moses: It should not enter your mind to say, “I shall teach them a section of the Torah or a single Halacha twice or three times until it will become current in their mouths exactly according to its wording (i. e. until they know the text verbatim), but I shall not take the trouble to make them understand the reason of each thing and its significance”; therefore Scripture says, אשר תשים לפניהם, “which thou shalt set before them” (cf. Genesis 34:23) — like a table fully laid before a person with everything ready for eating (Mekhilta).
Their livestock, their possessions and all their cattle, will it not be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will live with us.
Their flocks, and their substance, and all their cattle, will they not be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will dwell with us.
| וַיִּשְׁמְע֤וּ אֶל־חֲמוֹר֙ וְאֶל־שְׁכֶ֣ם בְּנ֔וֹ כׇּל־יֹצְאֵ֖י שַׁ֣עַר עִיר֑וֹ וַיִּמֹּ֙לוּ֙ כׇּל־זָכָ֔ר כׇּל־יֹצְאֵ֖י שַׁ֥עַר עִירֽוֹ׃ | 24 J | All his fellow townsmen (All his fellow townsmen So the NJPS footnote; the reading in NJPS itself is more literal (“all who went out of the gate of his town”), yet here, women are not in view.) heeded Hamor and his son Shechem, and all males, all his fellow townsmen, (all his fellow townsmen See the previous note.) were circumcised. |
כל יוצאי שער עירו, “here the Torah speaks about people leaving his city,” whereas in 23,10, it spoke about כל באי עירו, “all the people coming into the gate of the town.” In this instance no one was allowed to leave the city until after he had been circumcised. In chapter 23 above everybody came in order to pay their respects to Sarah on the occasion of her forthcoming burial.
I.e., all his fellow townsmen.
All who emerged from the gate of his city heeded Hamor and Shekhem his son; every male, all who emerged from the gate of his city, was circumcised. In several cultures, males are circumcised in adulthood; however, this is an uncomfortable and even painful operation, far more so than when performed upon infants.
“All those who went out of the gate of his town were circumcised” [34:24]. All the men who went out of the city circumcised themselves. Hizkuni writes here. Why does the verse say, “All those who went out of the gate of the city”? This means, all those who went out of the city. With regards to Sarah it is written, “All who came into the gate of the city” [Genesis, 23:10]. This means, those who came into the city. The explanation is that here, Hamor and Shechem did not want to allow anyone out of the city. They first had to circumcise themselves, but they did it by force. Therefore, it is written, “All those who went out of the gate of his city.” However, with Sarah, they all came to do an act of grace with Sarah, to accompany her, out of good will. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 34:24.)
Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem and Ḥamor his father with guile, and spoke, as he had defiled Dina their sister” (Genesis 34:13). “Jacob’s sons answered Shekhem…” – what do you think, that there is deceit here? The Divine Spirit says: “As he had defiled Dina their sister…” “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace for us” (Genesis 33:14). “They said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man who has a foreskin, as it is a disgrace” – Rabbi Neḥemya said: Where do we find that the foreskin is called disgrace? It is from here, as it is stated: “As it is a disgrace.” “Are their livestock and their property and all their animals not ours? We only must accede to them, and they will live with us” (Genesis 34:23). “Their livestock and their property” – they thought to despoil them, and were despoiled. “All who emerged from the gate of his city heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son; every male, all who emerged from the gate of his city, was circumcised” (Genesis 34:24). “[They] heeded Ḥamor and Shekhem his son…” – one of them would enter the city bearing his burden, and they would say to him: ‘Go and be circumcised.’ He would say: ‘Shekhem is marrying and Magbai is circumcised?’ (Magbai is a generic name. Just because Shekhem is marrying, I should get circumcised?)
(Gen. 38:24, cont.:) THAT IT WAS TOLD TO JUDAH, SAYING: YOUR DAUGHTER-IN-LAW TAMAR HAS PROSTITUTED HERSELF; AND SHE IS ALSO PREGNANT FOR LEWDNESS. What is the meaning of FOR LEWDNESS? That she would enter a bathhouse and say to her women friends: Go away from me because I am bearing kings. But Isaac, Jacob, and Judah were sitting there in judgment. They said (ibid., cont.): BRING HER OUT AND LET HER BE BURNED. R. Johanan said: In property cases one begins with the eldest, but in capital cases one begins with the youngest and finishes with the eldest. (Sanh. 4:2; Git. 59a. Thus the younger judges would not be unduly influenced by their elders.) And why does one say: WITH THE YOUNGEST? Because one ascribes corruption to the youngest. Why did he say (in Gen. 34:24): LET HER BE BURNED, and not say: "Let her be killed"? Ephraim the Disputant said in the name of R. Me'ir: She was Shem's daughter, and Shem was a priest. For this reason he said: BRING HER OUT, AND LET HER BE BURNED. (See Lev. 21:9.) Now they were dragging her and bringing her out against her will, as stated (in Gen. 38:25): AS SHE WAS BEING BROUGHT OUT. Now while she was being brought out, she sought < the tokens of > the pledge but did not find them. In that hour she raised her eyes to the heavens. Immediately the Holy One sent her others.
ויבא אלו-הים אל בלעם, “G’d came to Bileam, etc.” The only reason that Bileam was granted a divine vision at this point was in honour of the Israelites. This situation was similar to G’d revealing Himself in a nocturnal vision to Lavan to prevent him from harming Yaakov (Genesis 34,24). Something similar occurred in Genesis 20,3 where G’d revealed Himself to Avimelech, King of the Philistines, for the sake of Avraham.
באי שער, people who enter or leave through the gate. In other words, everybody. Sometimes the Torah refers to באי שער, people entering through the gate, other times יןצאי עירו, people leaving via the gate. (compare Genesis 34,24) It all amounts to the same thing. For the sake of brevity the Torah mentions only either באי or יוצאי. Sometimes it mentions both, as in Jeremiah 17,19.
FROM TWENTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARD, ‘KOL YOTZEI TZAVA’ (ALL THAT ARE ABLE TO GO FORTH TO THE HOST) IN ISRAEL. “This tells us that no one under the age of twenty goes forth to the host. ‘Se’u eth rosh’ [literally: ‘take the head’ and generally translated: take ye the sum] of all the congregation of Israel. (Verse 2.) This is as one says to an executioner: ‘take that man’s head’.” (The meaning of this text which stems from Bamidbar Rabbah 1:9 will be explained further on by Ramban. The final quote is not found in our texts of Rashi, although Ramban quotes it from his commentary. The reason for its disappearance from all other texts of Rashi may well be its sharpness of expression which on first sight baffles the student. Ramban, however, recognizing that it is a genuine text which stems from Midrash Rabbah proceeds to explain it appropriately.) This is Rashi’s language. Perhaps the reason for this [law that a male under twenty years old was not liable to military service] is because he is not strong enough for war under the age of twenty, as the Rabbis have said: (Aboth 5:21.) “Twenty is the age for pursuit.” (The Hebrew is lirdof, which is variously interpreted as: “for seeking a livelihood:” or “for seeking one’s life-pursuit.” Ramban here understands it in its literal sense — “to pursue [the enemy in battle].”) But it may be that the meaning of the phrase kol yotzei tzava is “all who go forth to be assembled in the congregation,” because the young men do not take part in such an assembly of the people, and every gathering of the people is called tzava, as in ‘[litzvo] tzava’ (to be counted among the host) for the work of the Tent of Meeting; (Further, 8:24.) he shall return from the ‘tz’va’ of the work; (Ibid., Verse 25.) with the mirrors of the ‘tzov’oth’ that ‘tzav’u’ (women that congregated together); (Exodus 38:8.) and similarly ‘tz’va’ (the host of) heaven; (Deuteronomy 4:19.) and all ‘tz’va’am’ (their host) I commanded. (Isaiah 45:12.) Therefore Scripture explains when speaking of men of war: ‘mi’tz’va’ (from the host of) the war; (Further, 31:14.) and the number of them reckoned ‘bi’tz’va’ (by the host) for the war. (I Chronicles 7: 40.) Scripture states here all that go forth to the host, similar to what it says, all that went out of the gate of the city. (Genesis 34: 24. Ramban’s meaning is that the intention of the verses is: “all that are able to go,” even if they have not actually gone.) It states, ye shall number them by their ‘hosts’ [in the plural], because they consisted of many hosts, since each and every tribe was a great host. But as for Rashi’s expression when he wrote — “This is as one says to an executioner: ‘take that man’s head’” — it is not clear to me why the Sages should interpret the verse in this derogatory manner. If it is because [the people counted here] died in the desert [therefore He said, take the head …] whereas in the case of the tribe of Levi He said Number the children of Levi, (Further, 3: 15.) since they were not included in the decree [that they die in the desert] — [this cannot be so], for in the second census [taken] of those who were to come into the Land it also uses the same [expression], take the head of all the congregation of the children of Israel! (Ibid., 26:2.) But in the Agadah (homiletic exposition) of Vayikra Rabbah (I did not find it there. But a similar exposition is found in Bamidbar Rabbah 1:7. See my Hebrew commentary p. 196, Note 26 for the full text.) the Rabbis explain it as an expression of praise [for the people]: “The term se’u always means ‘greatness’, as it is written, Pharaoh ‘yisa’ (shall lift up) thy head, and restore thee unto thy office. (Genesis 40:13.) Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to Israel: ‘I have given you an exaltation of the head, and I have likened you to Myself. Just as I am exalted above all inhabitants of the world, as it is said, Thine is the kingdom, O Eternal, and Thou art exalted as head above all, (I Chronicles 29:11.) so to you also I have given an elevation of the head, as it is said, Lift up the head of all the congregation of the children of Israel, thus fulfilling that which is said, And He hath lifted up a horn for His people, (Psalms 148:14.) and similarly it is said, and the Eternal thy G-d will set thee on high above all the nations of the earth. ' ” (Deuteronomy 28:1.) I have found further in Bamidbar Sinai Rabbah that the Sages have stated: (Bamidbar Rabbah 1:9.) “Said Rabbi Pinchas in the name of Rabbi Idi: What is [the meaning of] that which is written at the beginning of this book, ‘se’u eth rosh’ (take the head)? It does not say: ‘lift up the head,’ ‘elevate the head,’ but it says se’u eth rosh, like a man who says to an executioner: ‘take this man’s head’. Here He gave a hint to Moses, se’u eth rosh, meaning that if the people are worthy they will become exalted, just as it is written, Pharaoh ‘yisa’ (shall lift up) thy head, and restore thee unto thy office; (Genesis 40:13.) but if they are not worthy, they will all die, just as it is written, Pharaoh ‘yisa’ (shall lift up) thy head from off thee, and shall hang thee on a tree. ” (Genesis 40:19.) Thus the expression [se’u eth rosh which, as Rashi explained, is used in connection with execution] is to be interpreted according to the intention [of the speaker] — in a good way for those who are good. (See Psalms 125:4: Do good, O Eternal, unto the good. Thus Pharaoh said unto the chief executioner: “Take the chief butler and lift up his head and restore him to his office.” But as for such as turn aside unto their crooked ways, the Eternal will lead them away with the workers of iniquity (ibid., Verse 5). Thus in the case of the chief baker, the same expression signified his downfall. In short, the expression of the Midrash which Rashi quoted can be interpreted either for bad or for good. And since it is an expression of elevation etc.) And since it is [also] an expression of elevation, and it is used [here] in the first census, He used the same expression in the second census. (Ibid., 26:2.)
They listened to [obeyed] Chamor, and to his son, Shechem—all those who passed through the gate of his city. Every male was circumcised—all who passed through the gate of his city.
And all they who came out of the gate of his city received from Hamor and from Shekem, his son; and they circumcised every male, all who came out of the gate of the city.
| וַיְהִי֩ בַיּ֨וֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֜י בִּֽהְיוֹתָ֣ם כֹּֽאֲבִ֗ים וַיִּקְח֣וּ שְׁנֵֽי־בְנֵי־יַ֠עֲקֹ֠ב שִׁמְע֨וֹן וְלֵוִ֜י אֲחֵ֤י דִינָה֙ אִ֣ישׁ חַרְבּ֔וֹ וַיָּבֹ֥אוּ עַל־הָעִ֖יר בֶּ֑טַח וַיַּֽהַרְג֖וּ כׇּל־זָכָֽר׃ | 25 J | On the third day, when they were in pain, Simeon and Levi, two of Jacob’s sons, brothers of Dinah, took each his sword, came upon the city unmolested, and slew all the males. |
ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, “It was on the third day when they are in pain:” they were all in pain and regretted having agreed to undergo circumcision: when Yaakov’s sons heard about this and they also heard that Chamor and Sh’chem had altered the conditions they had agreed to with them, i.e. that no one was allowed to leave the town before he had undergone circumcision, plus their having presented the whole agreement as due to enhancing the honour of the people of Sh’chem instead of in response to an ultimatum by the sons of Yaakov, plus the fact that they boasted that henceforth the herds and flocks of Yaakov’s family would (verse 23) be theirs, they decided to attack the city’s inhabitants. The reason they had waited until the third day was that it took the people of Sh’chem until that day to complete the process of circumcising all the men and boys. On that day those who had been circumcised on the first day were still suffering from pains and relatively weak. This is why the Torah writes: ויבואו על הער בטח, “they came into the city unopposed, without having to worry.” This is also how Onkelos translated it. A different exegesis: Shimon and Levi entered the town while the inhabitants were sitting, feeling themselves secure.
ויהרגו כל זכר, “they killed every male inhabitant; they were all guilty as gentiles are also commanded to appoint a judicial court in every town and when it became known that Sh’chem had raped Dinah and abducted her, refusing to release her, he should have been tried and convicted.”
ויהי ביום השלישי בהייותם כואבים, “it was on the third day (after circumcision) when they were all in pain, etc.” it is difficult to understand why the brothers had insisted that all these people circumcise themselves when they had meant to kill them anyways. Why did they have to resort to such deceit? Our verse may provide the answer by reporting that on that day the men of Sh’chem regretted having circumcised themselves. It was on account of that Shimon and Levi killed them. There had been no intent to kill them when they demanded that they circumcise themselves if they wanted to become members of the clan of Semites. Their act of circumcision was perceived by them as an initiation rite. Also, there is no reason to assume that they should have been in greater pain on the third day than on the previous two days. In fact, it is likely that they had not been able to circumcise themselves all on a single day, and the third day that the Torah speaks of was the day when these circumcisions were completed. This is why Shimon and Levi did not take their swords until the third day.
ON THE THIRD DAY. The third day is always a difficult day because it is half of a monthly quarter. (It is half a week which is a quarter of the month (Weiser). The astrologers count the days from the afternoon. Hence the fourth day begins after the noon of the third day has passed. The time between noon and sunset of the third day is called half the monthly quarter (Krinsky).) Simeon and Levi acted with the full consent of their brothers. This is clear from And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father with guile (v. 13). The “sons of Jacob” (The reference is to verse 13 (Krinsky, Cherez). Weiser suggests that the reference is to verse 27 wherein it is stated, The sons of Jacob came upon the slain and spoiled the city.) refers to all of the brothers. Jacob spilled his anger on Simeon and Levi because they killed the men of Shechem (While the others merely looted the city, Simeon and Levi killed its male inhabitants (Weiser). Cherez explains that the others merely wanted to save Dinah. They did not intend to kill the men of Shechem.)
ויהרגו כל זכר. They killed every male. Why did they kill people who had not actively committed a sin? Why did they not first kill the truly guilty, i.e. Shechem?
Actually, the sons of Jacob did not intend to kill anyone except the guilty party; however, all the inhabitants formed a human barrier to protect their king and prince. As a result the sons of Jacob were forced to kill the townspeole under the heading of killing a רודף, a pursuer, someone who endangers the life of the avenger. When the Torah states that they killed all the males this means that they succeeded in killing Chamor and his son only after killing the other males in the town. Had they not done so they could not have executed someone who was guilty of death.
Another reason they killed all the males in the city was that they had all been accessories to the crime by keeping Dinah captive after the rape. This was tantamount to kidnapping. According to the Noachidic law the penalty for kidnapping is death. Gentiles are not guilty of the death penalty for sleeping with an unmarried girl.
You will note that the Torah (or the brothers) describes all the people of having "defiled their sister" (34,26). This shows that they all shared equally in the guilt of kidnapping. The reason the Torah does not speak about these people having "stolen" their sister is that the principal sin they were guilty of was that it was the kind of robbery which could not be made good. [If you kidnap a virgin and you give back a woman who has been defiled by sexual intercourse out of wedlock this is not a proper restoration. Ed.] The Torah makes it plain by using the term "they had defiled," that if the sin had not been one that could not be reversed the brothers would not have killed all the males in the town. While it is certainly true that the people of Shechem were not the only ones in the world guilty of such crimes, and Noachides who have committed robbery are all guilty of the death penalty, the brothers could certainly not be expected to play executioners in all such instances. They lacked the power to do so. Jacob himself alluded to this when he accused Shimon and Levi as "distressing" him, especially in view of the fact that his family was "numerically weak" (verse 30).
Another reason why the Torah speaks of "who had defiled" is to justify the brothers looting the belongings of the inhabitants of Shechem. Their property served as דמי בושת, compensation for the humiliation Dinah had suffered at the hands of these people. The amount of such compensation is determined in accordance with the relative stature of the victim as well as the perpetrator of the crime. In this instance both Shechem and Dinah were of very elevated stature so that the compensation due was of the highest category. The entire possessions of the townspeople may not have sufficed to provide adequate compensation for the shame Dinah had suffered. She was a person who was unique in the whole world. When I mentioned earlier that a self-confessed sinner is free from financial penalties, this does not apply to the money paid as compensation for shaming someone (Ketuvot 41).
In his Hilchot Melachim chapter 9,14, Maimonides explains that the reason all the inhabitants of Shechem were guilty of death was that they had failed to establish a judiciary which would deal with the robbery committed by Shechem. Whence does Maimonides know that the common people had to judge their king or crown prince? Is it not a fact that even amongst the Israelites individuals do not have to testify against the King, and one does not sit in judgment of him (Sanhedrin 16)? Accordingly, we are forced to conclude that the guilt of the people of Shechem consisted in their being active accessories to the crime. They may even have advised Shechem how to successfully rape Dinah. Nachmanides refutes Maimonides' argument claiming that the Noachides were not commanded to establish a permanent judiciary but to settle matters that come up for litigation. He claims that the death of the people of Shechem was primarily for the sin of idolatry which all of them had been guilty of for a long time. His words require proof, and they do not account for the brothers looting the town.
ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, “it was on the third day, when they were in pain, etc.” It is an accepted fact in science that amongst all creatures the “third” is always relatively weak. It makes no difference whether it is the third day after a woman has given birth or whether it is the third day in the development of anything else. This is all due to the fact that the third day was under the aegis of the planet Mars. This is why the pain after a wound has been inflicted is always greater on the third day. This is why the pain of circumcision is greatest on the third day, weakening the person who has undergone this procedure. Our sages in Shabbat 86, have ruled that it is permissible to perform all kinds of procedures otherwise prohibited on the Sabbath for a person on the third day after he has been circumcised, as he is weak and even his life may be in some danger. Experts of a science known as Techunah, (a form of astronomy) wrote that the third day is the day under the influence of the horoscope cancer which in turn is presided over by Samael. Samael’s personal servant is the planet Mars. This knowledge prompted our sages in Taanit 27 to decree that the אנשי מעמד, the Israelites representing the people every day in the Temple, were not to fast on Sundays (first day of the week) as this was the third day after Adam had been created on Friday, the 6th day of the week, so that in counting a completed universe this day was actually the third day. This is also the reason we take some fragrant plants at the conclusion of the Sabbath and pronounce a benediction over them as the third day is ushered in and we want to face it having performed an additional mitzvah. Our spiritual self is strengthened by means of the pleasant fragrance.
ויקחו שני בני יעקב שמעון ולוי, ”and Shimon and Levi, two of Yaakov’s sons, took, etc.” By reading the text carefully it is possible to deduce the ages of these two sons of Yaakov when they destroyed the city of Shechem. We know from the text that Yaakov stayed at his uncle Lavan for twenty years. During the first 14 years he worked for his two wives Rachel and Leah, whereas during the remaining six years he worked in order to establish an economic base for himself and his family. After the first seven years of his service Lavan cheated him by giving him Leah instead of Rachel as his wife. Leah bore Reuven for Yaakov after a pregnancy of seven months. Another seven months (or so) later Shimon was born. It follows that when Yaakov left Lavan and interrupted his journey at Sukkot, Shimon was 2 months shy of 12 years old. Yaakov stayed at Sukkot for 18 months before moving on to Shechem. This means that at that time Shimon was 13 years and four months. His younger brother Levi was only 12 years and nine months old at that time. The Torah called both of them by the name איש, meaning they had attained puberty. This is the meaning of the words איש חרבו, “each man his sword.”
ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, this was because the pains are strongest on the third day after the circumcision. In view of this the sages permitted bathing the child with hot water on the Sabbath after the circumcision, if it coincided with being the third day after the operation.(Shabbat 134). Even hot water boiled on the Sabbath itself is permissible to be used for this when there is no other, as the potential danger to the life of the infant overrides the Sabbath legislation not to boil anything on that day.
ויקחו שני בני יעקב, in this instance, Shimon and Levi, although all the brothers were in complete agreement of what was being planned. We know this from verse 13 ויענו בני יעקב במרמה, “the sons of Yaakov responded, deceitfully.” When it came to carrying out their plan, the other brothers were afraid and did not risk their lives in that undertaking. Only Shimon and Levi considered the fate of their sister as paramount. אחי דינה; the Torah accords them full points for considering themselves as the brothers of Dinah par excellence, although at least four more of the brothers were Dinah’s brothers both from the father and from the mother.
בטח, they were feeling as secure as if they were numerous and not 2 against a whole town.
בהיותם כואבים, according to normal reactions of people to such an operation, and according to the plain meaning of the text, the meaning is that they had been in pain during the first and second day after the circumcision, and they were now in even greater pain,
ויבואו על העיר, the people there felt perfectly safe, so that Shimon and Levi did not need to take any precautions. Whenever the word בטח occurs throughout Scriptures, it refers to the people feeling secure, unworried, just as in this verse.
שני בני יעקב TWO OF THE SONS OF JACOB — They were his sons (the sons of Jacob, a wise and clever man), but they acted as any man named Simeon and Levi would do — as other people would do who were not his sons — for they did not take counsel with him (Genesis Rabbah 80:10).
אחי דינה DINAH’S BROTHERS — because they risked their lives for her they are designated as her brothers (Genesis Rabbah 80:10)
בטח IN SECURITY — because they (the men of Shechom) were ill. The Midrashic explanation, taking בטח in the sense of confident, is: that they relied upon the strength (i.e. the merits) of the old man (Jacob) (Genesis Rabbah 80:10).
(25-31) Nun beginnt das Tadelnswerte, das wir keineswegs zu entschuldigen brauchen. Hätten sie Schechem und Chamor erschlagen, es wäre kaum etwas dagegen zu reden. Allein sie haben die wehrlosen, preisgegebenen Menschen nicht geschont, ja, sie haben noch mehr getan, haben geplündert, haben überhaupt die Ortsbewohner das Verbrechen des Gutsherrn mit büßen lassen. Das war durch nichts gerechtfertigt. Jakob wirft ihnen daher auch vor, ihr habt mich "getrübt"; unser Ruf, unser Name, unsere Ehre war klar wie ein Kristall, ihr habt sie getrübt, habt "mich in übeln Geruch gebracht", selbst unter dem Kenaani und Perisi. Und wenn ihr so nicht recht, so habt ihr auch nicht klug gehandelt, wir sind so wenig zahlreich etc.
Ihre einzige Antwort: הכזונה וגו׳ enthält das ganze Motiv. Der Herr hätte sich das nimmer erlaubt, wenn es sich nicht um ein fremdes, verlassenes Judenmädchen gehandelt hätte. Dieser Gedanke hatte in Schimeon und Lewi das Bewusstsein geweckt, daß es Momente gebe, in welchen auch Jakobs Familie zum Schwert greifen müsse, um Reinheit und Ehre zu beschützen. So lange auf Erden nur das Recht geachtet wird, dem die Gewalt schützend zur Seite steht, so lange muss auch Jakob wohl zum Schwert zu greifen wissen. Sie wollten auch gar nicht klug handeln. Sie wollten sich gefürchtet machen, damit keiner weiter ein Ähnliches wage. Jakobs Töchter werden nicht als Preisgegebene dastehen. Sie waren jedoch zu weit gegangen, das an Unschuldigen zu rächen, was mächtige Schuldige begangen.
In eigentümlicher Weise schließt sich diese Geschichte der vorhergehenden an. Wie wir dort vorübergehend ein קול יעקב, eine menschliche Regung in Esaus Gemüt aufblitzen sahen und darin den Keim der Humanität erkannten, der auch einst in Esau zur vollen Entfaltung aufgehen soll: so sehen wir hier mit einem Male vorübergehend das Schwert Esaus in Händen der Söhne Jakobs, und lernen daraus zur Aufhellung der jüdischen Geschichte die Wahrheit: daß, wenn wir zuletzt das Volk geworden sind, an dessen Händen am wenigsten vergossenes Blut klebt, wenn wir das mildeste, weichherzigste Volk geworden sind, dies nicht etwa in unserer Schwäche, in etwaiger Feigheit beruhe — die letzten Tage unsers nationalen Staatenlebens haben unsere Tapferkeit und unseren Kriegsmut in so gefürchteter Weise gezeigt, daß die tapfersten Legionen Esaus gegen uns herbeigerufen werden mussten. Wir können auch das Schwert schwingen, können auch blutdurstig werden. Unsere Menschlichkeit und Milde sind Früchte der Erziehung, die Gott uns durch unser Geschick und sein Gesetz hat angedeihen lassen.
Allein nur in den Mitteln und in dem Maß des Ausschreitens liegt das Tadelnswerte. Das Motiv, das Schimeon und Lewi bewegte, der Zweck, den sie anstrebten, waren die heiligsten und berechtigsten. Der Geist, der sie erfüllte, war der unentbehrlichste für eine Familie, die, als Jakob zum Volke heranwachsend, das Herbste über sich ergehen lassen, die tiefste Erniedrigung erdulden und doch mit aller Elastizität des Geistes und mit allem Adel der Gesinnung aufrecht erhalten bleiben sollte für die welthistorische Auferstehung zu einem unsterblichen Gange durch die Geschichte sonder Gleichen. Noch auf seinem Sterbebette werden wir den greisen Vater Fluch über die Mittel und die ausschreitende Leidenschaftlichkeit, segnende Anerkennung aber über die Motive und die Gesinnung aussprechen, und Schimeon und Lewi eine solche machtlose, zerstreute Stellung im künftigen Jakob Israelvolke anweisen sehen, daß das materielle Heft in Israel nie in ihre Hände zur maßlosen Ausschreitung gelangen könne, ihr kräftiger, der geistigen und sittlichen Würde und Bestimmung stets bewusster Geist aber belebend, erhaltend und rettend in allen Kreisen des Volkes gegenwärtig und wirksam bleibe. Dasselbe Schwert, das Lewi hier zur Rettung der sittlichen Schwesterehre nach außen wandte, sehen wir später gegen die eigenen Brüder nach innen gewandt, wo es galt, rücksichtslos — את אחיו לא הכיר ואת בניו לא ידע — die Brüder aus der eigenen Entartung empor zu retten.
Züge endlich, wie sie uns aus diesen und noch ferneren Ereignissen in der ersten Jakobsfamilie begegnen, dürfen uns zugleich die Notwendigkeit andeutend erkennen lassen, die vorhanden gewesen sein mag, diesen Menschenstamm in dem "eisernen Tiegel" des Leidens zu dem Adel der Gesinnung zu erläutern und zu stählen, der sie befähigen sollte, für den Menschheit erlösenden Musterwandel dereinst erwählt zu werden. Nicht weil wir der gefügigste, sondern weil wir der ungefügigste, härteste Völkerstamm gewesen — עז שבאומות wie die Weisen bemerken — hat uns Gott zu seinem Werkzeuge gewählt, um aus uns seinen härtesten, ausdauerndsten Stahl zu schmieden, und an unserer Gewinnung zuerst die Wundermacht seiner Waltung und die Wunderkraft seines Gesetzes zu zeigen. —
ויהרגו כל זכר, these men had not circumcised themselves in order to become Jews and embrace monotheism but only in order to lay their hands on the vast possessions of the family of Yaakov, as their leaders Chamor and Shechem had promised them.
Shimon and Leivi acted as other people... Rashi knows this because Scripture should have just said, “Shimon and Leivi.” Why is it [also] written, “Two of Yaakov’s sons”? Thus Rashi explains as he does. (Maharshal)
Because they risked their lives for her... [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why does it say, “Brothers of Deenah?” Perforce, it tells us that they acted out of brotherhood and not because they were violent.
The Aggadaic explanation is: They were confident of the power of the “old one.” This refers to Yaakov. Alternatively, [it refers to Avraham. They were confident] of Avraham’s prayer for them, as explained in Parshas Lech Lecha (12:10). (Maharshal)
It was on the third day, when they were in so much pain that they could not leave their homes. Although the pain did not paralyze them, it limited their ability to move and act. The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina’s brothers, each man took his sword. These brothers took the initiative because they had a special relationship with Dina, who was their maternal as well as their paternal sister. It is unclear why their elder brother Reuben did not participate. And they came upon the city confidently, as its residents were not prepared to have to defend themselves against Jacob’s family, with whom they were expecting to unite. Furthermore, the recently circumcised men were limited in their physical capabilities. Simeon and Levi went from house to house and killed all the males.
ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, “It was on the third day, when they were in a lot of pain, etc.;” according to Rashi every wound or injury is especially painful on the third day after it has been inflicted. His explanation appears to conflict with what the Talmud stated in the chapter dealing with circumcision, where the washing of the wound on the third day if it occurs on the Sabbath is permitted, adding that it is clear from this that it may certainly be washed on the first day after the circumcision. (Shabbat, 134) Some commentators hold that the Torah described the last day when the brothers could kill with impunity, as they had failed to do so on the first or second day when no resistance at all would have been forthcoming. Some commentators say that the inhabitants of the town were numerous, and not all of them had gone along with the request of their king and prince until the third day of their deliberations. This was the day when all the male inhabitants of the town were in great pain and could not defend themselves. There is yet another opinion according to which the brothers actually killed the men of Shechem on the first day after their circumcision, the day which was the third day after Dinah’s rape.
“On the third day, when they were in pain” [34:25]. It was on the third day and Simeon and Levi took their swords and attacked the city and killed them. They took their goods and money and took their sister. Hizkuni writes. They all regretted that they had circumcised themselves. The children of Jacob heard them say that they had regrets about the circumcision and that Hamor and Shechem said different things to the people of the city. They first said to Jacob, you should have the choice to take our daughters that you desire. Shechem and Hamor came to their wise men to convince them to circumcise themselves. They told them. We will have the choice to take the daughters of Jacob. Hamor and Shechem also said to their wise men, all the goods and money of the children of Jacob is ours. Therefore, they came and killed the whole city on the third day when they were very weak because of the circumcision. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 34:25.) They relied on the merit of Jacob to help them to kill the whole city with two men, Simeon and Levi. (Rashi, Genesis, 34:25.) Bahya writes. On the third day, all the wounded ones were weak and everything that moves is weak. Even the third day of the week, which is Tuesday, people are weaker than the other days. This is because its constellation is Cancer, which is crab, and its angel is the evil Samael, and its star is Mars, which means blood. Therefore, our sages told us to fast on Sunday. This is the third day after the creation of man, when Adam was created on Friday. Therefore, every person is weaker on Sunday than on other days. That is why we smell incense, so that we will have strength as we enter Sunday, and to strengthen our soul with good smells. Simeon and Levi were twelve years old when they killed the whole city, which was large and full of people. So writes Bahya. (Bahya, Genesis, 34:25.) Ramban asks a question about Rashi, who writes that the nations did not yet engage in illicit sexual relations, though the verse says concerning the Canaanites, “for all these abhorrent things were done by the people who were in the land before you” [Leviticus, 18:27]. The nations engaged in all these impurities. (Ramban, Genesis, 34:13.) The Toldot Yizhak gives an explanation. Rashi said that in Jacob’s times, the nations were pious with regard to sexual relations. They did not engage in illicit relations, since it was not long after the Flood, when the whole world was destroyed because of illicit sexual relations. If you want to ask, why were Abraham and Isaac afraid that people would take their wives if the nations feared illicit sexual relations? The explanation is that Abraham and Isaac have very beautiful wives and their likes were rare. Therefore, the kings wanted to take them as wives. Therefore, Abraham and Isaac were afraid that they would be taken. However, later in the time of Moses Our Teacher, the Canaanites did pursue illicit sexual relations. They had forgotten the Flood. It was a long time ago and there was nobody who could remind them of it. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 34:7.) They took all their goods, their wives and children, and their animals captive. (Genesis, 34:29.) “You have brought trouble on me” [34:30]. Jacob said to Simeon and Levi. You have brought me trouble and have made me odious to the whole world. Perhaps all the nations will gather together against me, in order to kill me. His children responded: shall we make a harlot of our sister? Bahya writes. What kind of authorization did Simeon and Levi have to kill and shed blood? The explanation is because the people of Shechem pursued illicit sexual relations and robbery more so than all the other nations. Therefore, they were killed by Simeon and Levi. (Bahya, Genesis, 34:30.)
See also R. Ovadiah Yosef, Yabi'a Omer, II, Yoreh De'ah, no. 17, sec. 2, who maintains that the culpability of minors is a matter of dispute between Rosh and Rashi: Teshuvot ha-Rosh, klal 16, no. 1, states that the age of legal capacity is a matter of halakhah le-Mosheh me-Sinai, i.e., transmitted orally to Moses on Mt. Sinai as one of the many shi'urim or specifications of quantity and size with regard to precepts and transgressions, all of which were transmitted in this manner. Rambam, Hilkhot Melakhim 5:10, states that such shi'urim pertain only to commandments binding upon Jews but not to Noachide obligations. Thus Noachides are culpable for eating even a minute particle of flesh torn from a living animal while Jews are culpable only upon consumption of a quantity of food equal to the size of an olive. [Cf., however, Maharit Algazi, Kehillat Ya'akov, s.v. ḥazi shi'ur, who maintains that Tosafot disagrees with this ruling.] Rashi, Avot 5:21 and Nazir 29b, however, states that the age of religious majority is rooted upon the principle that a person is not a "man" until he reaches the age of thirteen as evidenced by the scriptural description, "And the two sons of Jacob, Simon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Levi, at the time, was thirteen years old. The definition of the term "man" is a concept applicable to Noachides as well as to Jews. Rambam exempts Noachide minors from punishment, argues Rabbi Yosef, because he is in agreement with Rashi that exclusion of minors from culpability is a matter of definition rather than of shi'ur.
When a brit milah (circumcision) takes place later than the eighth day of a boy’s life (such as a baby who could not tolerate a brit on the eighth day due to health reasons, or a non-Jew who wishes to convert), (Of course, none of these concerns applies when circumcising a baby on the eighth day of his life, as circumcision on the eighth day overrides Shabbat. The Gemara discusses the laws of a circumcision on Shabbat at great length in the nineteenth chapter of Masechet Shabbat.) the Tashbetz (1:21) forbids performing it on a Thursday. He notes that on the third day after a brit (including the day of the brit), the baby is presumed to be in tremendous pain (see Bereishit 34:25 and Rashbam ad loc.). Thus, a baby who underwent a brit milah on Thursday may require medical treatment that will entail transgressing Shabbat (see Shabbat 86a). According to the Taz (Yoreh Deah 262:3), this problem exists when circumcising on Friday, too, as the baby suffers pain every day through the third day. (The Taz indicates concern for the baby’s pain and suffering per se, not for the desecration of Shabbat that it might necessitate. Apparently, he understands the problem of circumcising close to Shabbat in the same manner that the Rif explains the prohibition against traveling before Shabbat - concern for causing unnecessary discomfort during Shabbat (see Teshuvot Tzitz Eliezer 12:43).) The Shach (Yoreh Deah 266:18) notes that some Rishonim do indeed assume that the baby suffers through the third day, but the Tashbetz explicitly permits circumcising on Friday even when it is not the eighth day. (See, however, Teshuvot Yabia Omer, Y.D. 5:23.)
Rabbi Shimeon began with the verse: "and he took Shimeon from them, and bound him in front of them" (Genesis 42:24). And what did Yosef see that he showed partiality in Shimeon more than the brothers? Rather, Yosef said: in every place Shimeon (and Levi) are, there is an opening for strict judgment, and at that moment when I went from my father to my brothers, Shimeon opened the strict judgment [against me], as it is written "a man said to his brother here comes that dreamer, come now etc" (Genesis 37:19-20), and before, in Shechem, "and the sons of Yaakov, Shimeon and Levi, each man took" (Genesis 34:25) - all was in strict judgment. It is better to select this one, and not to stir up fights among all the tribes.
Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."
“On the fifth day, prince of the children of Simeon, Shelumiel son of Tzurishadai” (Numbers 7:36). “On the fifth day, prince of the children of Simeon, Shelumiel son of Tzurishadai…” –because Reuben was vigilant in rescuing his brother from death and Simeon was zealous regarding the harlotry of his sister in Shekhem, to rescue his sister from the hand of the impure; that is why he was privileged to present his offering after him. “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:37). “His offering was one silver dish…” – the prince of Simeon came and presented his offering corresponding to the order of the crafting of the Tabernacle. Why did he present his offering corresponding to the crafting of the Tabernacle? They took an example from the act of Simeon, the forebear of the tribe. Just as Simeon was zealous regarding the harlotry, and killed all the residents of Shekhem because they tormented his sister Dina, just as it says: “…the two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina's brothers, each took his sword, and came upon the city confidently, and killed all the males. And Ḥamor, and Shekhem his son, they killed by sword, and they took Dina from the house of Shekhem, and departed” (Genesis 34:25–26), likewise, the Tabernacle would kill the adulterers and the sotot, just as it says: “The priest shall take sacred water in an earthenware vessel, and from the dirt that is on the floor of the Tabernacle, [the priest shall take and he shall place it into the water]” (Numbers 5:17), and it says: “He shall give her to drink the water, and it will be, if she was defiled, and committed a trespass [against her husband…her belly will distend, and her thigh will fall]” (Numbers 5:27). That is why Shelumiel presented his offering according to the order of the crafting of the Tabernacle, as a commemoration of Simeon’s action. “His offering was one silver dish…” – “Dish,” corresponding to the Tabernacle courtyard that surrounded the Tabernacle like the sea surrounds the world. ”Its weight one hundred and thirty,” just as it says: “The length of the courtyard, one hundred cubits” (Exodus 27:18), and the length of the interior of the Tabernacle was thirty cubits; that is one hundred and thirty, “One silver basin [of seventy shekels] (Numbers 7:37), it corresponded to the courtyard without the Tabernacle, that was seventy cubits. Fifty cubits before the Tabernacle and twenty cubits behind the Tabernacle, that is seventy cubits. Alternatively, the courtyard, its length was one hundred cubits and its width was fifty cubits, just as it says: “The length of the courtyard, one hundred cubits, and its width fifty by fifty…” (Exodus 27:18). Take the fifty that the length is greater than the width, and render them into strips and surround the fifty of the width in a square. Its width equals its length, seventy cubits and a remainder by seventy cubits and a remainder. That is why it said: “Seventy shekels” – because the remainder was less than a cubit, it was not taken into consideration. Another matter, why seventy? It is corresponding to seventy pillars that were in the Tabernacle courtyard; twenty pillars on the south side, twenty pillars on the north side, ten on the west side, six pillars on the east side, and four pillars for the screen on the courtyard gate. That is sixty for the courtyard, [plus] four for the curtain, five for the screen of the Tabernacle entrance, and the pillar of the cloud; that is seventy. “Both of them full of high quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:37), corresponding to the courtyard and the Tabernacle, as in the courtyard they would sacrifice a meal offering mixed with oil, and in the Tabernacle there was the showbread, which was of fine flour, and the candelabrum, that one kindles it with oil. There was frankincense on the table that would ascend for a pleasant aroma. “One gold ladle, ten shekels, full of incense” (Numbers 7:38). “One…ladle [kaf],” this is the Torah scroll that was placed next to the Ark. Just as this hand [kaf] has five fingers, so, too, it contains five books. “Gold…ten shekels,” these are the tablets that were in the Ark that contained the Ten Commandments. Another matter, “gold…ten shekels,” corresponding to the ten portions in which the crafting of the Tabernacle is written. These are they: “They shall craft an Ark…” (Exodus 25:10); “you shall craft an Ark cover…” (Exodus 25:17); “you shall craft a table…” (Exodus 25:23); “you shall craft a candelabrum…” (Exodus 25:31); “the Tabernacle you shall craft…” (Exodus 26:1); “you shall craft sheets…” (Exodus 26:7); “you shall craft the boards…” (Exodus 26:15); “you shall craft a curtain…” (Exodus 26:31); “you shall craft an altar…” (Exodus 27:1); “you shall craft the Tabernacle courtyard…” (Exodus 27:9). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:39). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:40). “And for the peace offering, two cattle, five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year. This was the offering of Shelumiel son of Tzurishadai” (Numbers 7:41). “One young bull [par]” (Numbers 7:39), corresponding to the Tabernacle sheets that were crafted of all types of colors, (The midrash expounds par similar to apiryon, palanquin, which was colorful.) just as it says: “You shall craft the Tabernacle of ten sheets [of spun linen and sky blue, purple and scarlet wool]” (Exodus 26:1). “One ram” (Numbers 7:39), corresponding to the covering of rams’ hides, dyed red. “One sheep” (Numbers 7:39), corresponding to the taḥash hides. “[One] goat” (Numbers 7:40), corresponding to the tent that consisted of sheets of goat hair. “And for the peace [hashelamim] offering, two cattle” (Numbers 7:41), this is corresponding to Betzalel and Oholiav, who completed [hishlimu] the labor of the Tabernacle. Alternatively, this is corresponding to the screen of the entrance of the Tabernacle and the screen of the entrance of the courtyard, which completed [mashlimim] the closure of the Tent on all its sides, and the closure of the courtyard on all its sides. “Five rams, [five goats, five sheep]” (Numbers 7:41), these three species correspond to the hangings of the courtyard on its three sides, southern, northern, and western, as the length of the southern and the northern hangings was one hundred cubits, corresponding to the length of the courtyard, and the length of the western corresponded to its width of fifty cubits. Why were there five of each? It is corresponding to the courtyard hangings that were five cubits high, as it is stated: “And the height in the width, five cubits, corresponding to the hangings of the courtyard” (Exodus 38:18). And it says: “And the height, five cubits of fine twisted linen” (Exodus 27:18). Three times, that is fifteen, corresponding to the hangings of the fourth direction, as their length was only fifteen and fifteen cubits, as it is stated: “On the east side, they were fifty cubits. Hangings were fifteen cubits on the side…. On the second side: from this side and from that side of the gate of the courtyard, hangings were fifteen cubits” (Exodus 38:13–15). (On the eastern side, the fifty cubits of width of the courtyard consisted of fifteen cubits on each side of the screen at the entrance, which was twenty cubits.) “This was the offering of Shelumiel…” (Numbers 7:41), when the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented his offering corresponding to the order of the crafting of the Tabernacle, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Shelumiel…”
What did the Holy One blessed be He see that led Him to trace Pinḥas’s lineage after that incident? When Zimri son of Salu was stabbed, the Sages said that Zimri had six names: (Etz Yosef, Reshash, and Radal suggest that the correct reading is five names (see Sanhedrin 82b).) Zimri, son of Salu; Shaul, son of the Canaanite woman; Shelumiel, son of Tzurishadai; Zimri – because he became upon that Midianite woman like a rotten [hamuzeret] egg. (He was so exhausted from his sexual activity that he was like an egg that would not produce a fledgling. The name Zimri shares the same root as muzeret.) Son of Salu – a son who magnified [sila] his family’s iniquity. Shaul – as he lent [shehishil] himself for transgression. Son of the Canaanite woman – as he performed a Canaanite act. What was his name? Shelumiel. You find that when Zimri was stabbed, the tribes stood near him and said: Have you seen, this son of Putiel, whose mother’s father (A midrash states that Pinḥas’s mother was a descendant of Yitro, who was also called Putiel (see Shemot Rabba 7:5).) fattened calves for idol worship, killed a prince of Israel? That is why the verse came to trace his lineage: “Pinḥas, son of Elazar, son of Aaron the priest.” “Therefore, say: Behold, I am giving him My covenant of peace” (Numbers 25:12). “Therefore, say: Behold, I am giving him My covenant of peace” – as he is still alive. (The Etz Yosef explains that this is a reference to the view that Pinḥas is Elijah, and therefore he is still alive.) Likewise it says: “My covenant was with him, life and peace, and I gave it to him for the fear that he feared Me, and because he was in awe of My name” (Malachi 2:5). “It shall be for him, and for his descendants after him, a covenant of an eternal priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and he atoned for the children of Israel” (Numbers 25:13). “It shall be for him, and for his descendants after him…and he atoned” – did he sacrifice an offering, that atonement is stated in his regard? It is, rather, to teach you that anyone who sheds the blood of the wicked, it is as though he sacrificed an offering. “The name of the Israelite man who was slain, who was slain with the Midianite woman, was Zimri son of Salu, prince of a Simeonite patrilineal house” (Numbers 25:14). “The name of the Israelite man who was slain, who was slain with the Midianite woman” – just as the Holy One blessed be He engages in praise of the righteous to publicize it in the world, so, He engages in defamation of the wicked to publicize them in the world. Pinḥas, He publicized him for praise; Zimri, for defamation. In their regard it is stated: “The memory of the righteous is for blessing, and the name of the wicked will rot” (Proverbs 10:7). “Prince of a Simeonite patrilineal house” – as anyone who tarnishes himself, tarnishes his family with him. “Zimri son of Salu” – the verse is astonished in his regard: “One who breaches a fence, a serpent will bite him” (Ecclesiastes 10:8). His ancestor was initially zealous regarding harlotry, as it is stated: “The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took [each man his sword…and slew all the males]” (Genesis 34:25), and this one breached the fence that his ancestor had established. “And the name of the Midianite woman who was slain: Kozbi daughter of Tzur; he was head of the nations of a patrilineal house in Midian” (Numbers 25:15). “And the name of the…woman who was slain…he was head of the nations of a patrilineal house…” – to inform you of the extent to which the Midianites devoted themselves [to cause Israel to sin]. They even renounced a king’s daughter, as it is stated: “They killed the kings of Midian among those who were slain [Evi, and Rekem, and Tzur, and Ḥur, and Reva, the five kings of Midian]” (Numbers 31:8) – Tzur was the greatest of them all. He was a king and renounced his daughter; who would not renounce? Because he demeaned himself and publicized his daughter in disgrace, the verse demoted him and wrote him third. But he was the king over all of them: “He was head of the nations of a patrilineal house in Midian.”
“The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi…took” – from the fact that it says Simeon and Levi, we know that they are Jacob’s sons. It is, rather, “Jacob’s sons” – that they did not take counsel from Jacob; “Simeon and Levi” – that they did not take counsel from one another. “Dina's brothers” – was she only the sister of the two of them? Was she not the sister of all the tribes? It is, rather, because they endangered their lives on her behalf, she is called by their name. Similarly, “Miriam the prophetess, Aaron’s sister” (Exodus 15:20) – was she [only] Aaron’s sister? Was she not sister of the two of them? It is, rather, because Aaron devoted himself on her behalf, (He implored Moses to pray on Miriam’s behalf when she was afflicted with leprosy.) that is why she is called by his name. Similarly, “And in the matter of Kozbi, daughter of the prince of Midyan, their sister” (Numbers 25:18) – was she [only] their sister? Was she not a member of their nation? It is, rather, because she gave her life on behalf of her nation, her nation was called by her name. “Each man took his sword” – Rabbi Elazar says: They were thirteen years old. “They slew Ḥamor and Shekhem his son by the sword, and took Dina from Shekhem’s house, and departed” (Genesis 34:26). Shmuel asked Levi bar Sisi, he said to him: ‘What is that which is written: “And came upon the city confidently”?’ He said to him: ‘They were confident in the strength of the elder. Our patriarch Jacob did not want his sons to perform that act, but when his sons performed that act, he said: What, will I allow my sons to fall at the hand of the nations of the world. What did he do? He took his sword and his bow, stood at the entrance of Shekhem, and said: If the nations of the world come to confront my sons, I will battle against them.’ That is what he said to Joseph: “I have given to you one portion [shekhem] beyond your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22) – where do we find that our patriarch Jacob took his sword and his bow in Shekhem, as it is stated: “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite, with my sword and with my bow”? (Genesis 48:22) – “Ḥamor and Shekhem his son.” (As a consequence of the actions of Simeon and Levi, who killed Ḥamor and Shekhem, Jacob took up his sword and bow.)
“It was on the third day, when they were in pain, that the two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina's brothers, each man took his sword, and came upon the city confidently, and killed all the males” (Genesis 34:25). “It was on the third day, when they were in pain” – there we learned: One bathes the child [using hot water]. (The presumption of this section is that one is not permitted to bathe on Shabbat with hot water, even if the water was heated before Shabbat.) The school of Rabbi Meir: One bathes the circumcision. Rabbi Yosei said: You (Whoever it is that teaches the halakha.) should teach that one bathes the child. (And not one bathes the circumcision.) Rabbi Ze’eira said: At all times, Rabbi Yosei would say to him: ‘Say over your mishna [one bathes the child], as we learned: (The following serves as a proof that the correct version of the Mishna is that one bathes "the child" and not only "the circumcision.") One does not withhold oil or hot water from upon a wound on Shabbat. Moreover, one may sprinkle hot water upon a wound on Shabbat. And if you say one bathes the circumcision, what is the difference between the wound of an adult and wound of a child. It is, rather, to teach you that one bathes the entire body of the child, which is not the case regarding an adult, as that [one] is only [allowed to bathe] the wound.’ Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: One bathes the child on the third day from circumcision that coincides with Shabbat. Rabbi Yaakov bar Aḥa said: At all times, Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yonatan would instruct the midwives and say to them: ‘All the treatments that you administer during the week, perform them on Shabbat, on the third day that coincides with Shabbat.’ Shmuel said: It is due to danger. Rabbi Yosei said to him: ‘If it is due to danger, let us prepare hot water for him on Shabbat, as we learned: A person heats a cloth and places it upon his wound on Shabbat, and he may not take a bowl filled with hot water and place it on his belly on Shabbat, (This is for fear that the water will spill and cause a burn.) but hot water for a cure is permitted.’ Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: There is no prohibition; rather, it is permitted. (Boiling water on Shabbat in order to bathe the child on the third day is permitted.)
“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5). Reuben went out and his ears were slumped. [Jacob] began calling: “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers for degradation. He said to them: ‘You were brothers for Dina, as it is written: “Two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina’s brothers, each took his sword” (Genesis 34:25), but not brothers for Joseph, as you sold him.’ Rabbi Simlai said: In Reuben’s regard it is written: “In order to deliver him from their hand, to restore him to his father” (Genesis 37:22). Reuben was not involved in Joseph’s sale. Judah, too, said to them: “What profit [is there if we kill our brother]?” (Genesis 37:26). These were the eldest; consequently, the two of them sold him. (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah were the oldest sons of Jacob. If Reuben and Judah were not involved in the sale, it must have been Simeon and Levi who organized it. ) Know that it is so, for when they descended to Egypt, [Joseph] took from them none other than Simeon, as it is stated: “He took Simeon from them [and incarcerated him before their eyes]” (Genesis 42:24). That is why [Jacob] called the two of them as one. “Weapons of villainy” – what are weapons of villainy? He said to them: ‘They have been stolen by you; they are not yours. They belong to Esau, in whose regard it is written: “By your sword you shall live”’ (Genesis 27:40). Those are weapons of villainy, and villainy is none other than Esau, as it is stated: “For the villainy to your brother Jacob” (Obadiah 1:10). (Thus, Jacob was saying that the weapons of Simeon and Levi belong to Esau, who is the subject of the verse in Obadiah. ) “Their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is a Greek expression, makhirin, makhirin>. Some say: “Mekhuroteihen” – their residences [meguroteihem], just as it says: “Your origins [mekhorotayikh] and your birthplace” (Ezekiel 16:3). “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when Zimri will arise and perform that act with Kozbi, let my name not be mentioned there, as it is stated: “The name of the man of Israel who was slain…[Zimri, son of Salu, a prince of a patrilineal house of the Simeonites]” (Numbers 25:14). (The name of Jacob is not mentioned. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when Koraḥ will assemble his congregation to dispute, let my name not be associated with them, but rather, “Koraḥ, son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi” (Numbers 16:1), but it did not say: “Son of Jacob.” “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” – did they kill one man [ish]; is it not written: “They killed all the males” (Genesis 34:25)? It is that they were all considered before the Holy One blessed be He like one man. Likewise it says: “Behold [hen], nations may be regarded like a drop from a bucket…” (Isaiah 40:16). What is hen? In the Greek language, hen is one. Likewise it says: “You will smite Midian as one man” (Judges 6:16). Similarly, “the horse and its rider He cast into the sea” (Exodus 15:1) – like one horse and its rider. (The singular terms are used in order to indicate that God cast all the many horses and riders of the Egyptian army into the sea as though they were just one. ) “Cursed is their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed is their anger” – he cursed only their anger. Likewise, the wicked Bilam says: “How will I curse, where God has not cursed” (Numbers 23:8)? If at a time of anger he cursed only their anger, can I come to curse them? (If Jacob was angry at Simeon and Levi and yet, with divine spirit, Jacob cursed only their anger and not them, can I, Bilam, curse the Israelites? ) “I will divide them in Jacob” – how so? Twenty-four thousand fell from the tribe of Simeon in [the incident of] Zimri, and its widows were twenty-four thousand. They were divided into two thousand for each and every tribe, as it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.” Everyone who circulates among the doorways [to beg] is from the tribe of Simeon. The Holy One blessed be He said: Levi too will circulate. What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He provided him with his sustenance cleanly, and yet Jacob’s edict was fulfilled. The Holy One blessed be He elevated [Levi] and gave him one-tenth, (The first tithe of produce. ) and he circulates and says: ‘Give me my portion.’ That is why it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.”
We are taught in Baraitha that R. Joshua b. Karcha says: "Circumcision is so important that all the merits which Moses our teacher acquired were not sufficient to protect him in the hour when he was indifferent to circumcision, as it is said (Ex. 4, 24) And it came to pass on the way at the lodging place, that the Lord met him and sought to kill him." R. Josi says: "God forbid to think that Moses was slow in circumcising his child, but Moses said thus to himself: 'Shall I circumcise [my child] and then go on my journey, it might prove dangerous to it, as it is written (Gen. 34, 25) And it came to pass on the third day, [after the circumcision, when they were sore. Shall I circumcise my child and remain here three days [until it heals,] the Holy One, praised be He! said unto me (Ex. 4, 19) Go return unto Egypt! [Consequently, he left his child uncircumcised.] But why then was he punished? Because when he arrived at the inn he attended (Fol. 32) to things concerning the lodging first, [and did not perform the circumcision,] as it is said (Ib. ib.) And it came to pass on the way in the lodging." Rabban Simon b. Gamiliel says: "Satan did not want to kill Moses our teacher, but he wanted to kill the child, as it is said (Ib., ib., 25) Surely a bloody relative art thou to me. Now let us see who is called a relative, Moses, or the infant? Surely we must say that it refers to the infant." R. Juda b. Z'bina lectured: "At the time when Moses was indifferent to circumcision, the angels Aph and Chemah came and swallowed him, and they left nothing of him except the legs. Immediately, then Zipporah took a flint and cut off the foreskin of her son, etc., and then he withdrew from him. And Moses then wanted to kill them (the angels), as it is said (Ps. 37, 8) Cease from anger, (aph) and forsake wrath (Chemah)." Others, however, say that he did not kill the Angel Chemah, as it is said (Ez. 27, 4) Wrath (Chema) have I not. Behold it is written (Deut. 9, 19) For I was afraid of the anger (Aph), and the wrath [Chemah], hence they did exist? We must therefore say that there were two angels called Chemah. And if you wish we may explain that the latter refers only to the troop commanded by Chemah.
“It is better that you do not vow, than that you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). “It is better that you do not vow” – Rabbi Meir said: Better than both is one who does not vow at all, but rather brings his sheep to the Temple Courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it, as it is stated: “If you refrain from vowing, [there will be no sin in you]” (Deuteronomy 23:23). Rabbi Huna said: There was an incident involving one who vowed and did not pay. He set sail in the Mediterranean Sea, and his ship sank in the sea and he died. Rabbi Shmuel said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes for himself that his wife will die, as it is written: “I, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me…” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes [himself] to come to four transgressions: Idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander, and all of them are derived from Jacob. (While fleeing Esau, Jacob took a vow that he was to fulfill upon his return to Canaan (see Genesis 28:20–22), but he did not fulfill it immediately upon his return.) Idol worship, as it is written: “Remove the foreign gods” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, as it is written: “That he had defiled Dina his daughter” (Genesis 34:5). Bloodshed, as it is written: “Jacob’s two sons, […each] took [his sword…and killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). And slander, as it is written: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons [saying: Jacob has taken everything that was our father’s]” (Genesis 31:1). Rabbi Mana said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes death to come upon him, as it is stated: “For the Lord your God will demand it of you [and it will be a sin for you]” (Deuteronomy 23:22), and Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). And there is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgressions with a rod and their iniquity with plagues” (Psalms 89:33).
Similarly, (Genesis 34:25) "Shimon and Levi, the brothers of Dinah." Now was she not the sister of all of the tribes? Why, then, "the brothers of Dinah"? — Because they risked their lives for her, she was called their sister.
(Gen. 42:3:) SO JOSEPH'S TEN BROTHERS WENT DOWN < TO BUY GRAIN IN EGYPT >. Jacob said to them: Will you please not < all > enter by one gate (Gk.: pyle.) because of the evil eye? (Tanh., Gen. 10:8; Gen. R. 91:6; cf. 91:2; cf. also above, 10:8; below, 10:17.) And so they did. When they entered, they did not all enter as a unit, but each and every one all by himself. What did Joseph do? He posted guards over the entrance gates of Egypt. He said: Let each and every one who enters have his name and the name of his father written under your supervision. Then you are to bring their names to me. So, when the children of Jacob entered, each and every one all by himself, he (a guard) said: What is your name? So he told him: Reuben ben Jacob. And so it was with each and every one of them. < A guard > would write down his name and the name of his father. Then they brought < the names > to Joseph. Joseph immediately recognized them, as stated (in Gen. 42:8): SO JOSEPH RECOGNIZED HIS BROTHERS. He began to recall the dreams, as stated (in Gen. 42:9): NOW JOSEPH REMEMBERED THE DREAMS THAT HE HAD DREAMED ABOUT THEM. (Vs. 7:) BUT HE BECAME A STRANGER UNTO THEM, AND HE SPOKE HARSHLY WITH THEM. He began to treat them harshly, AND (ibid., cont.) HE SAID TO THEM: WHERE DO YOU COME FROM? When they said: From the land of Canaan, he said to Simeon and Levi: Are you accustomed to pillaging people just as you did at Shechem (in Gen. 34:25-26)? Ergo (in Gen. 42:7): AND HE SPOKE HARSHLY WITH THEM.
(Numb. 25:14, cont.:) ZIMRI BEN SALU, . Whoever discredits himself discredits his family along with himself. It is astounding what is written about him (in Eccl. 10:8): THE ONE WHO BREAKS THROUGH (“To break through a barrier” means “to transgress.” Cf. the parallels in Tanh., Numb. 8:2, and Numb. R. 21:3, which supply a fuller reference to Eccl. 10:8.) is a son (i.e., Zimri). His ancestor (Simeon) was the barrier maker. He was the first to display zeal against harlotry, as stated (in Gen. 34:25): THEN TWO OF THE SONS OF JACOB, SIMEON AND LEVI, TOOK …. But this broke through the barrier which his ancestor had made.
(Gen. 44:18, cont.:) IN THE EARS OF MY LORD. He said to him: Let my words enter your ears. Two of us younger ones entered a great city and destroyed it, as stated (in Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS < EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … AND KILLED EVERY MALE >. Now we are all here. If we want, we shall not leave a soul here.
(Gen. 34:1:) < NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT > TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. TO SEE < implies > TO BE SEEN. (The unpointed Hebrew text could be read either way by assuming a contraction of the passive common in Mishnaic Hebrew. See M.H. Segal, A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew (Oxford: Clarendon, 1958), section 115. See also Gen. 22:14, where the same contracted passive is used to explain a place-name based on the active Hebrew verb, “to see.” On Gen. 22:14, see E.A. Speiser, Genesis (“Anchor Bible,” 1; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 163f.) To what is the matter comparable? To one who was walking in the marketplace with a piece < of meat > in his hand. (Gen. R. 80:5.) A dog, having seen it, went after it, and snatched it from him. Thus did Dinah go out TO SEE (and TO BE SEEN) when Shechem saw her and seized her. (See Eccl. R. 10:8:1.) Another interpretation (of Gen. 34:1): TO SEE THE DAUGHTERS OF THE LAND. When the children of Jacob came into the land of Israel, they began to exhibit their strength, their wealth, and their beauty. They exhibited their strength (according to Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, < SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH >, [EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. They exhibited their wealth (according to Gen. 33:17): BUT JACOB JOURNEYED TO SUCCOTH, BUILT A HOUSE FOR HIMSELF, AND MADE STALLS (sukkot) FOR HIS CATTLE. He began opening < cattle > bazaars. (Gk.: katalusis (“resting place” or “inn”). See Gen. R. 79:6; Eccl. R. 10:8:1; Esth. R. 3:7.) And where is it shown concerning their beauty? (In Gen. 34:1:) NOW LEAH'S DAUGHTER DINAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO JACOB, WENT OUT TO SEE AND TO BE SEEN. (Note that the midrash understands the one verb, “see,” in both an active and passive sense. See above, note 59.) (Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < It is > the wicked < who > "see." (Thus in Esth. 3:5:) WHEN HAMAN SAW. (Similarly in Gen. 28:6:) WHEN ESAU SAW. (So also here, in Gen. 34:2:) THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR … SAW. David said (in Ps. 69:24:) LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED SO THAT THEY DO NOT SEE.
What is written above on the matter (in Gen. 33:18)? NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. < When > he had come from Paddan-Aram under conditions that the Holy One had set with him, he did not lessen him in any respect. What did Jacob do? He began opening bazaars. (On this word, see above, 8:19, and the note there.) The Holy One said to him: Have you forgotten what you vowed to me? And did you not say this (in Gen. 28:20): IF GOD IS WITH ME, so that I do not commit idolatry, (ibid., cont.:) AND PROTECTS ME, from bloodshed, (ibid., cont.:) ON THE WAY, from unchastity, as stated (in Prov. 30:20): SUCH IS THE WAY OF AN ADULTERESS: SHE EATS, WIPES HER MOUTH, AND SAYS: I HAVE DONE NO WRONG. The Holy One did protect him, for it so states (in Gen. 28:15): AND I WILL PROTECT YOU WHEREVER YOU GO. Jacob said (in Gen. 28:22): [AND] OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME, I WILL SURELY SET ASIDE A TITHE FOR YOU. As soon as he came to the land of Israel, he forgot this vow. The Holy One said: By your life, through the very things which you said you would observe, through them you shall come to grief. Where is it shown in regard to idolatry? Where it is stated (in Gen. 35:4): THEN THEY GAVE UNTO JACOB ALL THE ALIEN GODS THAT THEY HAD…. Where is it shown in regard to bloodshed? Where it is stated (in Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … [AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. Where is it shown in regard to unchastity? From Dinah, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:2-3): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < … > AND HIS SOUL CLUNG TO JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH. R. Abbahu said: We have learned things from putrid secretion (i.e., mere mortals): (“Putrid secretion” can denote semen or, as here, the mere mortals like Pharaoh, who were produced by it.) (Gen. 41:44:) PHARAOH SAID TO JOSEPH: I AM PHARAOH. (Gen. R. 90:2.) I have said that you shall be king. The Holy One said to Israel concerning each and every commandment which they do: I AM THE LORD (e.g., in Lev. 19:3, 4, 10, 12, 14, 16, etc.). I am the one who is going to repay each and everyone with his reward. Now, just as in the case of flesh and blood, when it said: I AM PHARAOH, it raised him to great dignity; so much the more so with me when I say something. And just as you said (in Gen. 41:40): ONLY WITH RESPECT TO THE THRONE SHALL I BE GREATER THAN YOU, < so > has the Holy One said to Israel (in Deut. 28:13): AND YOU ONLY SHALL BE AT THE TOP. Just as an "only" from flesh and blood (i.e., from Pharaoh) magnified Joseph, so much the more so in the case of an "only" from the Holy One.
The Israelites sang ten songs because of the ten miracles performed in their behalf. The first was in Egypt, as is said: You shall have a song as in the night when a feast is hallowed (Isa. 30:29). The second was at the Red Sea, as it is said: Then Moses sang (Exod. 15:1). The third was at the well: Then Israel sang this song (Num. 21:16). The fourth took place when Moses said: And it came to pass when Moses had made an end of writing (Deut. 31:24). The fifth: Then spoke Joshua to the Lord (Josh. 10:12). The sixth: Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam (Judg. 5:6); the seventh: And David spoke unto the Lord the words of this song (II Sam. 22:1); the eight: A song at the dedication of the House; of David (Ps. 30:1). Did David actually dedicate the House (Temple)? The fact is that Solomon dedicated it, but inasmuch as David had set his heart upon erecting it, the song of dedication was ascribed to him. A similar example is contained in the verse And his sister stood far off (Exod. 2:4). Was she not the sister of both of them? Indeed she was, but inasmuch as she had devoted herself to Moses’ welfare, she is referred to by his name. Another instance of this is contained in the verse And the two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers took (Gen. 34:25). Was she not the sister of each of the tribal ancestors? She was indeed, but because these two had devoted themselves to her welfare, she is mentioned with their names. Another illustration is contained in the verse Cozbi the daughter of the chief of Midian, their sister (Num. 26:18). Was she actually a sister to all of them? (Hardly!) She was called their sister because she was deeply devoted to her people.
(Numb. 25:14:) “And the name of the slain man of Israel...” Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is concerned with the praise of the righteous to publicize (Rt.: PRSM. Cf. Gk.: parresia (“boldness in speaking out”).) them throughout the world, so is he concerned with the disgrace of the wicked to publicize them throughout the world. He publicized Phinehas for praise and publicized Zimri for disparagement. About them is it stated (in Prov. 10:7), “The remembrance of a righteous one is for a blessing, but the name of the wicked shall rot.” (Numb. 25:14, cont.:) “Zimri ben Salu, the prince of a clan.” The sages said Zimri had three names: Zimri ben Salu; and Saul the son of the Canaanite woman; and Shelumiel ben Zurishaddai. [He was called] Zimri because of the fact that he became like an addled (hamuzeret) egg (as a result of engaging in multiple acts of intercourse); ben Salu because he evoked [shehisli] the sins of his family; Saul [Shaul] because he lent [shehishil] himself to sin; the son of the Canaanite woman because of the fact that he performed an act of Canaan. And what is his [true] name? Shelumiel, son of Zurishaddai. (Numb. 25:14, cont.:) “Zimri ben Salu, the prince of a clan,” as whoever discredits himself discredits his family along with himself. (Numb. 25:14, cont.:) “Zimri ben Salu, the prince of a clan.” The verse is astounded by him (in Eccl. 10:8), “The one who breaks through a barrier will be bitten by a snake.” (“To break through a barrier” means “to transgress.”) [As it was] his [ancestor Simeon) who was the first to display zeal against harlotry, as stated (in Gen. 34:25), “then two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, [the brothers of Dinah, each] took [his sword]….” And [yet] this (Zimri) broke through the barrier which his [ancestor] had made. (Numb. 25:15:) “And the name of the Midianite woman who was slain [was Cozbi bat Zur; Zur was the tribal head of a clan in Midian].” [These words are there] to inform you how far the Midianites hatred went. Thus they had abandoned a daughter of kings in to shame, as stated (in Numb. 31:8), “[And along with their other victims] they killed the kings of Midian:…, Zur.” Zur was the greatest of them all; and [since] he abandoned his daughter, who would not abandon [his own daughter]? But because he had disgraced himself and abandoned his daughter to shame, the text has demoted him and numbered him third (on the list). He was, however, the king of them all, as stated (in Numb. 25:15), “[Zur] was leader of the nations of the clan [in Midian].”
And there passed by the wild beasts. These are the sons of Jacob, who were compared to beasts: Judah is a lion’s whelp (Gen. 49:9); Dan is a young lion (Deut. 33:22); Naphtali is a hind let loose (Gen. 49:21); and likewise all the others. And trod down the thistle confirms what is stated in the verse And came upon the city unawares, and slew all the males. And they slew Hamor and Shechem, his son, with the edge of the sword (Gen. 34:25–26).
Rabbi Chanina ben Dosa said: All who are circumcised have (excessive) pain on the third day, as it is said, "And it came to pass on the third day, when they were sore" (Gen. 34:25). They may wash || the child on the third day, when it happens to fall on the Sabbath, and all things necessary for a circumcision are permitted to be done on the Sabbath.
The tribe of Shimon contended against the tribe of Levi: "Would the son (Pinchas) of the daughter of this "fattener" (Yithro , who fattened calves for idolatry) seek to uproot an entire tribe (Shimon) from Israel! Don't we know whose son he is?" When the L-rd saw them cheapening him thus, He began tracing his illustrious lineage, viz. (Bamidbar 25:11) "Pinchas, the son of Elazar, the son of Aaron the Cohein turned My wrath away from the children of Israel" — a Cohein, the son of a Cohein; a zealot, the son of a zealot (Levi, viz. Bereshit 34:25); turner away of wrath, the son of a turner away of wrath (Aaron, viz. Bamidbar 17:13) turned My wrath away from the children of Israel."
"His (Shimon's) hands did battle for him," as it is written (Bereshith 34:25) "And there took, two sons of Jacob, Shimon and Levi, etc." "And You shall be a help against his foes": as in (Ibid. 35:5) "And they journeyed, and the terror of G-d was on the cities around them, and they did not pursue the sons of Jacob."
(Devarim 33:8) "And of Levi he said": Why was this (blessing) said of him (and not of Shimon)? Shimon and Levi drank of one cup, viz. (Bereshith 49:7) "Cursed be their wrath, for it is fierce, and their anger, for it is sore. I shall divide them in Jacob, and I shall scatter them in Israel." This is analogous to (the situation of) two, who borrowed from the king. One paid him back, and borrowed from him again, and the other — not only did he not pay him back, but he borrowed again. Thus, Shimon and Levi: Both "borrowed" in Shechem, viz. (Bereshith 34:25) "And there took, two sons of Jacob, Shimon and Levi, each man his sword, and came upon the city (Shechem) secure, (in that the men were ailing from the circumcision), and they killed every male." Levi paid back what he borrowed in the desert, (in the incident of the golden calf) viz. (Shemoth 32:26) "And Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and he said 'Whoever is for the L-rd, (let him come) to me!' And there gathered unto him all the sons of Levi, etc." And he returned and "borrowed" from the L-rd in Shittim, viz. (Bamidbar 25:11) "Pinchas the son of Elazar the son of Aaron the Cohein turned My wrath away from the children of Israel when he raged My rage in their midst, and I did not consume the children of Israel in My wrath" — whereas Shimon, not only did he not repay the loan, but he went and "borrowed" again, viz. (Ibid. 14) "And the name of the man of Israel who was smitten, who was smitten together with the Midianite woman, was Zimri the son of Salu, chief of a father's house in the house of Shimon."
“Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:2). “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” – that is what is written: “It is preferable that you do not vow than if you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda: Rabbi Meir says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – but one who vows and pays is better. There is proof for Rabbi Meir from what is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Rabbi Yehuda says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – and better than both of them (Better than one who vows and does not pay, and one who vows and pays. ) is one who does not vow at all, but rather, brings his lamb to the Temple courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it. “If you refrain from vowing, there will be no sin in you” (Deuteronomy 23:23) – Rav Huna said: There was an incident involving one who took a vow but did not pay his vow, and he embarked to sail in the Mediterranean Sea. His ship sunk and he died at sea. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow, ultimately he will come to idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander. From whom do you derive all this? It is from Jacob; because he vowed and delayed fulfilling his vow, (Jacob’s vow is related in Genesis 28:20–22, and a midrash asserts that he did not fulfill his vow in a timely enough fashion when he returned to the Land of Israel. ) he came to all of them. Idol worship, from where is it derived? “Jacob said to his household…remove the foreign gods [that are in your midst]” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, from where is it derived? From Dina, as it is stated: “Dina went out.… [and Shekhem…lay with her and violated her]” (Genesis 34:1). Bloodshed, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “It was on the third day, when they were in pain…[Simeon and Levi…killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). Slander, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons” (Genesis 31:1). The Rabbis say: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow buries his wife. That is what is written: “And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and pays, he has reward for the vow and for the payment, as it is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Anyone who vows and delays fulfillment of his vow causes death to himself, as it is written: “As the Lord your God will demand it from you” (Deuteronomy 23:22) – payment is exacted from you, and not from your property. Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). There is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgression with a rod, and their iniquity with plague” (Psalms 89:33). Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: Just as regarding vows, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, (See Numbers 30:3. ) and: You shall not delay, (See Deuteronomy 23:23. ) so, regarding valuations, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, and: You shall not delay. That is why Moses cautions Israel and says: “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord.” (Moses mentions the term vow in the context of valuations in order to imply that the prohibitions against violating or delaying fulfillment of vows applies to valuations as well. )
One may wash the baby on Shabbat, both before the circumcision and after the circumcision. And one may sprinkle hot water on him by hand but not with a vessel, in order to depart from the usual manner in which this is done. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: One may wash the baby on the third day following his circumcision, even if that third day occurs on Shabbat. On the third day following circumcision, the baby is considered to be in danger, as it is stated with regard to the men of Shekhem, who were circumcised: “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25). This teaches us that on the third day the pain of circumcision poses a danger. If there is uncertainty whether or not to circumcise a baby, and likewise in the case of a hermaphrodite [androginos] baby, who possesses both male and female genitals, one does not desecrate Shabbat to perform the circumcision, since it is not certain that the circumcision is required. And Rabbi Yehuda permits doing so for a hermaphrodite baby.
The mishna continues to cite a series of unrelated halakhot based upon biblical allusions. From where is it derived that a woman who discharges semen even on the third day after relations is ritually impure, just like one who touches semen (see Leviticus 15:17)? Because the semen remains fit for insemination, it can transmit impurity, as it is stated prior to the revelation at Sinai: “And he said to the people, prepare yourselves for three days, do not approach a woman” (Exodus 19:15). This three-day separation period ensured that even a woman who discharged semen would be pure. The mishna cites another halakha based on a biblical allusion: From where is it derived that one may wash the circumcision on the third day, meaning the third day after the circumcision, even if it occurs on Shabbat? As it is stated: “And it came to pass on the third day when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25). The pain of circumcision lasts at least three days, and as long as the child is in pain he is considered to be in danger. The mishna cites another halakha with an allusion in the Bible: From where is it derived that one ties a scarlet strip of wool to the head of the scapegoat that is dispatched to Azazel? As it is stated: “If your sins be like scarlet, they will become white like snow” (Isaiah 1:18). Since the goat is offered to atone for sins, red wool is tied to its horns.
And the members of the non-priestly watch, who represented the entire community that week, would fast four days a week, from Monday until Thursday. And they would not fast on Shabbat eve, in deference to Shabbat, as they did not wish to start Shabbat while fasting. And they did not fast on Sunday, so as not to go from rest and delight immediately to exertion and fasting, and run the risk that they might die as a result of the abrupt change. Which portions of the Torah would the members of the non-priestly watch read on each day? On Sunday they would read the portions starting with: “In the beginning” and “Let there be a firmament” (Genesis 1:1–8). On Monday they would read: “Let there be a firmament” and “Let the waters be gathered” (Genesis 1:9–13). On Tuesday they would read: “Let the waters be gathered” and “Let there be lights” (Genesis 1:14–19). On Wednesday: “Let there be lights” and “Let the waters swarm” (Genesis 1:20–23). On Thursday: “Let the waters swarm” and “Let the earth bring forth” (Genesis 1:24–31). On Friday: “Let the earth bring forth” and “And the heaven and the earth were finished” (Genesis 2:1–3). A long passage, consisting of six verses or more, is read by two people, and a short passage is read by one, as one cannot read fewer than three verses from the Torah together. They read from the Torah in the morning prayer and in the additional prayer. In the afternoon prayer the members of the non-priestly watch enter the synagogue and read the daily portion by heart, just as one recites Shema every day. On Shabbat eve at the afternoon prayer, they would not enter the synagogue for the communal Torah readings, in deference to Shabbat.
He used to say: At five years of age the study of Scripture; At ten the study of Mishnah; At thirteen subject to the commandments; At fifteen the study of Talmud; At eighteen the bridal canopy; At twenty for pursuit [of livelihood]; At thirty the peak of strength; At forty wisdom; At fifty able to give counsel; At sixty old age; At seventy fullness of years; At eighty the age of “strength”; At ninety a bent body; At one hundred, as good as dead and gone completely out of the world.
ולא היו מתענין בע"ש מפני כבוד השבת – and one does not have to mention the Sabbath itself. And not on Sundays, because it is the third day [from] the creation [of mankind], since on Friday, man was created. And on the third day of his creation, he was weaker, as it is written (Genesis 34:25): “On the third day, when they were in pain…” Alternatively, because man was given the additional soul on the Sabbath and on Saturday night it w as taken from him, if they would fast on Sunday, they would be endangered. S And on each day, the men of the post would recite the Neilah prayer.
"Thirteen [is the age] for [observing] commandments": As is written (Numbers 5:6), "a man or a women who have done from all of the sins of man." And regarding Shekhem, it is written (Genesis 34:25), "and the two sons of Yaakov, Shimon and Levi, took - each man - his sword." And at that time, Levi was thirteen years old, and [still, the verse] calls him a man.
ויעש האיש כאשר אמר יוסף, “the man did as Joseph had said. According to our sages, the “man” was his older son Menashe, [who could not have been more than nine years old at the time. Ed.] This is difficult in light of Rashi’s commentary in the Talmud Avot chapter 5, that the rule that men have to observe the Torah’s commandments from the age of 13, is derived from Shimon and Levi, Joseph’s brothers when we calculate their ages at the time when they took their swords and killed the male population of the town of Sh’chem. (Genesis 34,25) If they were 13 at the time, it is clear that Menashe at this time could not have been older than nine years old. The Torah had spelled out that Joseph’s sons had been born before the onset of the famine. Seven years had elapsed since Joseph had married, seven good years and 2 years of famine. How could the Torah refer to Menashe as a “man” then? (Attributed to Rav Chayim who quoted Rabbi Eliezer avi ha-ezri.) The problem deserves further study.
R. Elazar ben Azaryah says: they may bathe an infant on the third day [of circumcision] which falls on the Shabbat, as it is said, “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were sore” (Genesis 34:25). Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah disagrees with the previous opinion in two ways. First of all, he holds that the child may be bathed in a normal manner and not just by sprinkling on him. Secondly, the child may be bathed even if Shabbat falls on the third day after his circumcision, and not just on the day of the circumcision itself. This Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah learns from the story of Shechem’s circumcision where we see that he and the people from his city were still hurting on the third day. Talmudic commentators debate whether this means that the infant may be bathed up until the third day, and also on the first and second day after the circumcision, or just the third day, but not the first two days. It seems to me that the first position is more reasonable. According to the latter position we would have to say that for some reason the pain is worse on the third day.
How do we know that one who has been circumcised may be bathed on the third day [after circumcision] which falls on Shabbat? Because it is said, “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25). It is permitted to warm water (but not to light a fire) in order to bathe someone who has just been circumcised. The mishnah assumes that we know that it is permitted to do so on the first and second days after the circumcision. It is permitted up until the third day. This is derived from what it says about the people of Shechem who were still in pain three days after their circumcision.
Auf die Stelle. Genesis 34, 25.
A verb that comes with two subjects will sometimes come in singular and sometimes in plural. ויצא נח ובניו ואשתו (And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife) (Genesis 8:18.) . ויבוא משה ואהרן (And Moses and Aaron went) (Leviticus 9:23.) . ויקברו אותו יצחק וישמעאל בניו (And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him) (Genesis 25:9.) . ויקחו שמעון ולוי איש חרבו (that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brethren, took each man his sword) (Genesis 34:25.) .
An additional meaning of the verse and the way it is phrased is that G'd appeared to Abraham for Abraham's sake. The Torah here alludes to something discussed in Baba Metzia 86. Rabbi Chama son of Chanina stated that this vision occurred on the third day after the circumcision. G'd came and enquired after Abraham's wellbeing. How did Rabbi Chama know that it was the third day? If we were to deduce this from Genesis 34,25, where we are told that the third day after the people of Shechem had circumsised themselves was a day they experienced additional pains, this cannot be, because we have a definitive statement in Shabbat 134 that the first and second day after the circumcision are more dangerous to the patient! True, the Talmud there distinguishes between the pain and the relative healing process experienced by adults (pain lasts longer, healing occurs more slowly), compared to that experienced by minors. However, such a distinction applies only to the third day, not to the first two days. On the first two days everyone experiences the most pain.
A Midrashic approach based on Tanchuma Vayigash 3 to Yehudah’s speech. The words ויגש יהודה introduce a confrontation between the lion and the ox. Yehudah represents the lion (Gen. 49,9), Joseph the ox (Deut. 33,17). The words בי אדני are a plea not to apply the attribute of Justice when judging Binyamin as well as themselves. The words: “let me say a word in the hearing of my lord,” mean “may my words find a receptive ear.” He then proceeded to tell Joseph that Sarah, the great-grandmother of Binyamin had been kept against her will in the palace of a previous Pharaoh. (Genesis 12,17) As a result, both Pharaoh and his entire household had been so stricken by G’d that he immediately not only released her but pacified her husband with generous gifts. Joseph was to reflect what this G’d would to him if he tried to keep Binyamin as a slave. He added that Binyamin’s mother died prematurely due to a carelessly worded curse by her husband Binyamin’s father (Gen. 31,32). Imagine what would happen if his father were now to pronounce a deliberate curse upon Joseph for depriving him of his son! He asked Joseph to also reflect on the fact that two of their number had destroyed an entire city (Gen. 34,25). He could imagine what all of them could do if they set their mind on it. At that time the reason for their act of vengeance had been the rape of their sister. This time it involved freedom of a male, their brother. Seeing this male was destined to house the Sanctuary of the G’d of the heavens on earth (Deut. 33,12), they would move heaven and earth to ensure that that prophecy would be fulfilled. Yehudah added: ”for you are like Pharaoh.” He meant: “just as Pharaoh makes promises and does not keep them, so you too make promises and do not keep them.” You had said that you merely wanted to take a look at Binyamin to convince yourself that we had spoken truthfully (42,20). Just as Pharaoh is known to indulge his homosexual tastes, so you appear to want to keep Binyamin for similar reasons. Just as Pharaoh is the King and you are his number two, my father has the rank of king in his country and I am second in command. He added that if he were to draw his sword he would start by slaying Joseph and finish by slaying Pharaoh.
A Midrashic approach to this verse (Bereshit Rabbah 99,7) “Shimon and Levi are brothers when it comes to taking revenge for the rape of Dinah, but when it came to their behaviour vis-a-vis Joseph they certainly did not act as brothers.” By using the word מכרותיהם, Yaakov alluded to the sale of Joseph i.e. מכירה. We should remember that the four brothers Reuven, Shimon, Levi, and Yehudah were the senior brothers. Seeing that the Torah reported that both Reuven and Yehudah considered the sale of Joseph as inappropriate (compare 37,22 and 37,26), this leaves Shimon and Levi as the ones who must have suggested that Joseph be sold. This explains why when the brothers went to Egypt, Joseph detained only Shimon.
שמעון ולוי אחים, they had acted like brothers in their concern for their sister Dinah, as the Torah credits them in Genesis 34,25.
ותקח מרים הנביאה AND MIRIAM THE PROPHETESS TOOK — But where had she prophesied? When she was THE SISTER OF AARON alone — before Moses was born she said, “My mother will at some time bear a son who will deliver Israel etc.”, as is stated in Treatise Sotah 12b (cf. Megillah 14a). Another explanation of אחות אהרן, the sister of Aaron: because he jeopardised his life for her by entreating on her behalf and so possibly incurring God’s displeasure when she was stricken with leprosy, she is called by his name (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi Genesis 34:25).
AT THIRTEEN, THE COMMANDMENTS. Rav: for the verse says, “should a man or woman commit one of the sins of man” (Numbers 5:6), and in the story of Shechem the verse says “and the two sons of Jacob, Simon and Levi, the brothers of Dina, each [Heb. ish] took their swords” (Genesis 34:25), and Levi was thirteen at the time, and is called ish, a man. Rashi: consider that Jacob spent another thirteen yars with Laban after marrying Leah. If one allows seven months for each of her pregnancies, then since Levi was the third pregnancy, he was born about two years in. He would then have been eleven years old when they left. Add to that the six months they spent on the road and the eighteen months—a summer, a winter, and another summer—that they spent in Sukkot, which makes two years altogether, and it turns out that Levi was thirteen years old when they arrived at Shechem, and was called ish, a man. In his commentary on the Torah, in parashat Vayeshev, on the verse “and he mourned his son many days” (Genesis 37:34), Rashi is not being precise when he writes that six months of that two-year period were spent in Beit El, as that happened after the incident in Shechem. [*See Zavim, 2:1.]
Benjamin was the only child of Jacob to be named by both his parents. He was, in fact, given two names. Jacob firmly chose the other meaning of Oni – not sorrow, but strength – and renamed him Benjamin, or “embodiment of strength.” (Alternatively, “son of days,” that he may live a long life unlike his mother (Midrash Aggadah, Numbers 1.4–14), or that he was the ben zekunim, the son of Jacob’s advanced age (Rashbam, Genesis 35:18).) The doubly named Benjamin was also the only son of Jacob to be born after the patriarch had been given his second name, undergoing the paradigm shift to Israel. He was born, as it were, into a new reality of a nascent nation, coming into its own power. (Simeon and Levi’s confident slaughter of Shechem (ויבאו על העיר בטח) (Genesis 34:25), and the brothers’ wholesale plundering of the city’s women, children, and spoils (27–29), illustrate the clan’s newfound strength.) This family was already a force that had proven itself on the battlefield with Esau and Shechem, and received from God the explicit blessing of nationhood. This first (and last) ben Yisrael to be born in the national homeland became the “embodiment of strength,” indeed.
Shall Our Sister Be Treated Like a Whore?! We next meet Simeon as a young man. (Rashi (Nazir 29b, “ור׳ יוסי ור׳ יהודה סבר”) suggested that he was at least thirteen years old, since the verse specified “ויקחו שני בני יעקב שמעון ולוי אחי דינה איש חרבו” [the two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, the brothers of Dinah – each man took up his sword] (Genesis 34:25).) Years have passed. Jacob is finally on the way back to Israel. Then disaster strikes.
Simeon and Levi were brothers, Jacob bemoaned – the two sons who were most alike, and most dangerous when united. They were the hotheaded ones, zealous and unforgiving, and united they were too formidable a force. “I will divide them in Jacob, scatter them in Israel.” This attribute of zealousness is a powerful tool, redemptive if used correctly and deadly if misemployed. At Shittim, as Phineas confronted Zimri, Jacob’s prophecy was realized, and the once-inseparable brothers now faced each other as antagonists. Levi (in Phineas) proved triumphant in his mastery of the potential inherent in a zealous personality, while Simeon (in Zimri) disastrously exposed that he never learned to channel his intensity properly. (For further discussion of their common spiritual strengths, see Ha-Emek Davar, Genesis 34:25, and Sefat Emet, VaYeĥi (5647).)
“And of Levi he said” (Deuteronomy 33:8) – Why is this said? Because Simeon and Levi drank from the same cup, as it was said, “Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce, and their wrath, for it was cruel. I will divide them in Jacob, I will scatter them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). A parable: Two men borrowed money from the king. One repaid the king and even lent him some money, while the other not only did not repay the debt but even borrowed more money. So it was that both Simeon and Levi “borrowed” in the matter of Shechem, (“The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, the brothers of Dinah – took each man his sword and came upon the city stealthily, and killed all of the males” (Genesis 34:25).) but Levi repaid his debt in the wilderness (“Moses stood in the gate of the camp and said, ‘Whoever is for the Lord, let him come to me.’ And all the sons of Levi gathered to him. And he said to them, ‘Thus says the Lord, God of Israel: Let every man gird his thigh… ’ And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses” (Exodus 32:26–28).) and even “lent” something to God at Shittim. (“Phineas son of Elazar son of Aaron the priest has turned My wrath away from the Children of Israel… ” (Numbers 25:11).) But Simeon not only did not repay his “debt” but even “borrowed” more, in the matter of Zimri. (Numbers 25:14.) Thus Levi was blessed, but not Simeon. Sifrei, Deuteronomy 349 (Also Midrash Tannaim 33:8.)
Shechem said… “Give me the maiden for a wife!” Jacob’s sons answered Shechem and his father Hamor deceitfully, because he had defiled their sister Dinah, and they spoke, saying… “Only on this condition will we acquiesce to you: if you become like us by letting every male among you become circumcised,”…so all the people of the city were circumcised. And on the third day, when they were in pain, the two of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, each took his sword and they came upon the city confidently, and killed every male. And Hamor and Shechem his son they killed at sword point. Then they took Dinah from Shechem’s house and left. Genesis 34:11–25
MISHNAH: One bathes the baby before and after the circumcision by sprinkling on him with one’s hand but not with a vessel (While it is permitted to wash the baby’s entire body (which is not permitted for adults), it should be done differently than on weekdays. This is a purely rabbinic rule.) . Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, one bathes the baby on the third day which falls on the Sabbath as it is said, it was on the third day when they were hurting (Gen. 34:25. This presumes that neonatal physiology is the same as the adult one.) . One does not desecrate the Sabbath for a case of doubt (When it is not clear which day is the 8th, as explained in the next Mishnah.) or for a hermaphrodite (Greek ἀνδρόγυνος, ὁ “man-woman”.) ; Rebbi Jehudah permits for the hermaphrodite (Since having a penis makes him a male, irrespective of other sex characteristics.) .
Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. Practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah. Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah: it was on the third day when they hurt (To be put on the wound as disinfectants.) . It does not say, “when it hurt”, but when they hurt, at a time when all their limbs hurt them. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan ordered for the women having newborns, that all treatments which you give to a sick person on the Sabbath should be given if the third day falls on a Sabbath. Samuel said, because of the danger. Rebbi Yose asked, if it is because of the danger one heats hot water for him! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of the rabbis there: One heats hot water for him. And it was stated thus: A person heats a linen cloth and puts it on his belly on the Sabbath. A person may not take a bottle full of hot water and put it on his belly on the Sabbath. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, on the contrary it is permitted.
MISHNAH: From where that one (Human semen is impure (Lev. 15:16–17 and sexual intercourse makes impure, v. 18. Semen which no longer can fertilize is not impure. The question is how long after intercourse must one suspect that semen released by the female still produces impurity? The answer which is given here states that semen may stay alive inside the woman’s body for three days.) who loses semen on the third day is impure? For it is said (Ex. 19:15.) , be prepared for three days, do not touch a woman. From where that one washes (A male baby on the third day after circumcision with warm water, heated for the purpose even on the Sabbath, because it is a medical necessity. The entire series of deductions from Scripture is introduced here because of this rule of the Sabbath.) a baby on the third day if it falls on a Sabbath? For it is said (Gen. 34:25.) , it was on the third day when they hurt. From where that one ties a crimson band to the head of the scapegoat (Mishnah Yoma 4:2 requires that a crimson band be tied to the horns of the goat sent to the cliff.) ? For it is said (Is. 1:18.) , if your sins were like scarlet they will be snow white, etc.
Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. Practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah (Who states in Mishnah 19:3 that on the third day after circumcision the boy is considered in mortal danger and therefore everything necessary for his care must be done on the Sabbath. Babli 134b.) . Rebbi Abbin in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah: it was on the third day when they hurt (Gen. 34:25.) . It does not say, “when it hurt”, but when they hurt, at a time when all their limbs hurt them. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan ordered for the women having newborns, that all treatments which you give on a weekday should be given on the Sabbath. This is necessary for the case that the third day falls on a Sabbath. Samuel said, because of the danger. Rebbi Yose asked, if it is because of the danger one heats hot water for him (If there is danger one has to do everything necessary; there seems to be no need to single out heating water.) ! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of the rabbis there: One heats hot water for him. And it was stated thus: A person heats a linen cloth and puts it on (a wound) (his belly) (The first version is that of the ms. and Gen. r.; G has a lacuna at this place. The second version is that of 19 and the Babli (40b).) on the Sabbath (Tosephta 3:7.) . A person may not take a bottle full of hot water and put it on his belly on the Sabbath. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, on the contrary it is permitted. (Babli 40b.)
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Heaven forbid that Moses our teacher was neglectful of the mitzva of circumcision. Rather, this is what he said: If I circumcise the child now and depart to begin my journey, it is a danger for the child, as it is stated: “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25), which indicates that the pain of circumcision lasts for several days and the child may be in danger while in pain. If I circumcise him immediately and wait three days and only then embark on the journey, this is problematic, as the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to me: “Go, return into Egypt” (Exodus 4:19), i.e., go immediately. For these reasons Moses did not circumcise the child immediately, but no neglect existed on his part. But according to this explanation, for what reason was Moses punished?
MISHNA: One may wash the baby on Shabbat, both before the circumcision and after the circumcision. And one may sprinkle hot water on him by hand but not with a vessel, in order to depart from the usual manner in which this is done. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: One may wash the baby on the third day following his circumcision, even if that third day occurs on Shabbat. On the third day following circumcision, the baby is considered to be in danger, as it is stated with regard to the men of Shekhem, who were circumcised: “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25). This teaches us that on the third day the pain of circumcision poses a danger.
MISHNA: The mishna continues to cite a series of unrelated halakhot based upon biblical allusions. From where is it derived that a woman who discharges semen even on the third day after relations is ritually impure, just like one who touches semen (see Leviticus 15:17)? Because the semen remains fit for insemination, it can transmit impurity, as it is stated prior to the revelation at Sinai: “And he said to the people, prepare yourselves for three days, do not approach a woman” (Exodus 19:15). This three-day separation period ensured that even a woman who discharged semen would be pure. The mishna cites another halakha based on a biblical allusion: From where is it derived that one may wash the circumcision on the third day, meaning the third day after the circumcision, even if it occurs on Shabbat? As it is stated: “And it came to pass on the third day when they were in pain” (Genesis 34:25). The pain of circumcision lasts at least three days, and as long as the child is in pain he is considered to be in danger. The mishna cites another halakha with an allusion in the Bible: From where is it derived that one ties a scarlet strip of wool to the head of the scapegoat that is dispatched to Azazel? As it is stated: “If your sins be like scarlet, they will become white like snow” (Isaiah 1:18). Since the goat is offered to atone for sins, red wool is tied to its horns. The mishna cites another allusion. From where is it derived that smearing oil on one’s body is like drinking and is similarly prohibited on Yom Kippur? Although there is no proof for this, there is an allusion to it, as it is stated: “And it comes into his inward parts like water and like oil into his bones” (Psalms 109:18). The verse appears to equate smearing oil on one’s body with drinking water.
The Gemara asks: What is the reason that they would not fast on Sunday? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Due to the Christians, as Sunday is their day of rest, and they would claim that even the Jews ascribe significance to their special day. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: Because it is the third day after the creation of man, who was created on Friday, and the third day of recovery from a wound or sickness, in this case one’s very creation, is considered the most painful.
On the third day when they were in pain [their pain was strong upon them], two of Yaakov’s sons, Shimon and Leivi, brothers of Deenah, each took his sword. They approached the city with confidence [whose inhabitants dwell in security], and killed every male.
And it was on the third day, when they were weak from the pain of their circumcision, two of the sons of Jakob, Shimeon and Levi, the brothers of Dinah, took each man his sword, and came upon the city, which was dwelling securely and killed every male.
| וְאֶת־חֲמוֹר֙ וְאֶת־שְׁכֶ֣ם בְּנ֔וֹ הָרְג֖וּ לְפִי־חָ֑רֶב וַיִּקְח֧וּ אֶת־דִּינָ֛ה מִבֵּ֥ית שְׁכֶ֖ם וַיֵּצֵֽאוּ׃ | 26 J | They put Hamor and his son Shechem to the sword, took Dinah out of Shechem’s house, and went away. |
ויקחו את דינה מבית שכם, “they took Dinah from the house of Sh’chem;” Rabbi Yudon claims that they had to drag her along on the floor, as she was unwilling to come along willingly. Rabbi Chunia claims that it is a known fact that a girl or woman who has had sexual relations with a gentile is difficult to separate from that gentile (Compare Bereshit Rabbah 80,11).
ויקחו את דינה; there is an aggadic commentary (Bereshit Rabbah 80,11) according to which Dinah felt so ashamed that she did not want to leave the house of Shechem until Shimon swore to her that he would marry her, and that this is the meaning of 46,10 where among the issue of Shimon one is described as being named “Sha-ul son of the Canaanite (woman). “Supposedly, the father of that child was Shechem, i.e. Dinah had conceived him at the time of the rape.
ואת חמור ואת שכם בנו הרגו, they went looking for them and found them.
And they killed Hamor and Shekhem his son by sword. Their death was apparently more conspicuous than that of the other men; perhaps they were beheaded in the formal manner of an execution. Throughout this entire episode, Dina had remained imprisoned in Shekhem’s house; she was possibly granted the status of a future bride. And now, Simeon and Levi took Dina from the house of Shekhem and departed.
They did not speak with her after Shekhem took her and abused her. And they did not even ask what she wanted, as it is stated, And Chamor and Shekhem his son they killed by the sword, then they took Dinah from Shekhem’s house and went off (Genesis 34:26). And they did not speak to her after she conceived, as is it stated, But they said, "Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot" (Genesis 34:31); will they say in the whole land that there is a wanton woman in the tents of Jacob?!"
“The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi…took” – from the fact that it says Simeon and Levi, we know that they are Jacob’s sons. It is, rather, “Jacob’s sons” – that they did not take counsel from Jacob; “Simeon and Levi” – that they did not take counsel from one another. “Dina's brothers” – was she only the sister of the two of them? Was she not the sister of all the tribes? It is, rather, because they endangered their lives on her behalf, she is called by their name. Similarly, “Miriam the prophetess, Aaron’s sister” (Exodus 15:20) – was she [only] Aaron’s sister? Was she not sister of the two of them? It is, rather, because Aaron devoted himself on her behalf, (He implored Moses to pray on Miriam’s behalf when she was afflicted with leprosy.) that is why she is called by his name. Similarly, “And in the matter of Kozbi, daughter of the prince of Midyan, their sister” (Numbers 25:18) – was she [only] their sister? Was she not a member of their nation? It is, rather, because she gave her life on behalf of her nation, her nation was called by her name. “Each man took his sword” – Rabbi Elazar says: They were thirteen years old. “They slew Ḥamor and Shekhem his son by the sword, and took Dina from Shekhem’s house, and departed” (Genesis 34:26). Shmuel asked Levi bar Sisi, he said to him: ‘What is that which is written: “And came upon the city confidently”?’ He said to him: ‘They were confident in the strength of the elder. Our patriarch Jacob did not want his sons to perform that act, but when his sons performed that act, he said: What, will I allow my sons to fall at the hand of the nations of the world. What did he do? He took his sword and his bow, stood at the entrance of Shekhem, and said: If the nations of the world come to confront my sons, I will battle against them.’ That is what he said to Joseph: “I have given to you one portion [shekhem] beyond your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22) – where do we find that our patriarch Jacob took his sword and his bow in Shekhem, as it is stated: “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite, with my sword and with my bow”? (Genesis 48:22) – “Ḥamor and Shekhem his son.” (As a consequence of the actions of Simeon and Levi, who killed Ḥamor and Shekhem, Jacob took up his sword and bow.)
“And took Dina” – Rabbi Yudan said: They were dragging her and departing. Rav Huna said: One who engages in relations with an uncircumcised man, it is difficult to pull away. Rav Huna said: She said: ‘But I, where will I carry my shame?’ (See II Samuel 13:13.) until Simeon said to her that he would take her. (Marry her.) That is what is written: “[Simeon’s sons…]and Shaul, son of the Canaanite woman” (Genesis 46:10) – the son of Dina, who engaged in relations with a Canaanite. Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis, Rabbi Yehuda said: That he [Shekhem] performed actions of the Canaanites. (Harlotry.) Rabbi Neḥemya said: That she engaged in relations with a Ḥivite, who are included in the Canaanites. The Rabbis say: Simeon took her and buried her in the land of Canaan.
“The thistle that was in the Lebanon sent to the cedar” (II Kings 14:9). “The thistle that was in the Lebanon” – this is Ḥamor, father of Shekhem; “sent to the cedar” – this is Jacob. “Give your daughter to my son as a wife” (II Kings 14:9) – “The soul of my son Shekhem longs for your daughter. [Please, give her to him as a wife]” (Genesis 34:8). But the beasts of the field…passed and trampled” (II Kings 14:9) – “They killed Ḥamor and Shekhem his son by the sword” (Genesis 34:26). Who caused it? “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.”
For in their anger they slew a man (Gen. 49:6). Did they slay only one man? Is it not written: And they came upon the city unawares, and they slew all the males (ibid. 34:25)? The fact is that they were all considered by the Holy One, blessed be He, and by them as one man, as Scripture states: And thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man (Judg. 6:16). Similarly, it states: The horse and its rider hath He thrown into the sea (Exod. 15:1).
And they too (Our verse indicates that others had also practiced deception but does not tell us who it was. Rashi proceeds to tell us who else had deceived them.) proceded with deception just as the sons of Yaakov dealt with trickery with Chamor, the father of Shechem, who was a Chivite. (The Givonim were a branch of Chivites, who were related Shechem who had raped Dinah the daughter of Yaakov. They remembered how their relatives were tricked by the sons of Yaakov and were subsequently killed by the two son of Yaakov. Thus the Gevonim felt justified in perpetrating their deception. (See Bereishis 34:1-26).) The people of Givon were descendents of the Chivites, as it is said in this context.
They killed Chamor and his son Shechem at the point of the sword. They took Deenah from the house of Shechem and they left.
And Hamor and Shekem his son they killed with the edge of the sword; and they took Dinah from the house of Shekem, and went forth.
| בְּנֵ֣י יַעֲקֹ֗ב בָּ֚אוּ עַל־הַ֣חֲלָלִ֔ים וַיָּבֹ֖זּוּ הָעִ֑יר אֲשֶׁ֥ר טִמְּא֖וּ אֲחוֹתָֽם׃ | 27 J | The other sons of Jacob came upon the slain and plundered the town, because their sister had been defiled. |
בני יעקב באו על החללים, The sons of Jacob came upon the slain and plundered the city. This means that all of Jacob's sons participated in the looting. They were entitled to do so as they had all suffered humiliation by the rape of their sister. Each one was entitled to take his share. Maimonides has written in Hilchot Na-arah Betulah chapter 2 that the court gives due consideration to the respective stature in society of both the rapist and the victim before it decides the amount of money to award to the victim's father and to her family. Dinah's brothers were all included in what Maimonides described as the victim's "family." This is why they all assembled there to determine their respective shares of the compensation due them. When they determined that the combined wealth of the townspeople was not adequate, they simply carted off all their belongings on behalf of their father to whom all this belonged. Although we have a rule that if someone is executed for a crime we do not exact financial penalties in addition, this rule does not apply to Gentiles (compare Tossaphot Eyruvin 62).
בני יעקב באו על החללים, to undress them and to take all their possessions
אשר טמאו אחותם, to demonstrate by means of this that the men of this city had defiled their sister. This became public knowledge in the region after the sons of Yaakov killed the people who had tolerated this crime, the townspeople had watched the violent rape and had not lifted a finger to stop it. The sons of Yaakov also took all the movable possessions of the city of Shechem both in the city and the fields belonging to that town.
על החללים UPON THE SLAIN — to strip the slain.
העיר אשר טמאו, unless according to the mores of Shechem (city) such behaviour was no longer considered despicable, Schechem would not have done what he did. He felt sure he could get away with it, as his townspeople would not object. However raping virgins was commonplace in Shechem already. They behaved in the manner described in Genesis 6,2 “they took women for themselves from wherever they chose.” [the punishment for this type of violence had been the deluge. Ed.]
Then the other sons of Jacob, who did not participate in the killing, 15 beset the slain to take their valuables and looted the city, with the justification that its residents had defiled their sister. Even if the other men had not actively assisted in the rape, they were rendered passive accomplices by their failure to stop Shekhem. 16 After all, he did not seduce her gently, but took her by force from the group of girls with whom she was socializing, presumably in public.
As for the solution to the twenty-sixth question, (1. The broad outlines of the arguments mentioned in this chapter are also found, in the abbreviated form, in the MS of the Retuḳot Kesef, fol. 16b. The question dealt with in this chapter is evidently one that relates to the morality of the actions of Jacob’s sons in the incident of the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) it was clarified by Him who gave the Torah, when at the conclusion of His words He stated with reference to all of them, (2. “Them” here evidently refers to the male inhabitants of the town of Shechem.) “because they had defiled their sister,” (3. Gen. 34:27.) having said of Shechem alone at the outset that “he had defiled Dinah their sister.” (4. Gen. 34:13. He means that the Torah itself implicates the Shechemites and implies their guilt by using the plural form in describing the defilement of Dinah.)
And it passed by the wild beast [that was in Levanon]. “Yaakov’s sons came upon the slain.” (Bereishis 34:27.) Here too, you come to compare yourself to me. This comparison was to humiliate him, for he likened him [Amatzyohu] to a thistle, and himself to a cedar [tree]. (Yehoash, whose grandfather Yeihu, completely destroyed Achov and his family, was mocking Amatzyohu, who was Achov’s descendant.)
The sons of Yaakov came upon the corpses [to strip the corpses], and they plundered the city that had defiled their sister.
And the rest of the sons of Jakob came to the spoil of the slain, and they sacked the city because they had polluted their sister in the midst of it.
| אֶת־צֹאנָ֥ם וְאֶת־בְּקָרָ֖ם וְאֶת־חֲמֹרֵיהֶ֑ם וְאֵ֧ת אֲשֶׁר־בָּעִ֛יר וְאֶת־אֲשֶׁ֥ר בַּשָּׂדֶ֖ה לָקָֽחוּ׃ | 28 J | They seized their flocks and herds and asses, all that was inside the town and outside; |
They took their flocks, their cattle, and their donkeys, and that which was in the city and that which was in the field.
Their sheep, their cattle, their donkeys, whatever was in the city and whatever was in the field—they took [plundered].
Their flocks, and oxen, and asses, and whatever was in the city or in the field they spoiled;
| וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֵילָ֤ם וְאֶת־כׇּל־טַפָּם֙ וְאֶת־נְשֵׁיהֶ֔ם שָׁב֖וּ וַיָּבֹ֑זּוּ וְאֵ֖ת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֥ר בַּבָּֽיִת׃ | 29 J | all their wealth, all their children, and their wives, all that was in the houses, they took as captives and booty. |
EVEN ALL THAT WAS IN THE HOUSE. This refers either to the house of Shechem or Hamor. (“House” is in the singular, hence I.E.’s comment (Krinsky).)
ואת כל חילם, silver, gold , and precious stones.
ואת כל אשר בבית, chattels. The word בבית is a general term, a place where most chattels are kept.
חילם means THEIR WEALTH. Examples are: (Deuteronomy 8:17) “hath gotten me this (חיל) wealth”; (Numbers 19:18) “and Israel acquireth (חיל) wealth”; (Psalms 49:11) “and they leave (חילם) their wealth to others”.
שבו has the meaning of taking captive (i.e. it is the Kal. perfect, 3rd pl. of the root שבה and means “they took captive”), and therefore it is accented on the last syllable (whereas שָׁבוּ, accented on the first syllable, is the same form of the verb שוב and means “they returned”).
From the term שבייה. The accent is, therefore, on the latter syllable. But if the accent was on the first syllable, like with קמו and שבו, the root would be שוב. Then it would mean “returning.”
And all their wealth, and all their offspring, their little children, and their wives, they took captive and looted, and everything that was in the house. As in war, they took captives and plundered the property.
All their wealth, all their children, and their wives—they took captive, and plundered—including everything in the houses.
and all their wealth and all their little ones they took and spoiled, and all that was in the houses.
| וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יַעֲקֹ֜ב אֶל־שִׁמְע֣וֹן וְאֶל־לֵוִי֮ עֲכַרְתֶּ֣ם אֹתִי֒ לְהַבְאִישֵׁ֙נִי֙ בְּיֹשֵׁ֣ב הָאָ֔רֶץ בַּֽכְּנַעֲנִ֖י וּבַפְּרִזִּ֑י וַאֲנִי֙ מְתֵ֣י מִסְפָּ֔ר וְנֶאֶסְפ֤וּ עָלַי֙ וְהִכּ֔וּנִי וְנִשְׁמַדְתִּ֖י אֲנִ֥י וּבֵיתִֽי׃ | 30 J | Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, “You have brought trouble on me, making me odious among the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites; my fighters (fighters Heb. metim (in construct form); cf. Deut. 2.34; 3.6; Isa. 3.25. NJPS “men.”) are few in number, so that if they unite against me and attack me, I and my house will be destroyed.” |
FEW IN NUMBER. Mete (few) means men. Anything that can be numbered is deemed a few. (I.E. renders mete mispar (few in number) as men of number, i.e., few men.) Hence Rabbi Aaron Ha-Kohen, dean of the Yeshiva, (Head of the academy in Pumpeditha. Hai Gaon was among his students (Weiser).) errs in rendering literally vi-yehi metav mispar (in that his men became few) (Deut. 33:6). (Rabbi Aaron renders Deut. 33:6, and let his men be numbered. I.E. renders this verse: and let his men not be men who can be numbered.)
TO MAKE ME ODIOUS. (Literally, to make me stink, hence I.E.’s comment.) They will hate me as one loathes something which gives off a horrible odor.
Yaakov said. Yaakov had thought that they intended to rescue Deenah with their subterfuge and perhaps to kill Shechem as well, not to slaughter the entire city.
עכרתם אותי, “you have caused me to become tainted.” Yaakov referred to their having spilled innocent blood. He used the term עכירה, similar to a person who introduces a turbid appearance into wine by adding sediments. Yaakov’s previously clear image had now been tainted. The inhabitants of the land were now able to point at Yaakov saying that he had dealt evilly with peaceful people. Bereshit Rabbah at the end of Genesis 80, describes this as a barrel of wine which had contained clear wine now having turned cloudy. Although it had been a tradition that the Canaanites would become the victims of the Jews, Yaakov felt his sons should have waited until they were numerically strong enough to overcome the Canaanites without miracles. Once they had taken possession of the land of Israel they could have punished the people of Shechem with Yaakov’s blessing. This is why he added ואני מתי מספר, “and I am few in number.”
ויאמר...עכרתם, an expression meaning “destruction.” The word is used in this sense in Samuel I 14,29 עכר אבי את הארץ, “my father has destroyed the land.” [I do not see this meaning in the root עכר either here or in Samuel. I would translate it more appropriately as “confused, caused confusion. Ed.]
להבאשני, to cause me shame. The Canaanites in the region will despise me and try to remove me from the district as one removes a person who exudes a putrid stench. Yaakov reacted in the time-honoured fashion of being afraid, almost a trademark of his, whereas his sons were stout-hearted men willing to avenge the shame inflicted upon their very personalities.
להבאישני, to ruin our reputation. We have the same word used in a similar sense in Exodus 5,21 הבאשתם את ריחנו, where the overseers of the Jewish people accuse Moses and Aaron after the failure of their first audience with Pharaoh which had resulted in an increased workload, that they had ruined the reputation of the people as diligent workers.
עכרתם YE HAVE TROUBLED ME — This has the same meaning as (Berakhot 25b) “troubled (עכורים) waters” (i.e. waters that are disturbed, not clear). He meant “Now my mind will never be clear (without worry)”. There is an Agada, (Genesis Rabbah 80:12) “He said: the wine in the cask was clear but you have troubled it”. The Canaanites had a tradition that they would fall by the hands of the sons of Jacob, but they thought that this would happen only when the condition was fulfilled as expressed in the verse (Exodus 23:30) “when thou shalt in-crease, then shalt thou inherit the land”; consequently they had been silent until now (i.e. they had not attacked them).
מתי מספר means A FEW MEN.
להבאישני, the local population would accuse us of having gone back on our agreement after the people of Shechem had circumcised themselves.
“When your numbers will increase, then will you inherit the land.” This is a verse in Parshas Mishpatim (Shemos 23:30). It implies: after you are fruitful and multiply, then you will inherit.
They had, therefore, been silent. But now they will think the time has come, and they will attack us.
Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: Until now I was considered clean and acceptable, but now you have sullied me, to render me loathsome to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizites. I am few in number. Since we are foreigners and we have attacked one of the Canaanite nations, the neighboring population might try to avenge the destruction of Shekhem, or seek to deter us from behaving in like manner toward other cities. To this end they will mobilize against me and smite me, and I and my household shall be destroyed.
The Ramban derives support for his opinion from the fact that Yaakov strongly criticized Shimon and Levi’s actions (Bereishit 34:30). The Rambam could counter that the Torah (ibid. 31) records the retort of Shimon and Levi to this criticism, to which Yaakov does not respond. On the other hand, the Ramban could reply that Yaakov further criticized Shimon and Levi on his deathbed (Bereishit 49:5-7). Thus, the Torah gives the last word to Yaakov.
Moses' blessings are viewed as a continuation of Jacob's blessings. Jacob had concluded with the line "and this is what their father said to them when he blessed them." (Genesis 49,28) So Moses says "and this," at the beginning of his blessings, whereas we find this term used at the very end of Jacob's blessings. Since Reuben had been demoted at the time of Joseph's sale, and had been the subject of his father's criticism at the time Jacob died, Moses emphasizes that though numerically not strong, Reuben would produce outstanding men in spite of this. The blessing may also include the assurance that Reuben personally had not lost his share in the world to come as the result of the incident with Bilhah. By mentioning Yehudah next, the fact that Reuben had been mentioned first, shows that Moses had not wanted to deny Reuben his rightful place. Yehudah is mentioned next due to his rank. Since it will be he who will lead Israel in battle, provide the kings, Moses blesses Yehudah by imploring G'd to come to Yehudah's aid when the latter finds himself in difficulties. "Though his hands fight on his behalf, be the helper from his adversaries." (33,7) Since the temporal and spiritual leadership of the nation are to go hand in hand, Levi is mentioned next in the list of tribes to be blessed. Although inquiries re the will of G'd are made via le-ish chassidecha, religious authority, by the use of tumecha ve-urecha, the ineffable name in the High Priest's breastplate, the secular leader is required to stand in the presence of the High Priest. (see chapter 35) Since Moses is himself a member of the tribe of Levi, he apologises for the sin at the "waters of strife," explaining it as having been due to instructions once received at Massa to hit the rock. (33,8) Since the sin had not been intentional, Aaron is not excluded from the term of endearment "your pious one." Both on the occasion of the golden calf episode when the Levites had risked their lives for G'ds law, and at Shittim when Pinchas had done so, the tribe had displayed fervent loyalty. The second function of the tribe is to teach the Torah to Israel, yoru mishpatecha, they will teach Your social laws. Thirdly, service in the temple will be performed by members of that tribe, yassimu ketorah be-apecha, they will put incense before You. The position of Priest and Levite being a hereditary one, it is apt to be viewed by some as an undeserved privilege, and will arouse antagonism towards that tribe. Therefore, Moses asks that the Levites' adversaries be crushed, (verse 11) Moses does not mention the tribe of Shimon, the latter still smarting from the affair of Baal Peor, and the wounds on its collective dignity inflicted by Pinchas. Also, it had just lost twelve thousand men. Moses therefore was content not to criticise the tribe of Shimon at this stage. Also, this made it unnecessary for him to bestow thirteen blessings.
The fourth trait listed by Aristo (Chapter 11) defines the true man of valor as someone who is not reckless, but weighs the dangers he exposes himself to in relation to the chance of success in battle. Being human, fear in varying degree is not alien to him. When facing certain death, he is aware of the advantages of life; when the cause is worthy however, he chooses death as being preferable to an unworthy life. Our sages, in Sanhedrin 74, have formulated three evils as the ones that are not fit to live with, and for the avoidance of which death is preferable to life (immoral sexual relationships, idol worship, and shedding inncocent blood). This will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 83. The value of not endangering one's life frivoulously, is demonstrated in Samuel II Chapter 23, when David refused to drink water which three heroes had secured for him at the risk of their lives. They could easily have been killed by Philistines at Bethlehem. David compared the water they brought him to their own lifeblood. Since our lives are a sacred trust given to us by G-d for safekeeping, we are not at liberty to endanger it needlessly. Until the owner (G-d) claims His property back, we have to preserve it faithfully. Elijah was wrong in offering his life back to G-d. (Kings I19) Why did he flee from Jezebel who would gladly have taken his life, had he not known that it was his duty to preserve it? When the wife of Job (Job 2,10) exhorted him to curse G-d and thus deliver himself up to death either at the hands of G-d or through a human tribunal, she did so thinking he would be better off dead than alive. Job, however, answered her that anyone willing to accept the pleasant aspects of life must likewise be prepared to accept the unpleasant parts if and when they do occur. Flavius Josephus's own account of how he surrendered to the Romans rather than commit suicide, is a valid argument in favor of our position. How much did Jacob's sons err when they destroyed a city situated in the midst of a densely populated area, an action that was bound to be followed by retaliatory measures by the whole district, and which could ultimately have resulted only in their collective deaths? Jacob remonstrated with them, "You have troubled me to make me odious" (Genesis 34,30). Had it not been for "the fear of the Lord" which overcame the inhabitants of the neighbouring towns, the inevitable consequences would have ensued.
However, since there are other bad waters, which are called Dead waters-Mayim Meitim-מים מתים, (Stagnant waters) these being the (See Rashi to Genesis 34:30 citing Talmud Bavli, Brachot 25b) muddy waters-Mayim Achurim-מים עכורים that come from the essence of the malignant waters-Mayim Zeidonim-מים זידונים, (Psalms 124:5) which are alien cisterns that contain several kinds of bad waters from which the bitter and repugnant waters came out, therefore HaShem-יהו"ה had to thunder against all of Israel and say, (Jeremiah 2:13) “For My people have committed two evils; they have left Me, the Source of Living waters-Mekor Mayim Chayim-מקור מים חיים, to dig cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that cannot hold water.” Moreover, it is written, (Jeremiah 17:13) “HaShem-יהו"ה is the hope of Israel, all who have left You will be shamed. Those who turn aside from Me will be inscribed for burial in the earth, for they have left HaShem-יהו"ה, the Source of Living Waters-Mekor Mayim Chayim-מקור מים חיים.”
“Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have troubled me, to render me loathsome to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizites, and I am few in number; they will mobilize against me and smite me, and I and my household will be destroyed” (Genesis 34:30). “They said: Shall he render our sister as a harlot?” (Genesis 34:31). “Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have troubled me” – the Rabbis said: [Jacob said:] ‘The barrel was clear, and you rendered it murky. There is a tradition of the Canaanites, that they are destined to fall into my hands; however, the Holy One blessed be He said: Until you multiply and reach six hundred thousand.’ (But because of the action of Simeon and Levi the Canaanites will conclude that Jacob is an immediate threat.) Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [Simeon and Levi replied:] ‘The barrel was murky, and we rendered it clear.’ They said: ‘“Shall [he render our sister] a harlot?”’ – they said: ‘What, will they treat us as worthless people?’ Who caused it? “Dina…went out.”
A company of priests alludes to the sons of Jacob, who had been called a kingdom of priests. Why does Scripture say: They murder in the way to Shechem? Because they committed an immoral act. Upon their return, Jacob began to chastise Simeon and Levi, saying: Ye have troubled me, to make me odious (Gen. 34:30). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Be not afraid, no one can harm you, as it is said: And a terror of God was upon the cities (ibid. 35:5).
"Remember forever His covenant, the word He commanded for a thousand generations. Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said to the leader of the generation, to the excellent one of the generation, as it is stated, 'Blow a horn in honor of the oil.' Be a commandment for a thousand generations. Rabbi Chiya said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman that it was fitting for nine hundred and eighty generations to have arisen who were worthy of standing, all of whom were wiped out in the generation of the Flood. Thus, God said that He would give the circumcision after a thousand generations. And you will find that ten generations elapsed from Adam to Noah and ten generations from Noah to Abraham. Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, the son of Rabbi Yosi HaGelili, that the commandment was given for a thousand generations, and a thousand generations arose in thought to be created, but many of them were wiped out, 970 to be exact. What is the reason that the commandment was given for a thousand generations? Six generations from Abraham to Moses, this is the commandment for a thousand generations, which is the Torah, and there is nothing other than the Torah, as it is stated, 'And God spoke all these words.' When you almost reach the point where the inheritance of the land before them is not breached by sixty thousand, when Shimon and Levi went and committed the deed in Shechem, what did their father say to them? 'You have troubled me to bring me into disrepute, and I am almost at the end of my days.'
Simeon and Levi were moved by a great zeal on account of the immorality, as it is said, "And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?" (Gen. 34:31). And each man took his sword and slew all the men of Shechem. When Jacob heard thereof, he became sorely afraid. For he said: Now all the people of the land will hear, and they will gather together against me || and smite me. He began to curse the wrath of his sons, as it is said, "Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce" (Gen. 49:7); and he also cursed their sword in the Greek language, for he said: "Weapons of violence are their swords" (Gen. 49:5). All the kings of the earth heard (thereof) and feared very much, saying: If two sons of Jacob have done all these great things, if they all band themselves together, they will be able to destroy the world. And the dread of the Holy One, blessed be He, fell upon them, as it is said, "And the terror of God was upon the cities,… and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob" (Gen. 35:5).
And when the year came around, the sons of Jacob journeyed from Shechem, and they came unto Hebron to Isaac, their father, and they dwelt there, only their sheep and cattle and all belonging to them, they drove daily for pasture unto Shechem, for there was good and fat pasture about there in those days. And Jacob and his sons and all their households dwelt in the valley of Hebron. And it came to pass on those days and in that year, which was the one hundredth year of Jacob’s life, and the tenth of his return from Padan-Aram, that Leah, Jacob's wife, died; and she was fifty one years of age at the time of her dying in Hebron. And Jacob and his sons buried her in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham had bought from the sons of Heth for a burial ground. And the sons of Jacob dwelt with their father in the valley of Hebron, and all the inhabitants of the land knew their strength and their fame was all over the land. And Joseph, and Benjamin, his brother, the sons of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, were quite young in those days, and they did not go forth with their brothers in the war against the seven cities of the Amorites. And when Joseph saw the strength and greatness of his brothers he lauded and praised them, but he considered himself greater than they and he thought himself above them. And his father Jacob loved him, indeed, more than his other brothers, and he made unto him a coat of many colors out of his love to him. And when Joseph saw himself more beloved by his father than all his brothers, he continued to regard himself far above his brothers, and he brought unto his father evil reports concerning them. And when the sons of Jacob saw all the actions of their brother Joseph against them, and that their father loved him best of all, they hated him and they could not speak to him peaceably all the time. And Joseph was seventeen years old, and he still continued to regard himself above his brothers and to exalt himself above them. And at that time Joseph dreamed a dream, and he came unto his brothers to tell them of his dream, and he said unto them: I dreamed a dream, and behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and lo, my sheaf arose and also stood upright, and behold your sheaves stood round about and made obeisance to my sheaf. And his brothers said unto him: What is the meaning of this dream that thou didst dream? Dost thou think in thine heart to govern and to rule over us. And Joseph came also unto his father informing him of his dream, and Jacob heard the words of his mouth and he kissed him and Jacob blessed Joseph. And when the sons of Jacob saw that their father had kissed and blessed Joseph and that he loved him so dearly, they became jealous of him and they hated him still more. And afterwards Joseph dreamed another dream and he related it unto his father in the presence of his brothers, and he said unto his father and brothers: Behold, I have dreamed another dream, and lo, the sun, and the moon, and eleven stars bowed down before me. And Jacob heard the words of Joseph and his dream, and he saw that his brothers hated Joseph on account of these words, and Jacob rebuked Joseph in the presence of his brothers, saying: What is the meaning of this dream which thou hast dreamed that thou exaltest thyself over thy brothers who are greater than thou. Thinkest thou perhaps in thine heart that we will come, I and thy mother and thy eleven brothers to bow down before thee, that thou speakest these words. And his brothers were jealous of him concerning his words and dreams and their hatred against him increased. And Jacob observed and kept the dreams within his heart. And when Jacob saw that they were delaying in Shechem, Jacob said to himself: Perhaps that the inhabitants of Shechem rose up to fight against them and therefore their coming home hath been delayed to-day. And Jacob called unto Joseph his son, saying: Behold thy brothers are feeding the flock in Shechem, and they have not yet returned; go thou therefore and look after them, and bring me back words concerning the peace of thy brothers and concerning the cattle. And Jacob sent his son from the valley of Hebron; and Joseph went unto his brothers in Shechem but he found them not. And Joseph went about in the fields about Shechem to ascertain whither his brothers had turned, and he lost his way in the wilderness, and he knew not in which direction he should go. And an angel of the Lord met him wandering about in the field, and he asked him, saying: What seekest thou? And Joseph said unto the angel: I seek my brethren, knowest thou where they are feeding? And the angel of the Lord replied unto Joseph: I saw thy brothers feeding here, but I heard them say that they would go to feed in Dothan. And Joseph listened to the voice of the angel and he went to Dothan unto his brothers and he found them feeding the flock in Dothan. And Joseph advanced towards his brothers, but ere he had reached them, they had concluded to kill him. And Simeon said unto his brothers: Behold the dreamer cometh unto us to-day. And now come and let us kill him, and cast him into some pit in the wilderness, and when our father will inquire for him, we will say, some evil beast hath devoured him. And Reuben heard the words of his brothers concerning Joseph, and he said unto them: Do not do such a thing, for how could we look up to our father? Cast him into this pit, that he may die therein, but lay no hand upon him, to shed his blood. And Reuben said this that he might rid him out of their hands and bring him back to his father. And when Joseph came amongst his brothers he sat down before them; and they took hold upon him and threw him to the ground and stripped off the coat of many colors which was upon him. And they took him and cast him into a pit, and in the pit was no water, but it was full of serpents and scorpions. And Joseph was greatly afraid of the serpents and scorpions, and he cried out with a loud voice, and the Lord hid the serpents and scorpions in the walls of the pit, so that they could do Joseph no harm. And Joseph cried out from the pit unto his brothers, saying: What have I done unto you and what is my sin, and why do you not fear the Lord concerning me? Am I not your bone and flesh and is not Jacob, your father, my father also? Why are ye doing this thing unto me this day, and how will you ever be able to look unto Jacob our father? And he was crying and calling unto his brothers from the midst of the pit, and he said: Oh Judah, and Simeon and Levi, my brothers, raise me from this darksome place where into ye have put me, and come and have mercy upon me this day, ye children of the Lord and sons of my father Jacob ' And supposing that I have sinned against you, are you not the sons of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who when they saw an orphan they had pity with him, and when they found one hungry they gave him bread to eat, and if he was thirsty they gave him water to drink, and if he was naked they covered him with garments. And how can ye withdraw your compassion from your own brother, of your own flesh and bone, and even if I have sinned against you, surely you ought to do it for the sake of my father. And Joseph spoke all these words from the midst of the pit but his brothers hearkened not nor did they incline their ears to Joseph’s sup plication and he was still crying and weeping in the pit. And Joseph said: Oh that my father knew the thing that my brothers have done unto me and what they said unto me this day. And Joseph’s brothers heard the weeping and lamentation of their brother, and they moved away in order not to hear his crying in the pit. And they seated themselves at a distance of about a bow-shot, and they sat down there to eat. And while they were eating they held counsel together concerning what was to be done with him, whether to kill him or to bring him back unto his father. And whilst they were holding their council they lifted up their eyes and behold, a company of Ishmaelites was coming from the distance on their road from Gilead, and going down to Egypt. And Judah said unto them: What profit is it to us if we slay our brother, perhaps the Lord may once require him from us, this is the advice I propose concerning him, according to which you may do unto him: Behold this company of Ishmaelites is going down to Egypt, come then and let us sell him unto them and let our hands be free from him. And they will take him along on their way and he will be lost amongst the people of the land, and we need not slay him with our hands. And this pleased them well and they decided to act according to Judah’s advice. And while they were dis cussing this matter, behold, before the Ishmaelites had yet reached them, seven merchants of Midian passed them by, and passing by they were thirsty and lifting up their eyes, they saw the pit wherein Joseph was, and behold all kinds of birds were around him. And these Midianites ran unto the pit to drink water, for they thought there was water in the pit, and when they arrived before the pit they heard the voice of Joseph weeping and lamenting in the pit and looking into the pit they saw a lad of fine figure and comely appearance. And they called unto him: Who art thou, and who hath brought thee hither and who hath cast thee into this pit in the wilderness? And they all assisted Joseph to raise him, and they brought Joseph out from the pit and took him along continuing their journey. And when they passed by his brothers, they saw Joseph in the hands of the Midianites and they said unto them: Why are ye doing this thing to take our servant and go away with him? Verily, we have placed this lad into the pit, for he hath rebelled against us, and you came and brought him up to take him away. And now return ye our servant unto us. And the Midianites answered and said unto the sons of Jacob: Is this really your servant and was he ministering to you? It is more likely that you all are his servants, for surely he is of a very fine figure and of comely appearance, and the best looking of all of you and wherefore do ye tell unto us these lies? And now we will not listen unto you nor give ear unto your words; for we have found this lad in a pit in the wilderness and we took him, and we will go away with him. And all the sons of Jacob advanced and stood up against them, saying: Give unto us our servant, and why do ye seek to die by the edge of the sword ' And the Midianites shouted at them and drew their swords, and they fought with the sons of Jacob. And Simeon rose up from his feet jumping to the ground, and drawing his sword he approached the Midianites, and he gave a fearful shriek before them. And his shouting was heard at a great distance, and the earth shook at Simeon’s voice. And the Midianites were greatly afraid of Simeon and his terrible shouting, and they fell upon their faces in terror. And Simeon said unto them: Verily I am Simeon the son of Jacob, who destroyed single handed the city of Shechem, and the other cities of the Amorites with the help of my brothers. And so may the Lord do unto me now and in all future, that if all your brethren the people of Midian together with all the people of Canaan were to come, they could not fight against me. And now give back unto us the lad you have taken, or I will give your flesh to the birds of the heavens and to the beasts of the field.And the Midianites approached the sons of Jacob in fear and trembling with soft words, saying: And have ye not said that this lad is your servant who rebelled against you, wherefore you have cast him into the pit? And now what will you do with a servant that hath rebelled against his master? Sell him then unto us and we will give you for him whatsoever you demand. And the Lord was pleased to do this, that the sons of Jacob should not slay their brother. And the sons of Jacob hearkened unto the Midianites, and they sold unto them their brother Joseph for twenty pieces of silver; and their brother Reuben was not with them at that time. And the Midianites took Joseph and continued on their way toward Gilead. And as they passed on along the road, the Midianites were sorry for what they had done in buying the youth, and they said one to the other: What is it that we have done to buy from the Hebrews this young man of such comely appearance and fine figure? For he may have been stolen from the land of the Hebrews, and if he be found in our hands all of us will be put to death on his account. And verily they are strong and powerful men, like the one of those that sold him unto us, and whose strength we have seen. They have certainly carried him away forcibly from his land, and therefore they sold him unto us for such a small price as we have paid for him. And while they were talking over this matter, behold the company of Ish maelites, which was first seen by the sons of Jacob, came towards the Midianites. And the Midianites said to each other: Come and let us sell this lad to the company of Ishmaelites that come towards us, and even if we should receive for him only the little we have paid, let us get out of trouble. And the Midianites did so, and they sold Joseph unto the Ishmaelites, for the twenty pieces of silver which they had paid unto his brothers, and the Midianites continued their journey towards Gilead, and the Ishmaelites took Joseph and seated him upon a camel and they led him down into Egypt. And when Joseph heard that he was to be brought down to Egypt he wept and lamented bitterly, to be removed so far away from the land of Canaan from his father. And he wept greatly while riding upon the camel, and one of the men noticing his weeping made Joseph alight from the camel and go on foot, but Joseph still kept on crying, oh my father, my father! And one of the Ishmaelites arose and struck Joseph on his cheek, but he still continued weeping. And Joseph became very fatigued from walking and from the bitterness of his soul, and all of the Ishmaelites beat him and abused him and they terrified him that he should cease crying. And the Lord saw Joseph’s affliction and the Lord brought over these men darkness and dismay, and every hand withered that struck Joseph. And they said to one another: What is it that hath happened to us on this journey? And they knew not that it was done on account of Joseph. And the men continued their journey and on their road they passed Ephrath the place where Rachel was buried. And when Joseph came near his mother's grave, he ran to the grave and he fell upon it and wept. And Joseph cried out loudly upon his mother's grave, saying: Oh my mother, my mother, thou who gavest me birth, awake and arise now to see thy son sold unto slavery with no one to have compassion upon him. Oh arise to look at thy son, and weep with me in my affliction, and see the hearts of my brothers. Oh my mother arouse and awake and direct thy warfare against my brothers, who have stripped me of my coat and sold me into slavery now for the second time, and have torn me away from my father where there is no one to have pity upon me. Arouse and bring thy complaints against them before the Lord and see who is to be justified in the judgment and who is to be condemned. Arise oh my mother, awake from thy sleep, and see my father whose soul is with me this day, and comfort him and console his heart. And Joseph spoke continually to his mother; and he cried aloud and wept bitterly upon his mother's grave; and he ceased speaking and from the bitterness of his heart he became silent like a stone upon the grave. And Joseph heard a voice speaking unto him from under the ground, answering him in bitterness of heart in a voice of weeping and prayer, in these words: My son Joseph, oh my son, I have heard the voice of thy weeping and crying, and I have seen thy tears and I know thy affliction, oh my son It grieveth me for thy sake, oh my son. And new sorrow hath been added to my sorrow. And now my son Joseph, hope thou in the Lord and wait for his help and do not fear, for the Lord is with thee to deliver thee from all trouble. Arise my son and go down with thy masters unto Egypt, and do not fear for the Lord is with thee my son And she continued to speak unto Joseph according to these words and then she was silent. And when Joseph heard this he was greatly astonished, and he kept on weeping. And one of the Ishmaelites saw him weeping and lamenting over the grave, and his wrath was kindled against Joseph, and he drove him away from the grave, and he beat him and cursed him. And Joseph said unto the men: Let me find grace in your eyes and carry me back unto my father's house, and he will reward you with great riches. And they answered unto him, saying: Verily thou art a slave and where is thy father? For hadst thou a father thou shouldst not have been sold into slavery, this the second time, and for such a small price. And their anger was excited against him, and they beat him and Joseph wept bitterly. And the Lord saw Joseph's affliction, and he smote these men once more. And the Lord brought darkness over the earth, and the lightning was flashing, and the thunder was roaring, and the earth shook at the noise of the thunder and the great storm, and the men were greatly alarmed and they knew not whither they should go. And the beasts and the camels stood still, and when they were led they refused to go on, and when they were smitten they lay down upon the ground. And the men said to each other: What is that God hath done unto us, what are our sins and our transgressions that this had to come over us? And one of them answered and said unto them: Peradventure on account of our sins in afflicting this slave hath this evil befallen us this day. And now entreat him and urge him on to forgive us, that we know on whose account this affliction hath come over us. And if the Lord have mercy upon us, then we will know that all this hath happened unto us for the sin of afflicting this slave. And they did so. And they entreated Joseph and begged him to forgive them, saying: We have sinned against heaven and before thee, and therefore we implore thee pray unto thy God to remove from us this death, for we have sinned against him. And Joseph did according to their words, and he prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord hearkened unto Joseph, and he removed from them the plague wherewith the Lord had visited the Ishmaelites, on account of Joseph. And the beasts rose up from the ground and became manageable and walked on, and the great storm subsided, and the earth became quiet, and the men continued their journey towards Egypt. And the men knew that this affliction had come over them on account of Joseph, and they said to each other: Behold, now we know that for the sin of afflicting this slave, all that evil hath come over us. Come then and let us consult what we shall do concerning him, for why should we expose ourselves further to such a terrible plague. And one of them said: Verily he hath told unto us to bring him back unto his father, and now let us carry him back to the place he will designate, and we will take from his family the price that we paid for him and go our way. And one answered, saying: Thy counsel is very wise but we cannot do accordingly; for we have gone a great distance from his place and we cannot turn away from our road. And still another said unto them: This is the counsel we will now follow without further delay. We are going down unto Egypt this day, and there we will sell him for a high price, and thus we will be delivered from his evil. And they were all pleased with these words, and they continued their journey unto Egypt, taking Joseph along with them. And after the sons of Jacob had sold Joseph unto the Midianites, their hearts beat within them for their brother and they repented of what they had done, and they searched for him to bring him back but they could not find him. And Reuben returned unto the pit wherein Joseph had been in order to take him out and return him unto his father, and he stood by the pit crying: Joseph, Joseph, but he heard not a word in answer. And Reuben exclaimed: Poor Joseph he must have died for fright, or he hath been killed by one of the serpents. And Reuben went down into the pit to search for Joseph, but he could not find him in the pit, and he came out again. And Reuben rent his garments and he said: The child is not here and how can I comfort my father concerning him, if he be dead? And Reuben went to his brothers and he found them grieving for Joseph and consulting in what manner they were to comfort their father concerning him. And Reuben said unto them: Behold I have come to the pit, but Joseph was not in it, and now what shall we say to our father, for my father will hold me alone accountable for the youth. And his brothers answered unto him: Thus have we done, and our hearts ached afterwards by reason of our action, and now we are seeking for a pretext how to comfort our father concerning our brother. And Reuben said unto them: What is it that you have done, to bring down the gray head of our father with sorrow into the grave? Verily the thing that you have done is not good. And Reuben took his seat in their midst, and all of them arose and swore to each other not to disclose a word unto Jacob and they said: He who will impart this to our father and his household or who will say a word concerning it to any of the people of the land, we will all unite against him and kill him. And the sons of Jacob were afraid of each other from the smallest to the greatest, and they never spoke a word concerning the matter; but they kept it concealed in their hearts. And they sat down together to counsel, to come to a conclusion as to what they would tell unto their father. And Issachar said unto them: Here is an advice for you if it pleaseth you to act accordingly: Take ye Joseph’s coat and tear it up, and slaughter a kid of the goats and dip the coat in its blood, and send it to our father. And he will see it and say, an evil beast hath devoured him, and therefore the coat is torn and bloody, and by doing this thing we will free ourselves from our father's reproaches. And the words of Issachar pleased them well, and they agreed to act upon his advice. And they took quickly Joseph’s coat and they tore it, and they killed a kid from the goats, and they dipped the coat in its blood, and they trampled the coat in the dust. And they forwarded the coat to their father through Naphtali, and they instructed him to speak according to these words: We had gathered in the cattle, and when we reached a little ways beyond Shechem, we found this coat on the road in the wilderness dipped in blood and covered with dust; and now recognize the coat whether it be the coat of thy son or not. And Naphtali came unto his father, and he gave unto him the coat, and spoke unto him according to the instruction of his brothers. And when Jacob saw the coat he recognized it, and he fell to the ground silent like a rock. And afterwards he rose up and cried out, in a weeping voice: That is the coat of my son Joseph! And Jacob sent hastily one of his servants to his sons, and he met them coming along the road with the sheep. And the sons of Jacob came unto their father towards evening, with their garments torn and dust upon their heads, and they met their father weeping and lamenting with a loud voice. And Jacob said unto his sons: Will you not tell me all about the misfortune that hath befallen me so suddenly to-day? And they answered unto Jacob their father saying: After having gathered in the sheep, we went on our road towards the city of Shechem in the wilderness, and we found this coat full of blood and dust, and we recognized the coat, and we forwarded it unto thee that thou mightst recognize it likewise. And when Jacob heard the words of his sons, he cried out with a powerful voice, and he said: It is my son’s coat; an evil beast hath devoured him; Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces. For I have sent him to-day unto you to inquire after your peace and the welfare of the sheep, and to bring me back word from you. And he went according to my orders, and this evil hath come over him, while I thought my son is with you. And the sons of Jacob answered, saying: He hath never reached us, and we have not seen him from the day we have left thee even until now. And Jacob rent his clothes and put sackcloth upon his loins, and he wept bitterly and he mourned for his son, lamenting in these words: Oh Joseph, Joseph my son, behold I have sent thee to in quire for the peace of thy brothers and thou hast been torn into pieces, and through me this hath befallen thee. It grieveth me for thy sake, my son Joseph, oh it grieveth me! How sweet hast thou been unto me while living, and how bitter is thy death unto me! Would that I had died in thy stead to-day, oh my son, for it grieveth me exceedingly for thee, oh my son. Oh my son, my son, Joseph, my son, where art thou and where is thy soul? Awake oh awake from thy place and come and see my affliction concerning thee, oh my son! Come and count the tears of my eyes flowing down my cheeks, and bring them before the Lord that his anger may turn away from me. Oh my son how hast thou fallen, in a manner as no man hath ever perished from the beginning of the world, even unto this day. For thou hast fallen by the hand of a cruel enemy, but I know that this hath happened unto thee on account of my many sins. Arise, oh my son, awake and see the bitterness of my agony concerning thee! But verily I have not caused thee to grow and I have not formed thee, and I have not given unto thee a spirit and a soul, for it was God who hath created thee, and he hath built up thy bones, and invested them with flesh and breathed into thy nostrils a breath of life, and he gave thee unto me. And the same God that hath given thee unto me hath taken thee away from me now, and this hath befallen thee to-day, and all the works of God are good. And Jacob kept on lamenting in this manner and he wept bitterly, and he fell to the ground and was silent. And all the sons of Jacob saw their father's agony, and they repented of what they had done, and they also wept bitterly. And Judah arose and lifted up the head of his father, and he placed it upon his knees, and he removed his father's tears from his cheeks. And Judah wept a fearful weeping, with his father's head upon his lap silent like a rock. And all the sons of Jacob and all his servants and all his daughters rose up and surrounded him to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted. And the news reached Isaac, the son of Abraham, Jacob's father, and he and his household wept bitterly for Joseph. And Isaac left his home in Hebron and his men with him, and they came to comfort Jacob; but he refused to be comforted. And afterwards Jacob rose up from the ground with the tears streaming down his face, and he said unto his sons: Arise and take your swords and your bows and go into the field to search for the body of my son, and bring it unto me and I will bury it. And, I pray ye, to search likewise among the beasts and hunt them down, and the one you meet first seize it and bring it unto me, peradventure the Lord will see my misery this day and grant you to find the one that hath torn my son, and bring it unto me that I may avenge on it the death of my son. And the sons of Jacob did according to the command of their father, and they rose early in the morning and they took each his sword and his bow, and they went unto the field to hunt the beasts. And when they came unto the wilderness, and behold a wolf came towards them, and they seized him and they brought him unto their father saying: This is the first beast we met, and we have brought him unto thee according to thy commandment, but the body of thy son we could not find. And Jacob took the beast from the hands of his sons, and he cried out once more with a terrible voice, and he seized the beast with one hand and he spoke unto the beast in the bitterness of his heart, saying: Why hast thou devoured my son Joseph, and how didst thou not fear the Lord of the earth to bring over me such grief concerning my son Joseph'? And thou hast devoured my son without any cause, for he hath not wronged thee, and thou hast brought guiltiness over me on his account, and now therefore the Lord will always find him that deserveth punishment. And the Lord opened the mouth of the beast in order to comfort Jacob with its words, and it answered unto Jacob and it spake these words: As God liveth who hath created me in the earth, and as thy soul liveth, oh my master, I have not seen thy son nor have I torn him to pieces. . But I am coming from a distant land likewise seeking my son, and as it hath happened unto thee and thy son, even so it hath happened unto me and my son. And it is now ten days since I have come unto this land in search of my son, who hath left me and I know not where he is, and whether he be dead or alive. And when I came to-day unto the field to seek my son, thy sons found me and they seized me, adding grief to my grief, and they brought me to thee this day; and I have spoken unto thee all concerning my affairs. And now, oh son of man, behold I am in thy hands and thou canst do unto me as it seem eth best in thine eyes, this day, but as the Lord liveth who hath created me in the earth, I have not seen thy son, neither have I torn him to pieces, nor has ever human flesh entered my mouth all the days of my life. And when Jacob heard the words of the beast he was greatly astonished, and he released the animal and it went away. And Jacob continued weeping and lamenting for Joseph, and he mourned over his son many days. And the Ishmaelites who bought Joseph from the Midianites who had bought him from his brothers went with Joseph unto Egypt. And when they reached the boundaries of Egypt they met with four men of the sons of Elam, the son of Abraham, who came on their way from Egypt. And the Ishmaelites said unto them: Would you not like to buy this slave from us? And they said: Give him unto us. And they delivered Joseph unto them and they examined him and they saw that he was a lad of very fine appearance and they bought him for nine shekels. And the Ishmaelites went on their journey into Egypt, and the Midianites returned like wise to Egypt on the same day. And they said to each other: Behold we have heard that Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh’s, captain of the guards, is seeking a good servant to stand before him and to minister unto him and to take charge of his house and all belonging unto him. And now let us go and sell him unto him as this is precisely the servant he wants, and he will pay us for him whatsoever we desire. And those Midianites came unto the house of Potiphar, saying unto him: We have heard that thou desirest to procure a good servant to attend thee. Behold we have with us a servant according to thy desire, and if thou canst give unto us what we ask for him, we will sell him unto thee. And Potiphar said unto them : Bring him into my presence, and if he pleaseth me then I will pay for him whatsoever you ask for him. And the Midianites brought Joseph before Potiphar, and Potiphar saw him and he pleased him exceedingly, and Potiphar said unto them: Name the value of that youth. And they said: We want for him four hundred pieces of silver. And Potiphar said unto them: I am ready to pay you the amount if you will bring unto me him that hath sold the youth unto you and inform me concerning his affairs; peradventure he hath been stolen, for the youth is neither a slave nor the son of a slave, for I see noble blood within him. And the Midianites went away and they brought the Ishmaelites who had sold Joseph unto them, and the Ishmaelites said unto Potiphar: He is a slave, and we have sold him unto these men. And when Potiphar heard their words he paid the silver unto the Midianites and they went away and the Ishmaelites returned likewise to their place. And Potiphar took Joseph and he brought him into his house and he served Potiphar. And Joseph found grace in Potiphar’s eyes, and he trusted in him, and he made him overseer in his house and all that he had Potiphar surrendered into his care. And the Lord was with Joseph and he was a prosperous man and the Lord blessed the house of Potiphar for Joseph’s sake, and he left all that he had in Joseph’s hand. And Joseph was all-in-all, and upon his command everything was done in Potiphar’s house. And Joseph was eighteen years of age, a youth of beautiful eyes and pleasant appearance, and there was not his like in the whole land of Egypt. At that time when Joseph was in his master's house, coming in and going out and attending to his master's affairs, Zulycah, his master's wife, lifted up her eyes unto Joseph, and she beheld his comely appearance, and his beauty tempted her heart. And her soul became attached unto Joseph, and she beguiled him and persuaded him day after day, but he would not lift up his eyes to look at his master's wife. And Zulycah said unto him: How comely is thy appearance and how graceful thy figure. Verily I have looked at all the servants, but I could not find one as fair as thou art. And Joseph replied unto her: He who hath created me hath created likewise all the sons of man. And she said unto him: How beautiful are those eyes of thine and thou hast captivated with them all the inhabitants of Egypt, men and women alike. And he said unto her: Verily they are beautiful while alive, but if thou wert to see them in the grave thou wouldst tremble before them. And she continued: How pleasant and sweet are thy words, do take the harp which is in the house and play with thy hands and let us hear thy voice. And Joseph said: How pleasant and sweet are my words when I sing the praises and the glory of my Lord. And she continued: Oh how beautiful is the hair of thy head! Go and take the golden comb which is in the house and dress thy hair with it. And he said unto her: How long wilt thou continue to speak unto me in such words. Cease talking unto me and attend to thy work about the house. And she replied: There is no work to be done by me about the house, save what thou mightst bid me do. And in spite of all that, she could not attract Joseph, nor would he look up unto her but he kept his eyes fixed upon the ground. And Zulycah's heart was yearning for Joseph to lie with her, and once upon a time when Joseph attended to his duties within the house, Zulycah came and seated herself before him, and she continually tempted and enticed him, but he would not lie with her, nor even look up unto her. And she said unto him: If thou wilt not do according to my wishes, I will punish thee with the judgment of death and I will place an iron yoke upon thee. And Joseph replied unto her: Verily, God who hath created me releases the captives, and he will deliver me from thy prison and from thy judgment. And when she saw that it was impossible to persuade Joseph, her heart was full of desire, for her soul was fixed upon Joseph, and she fell into a hard sickness. And all the women of Egypt came to visit her and they said unto her: Why art thou so pale and emaciated? Surely thou lackest nothing, for is not thy husband an honored officer and very great in the eyes of the king, and can it be that thou lackest the least thing that thy heart may desire? And Zulycah answered unto them: This day shall it be known unto you what hath reduced me to this sad condition, in which you see me now. And Zulycah ordered her maidens to set meat before all the women and to prepare a great feast for them, and all the women ate in Zulycah’s house, and she gave them knives to peel their oranges and to eat them. And she commanded that Joseph be put into costly garments and that he should appear before them. And Joseph came before them, and behold, when the women saw him they could not turn their eyes from him, and all of them cut their hands with the knives and the oranges were full of blood. And they noticed not what they had done, being so deeply absorbed in admiring Joseph’s beauty, and they could not turn their eyelids from Joseph’s face. And Zulycah saw what they had done and she said unto them: What is it that you are doing? Behold, I have given you oranges that ye might eat and now you have cut your hands all of you. And they looked at their hands and behold they were bleeding and blood was flowing down upon their garments. And they said unto her: It is because of this servant which thou hast in thy house, who hath charmed us and we could not turn our eyelids from him through his beauty. And she said unto them: Behold in the short moment that you have seen him this hath occurred unto you and you could not withstand him, how much less can I do it, being always in the house with him. And I see him day after day coming in and going out about the house, can I then help my sickness or even my death on his account? And they said: Thy words are true, for who can see this beautiful figure in the house and be indifferent. But is he not thy slave and servant, wherefore then dost thou not tell what thou hast in thy heart, and why allowest thou thy soul to perish on that account? And she said unto them: I am forcing myself daily to entice him, but he does not heed my words, and I assure him of all that is good, but he does not mind, and therefore I have fallen sick even as you see me this day. And Zulycah was very ill through her desire for Joseph, and her love sickness weighed heavily upon her, but the people of Zulycah's household, and her husband knew nothing of the matter and that Zulycah was sick out of her love to Joseph. And all the people of her household asked her: Why art thou so emaciated and sick whereas thou lackest not the least thing? And she said unto them: I know not the illness that is growing upon me day after day. And all the women and her friends came to visit her daily and they spoke unto her, saying: This is certainly caused through thy love for Joseph; entice him then and use force against him, peradventure he will listen unto thee and remove thy impending death. And Zulycah became more seriously ill and she grew poorer with every coming day until she had no more strength in her to stand up. And one day, while Joseph was attending to his work in the house, Zulycah came in secretly and threw herself suddenly upon him, and Joseph used force to free himself from her and he cast her to the ground. And Zulycah wept before him on account of the passion within her heart, and she entreated him, and tears gushed down her cheeks, and she spoke unto him in weeping and supplication, saying: Hast thou ever seen, or heard, or known of a woman more beautiful or better than myself, that she would speak unto thee day after day and become so reduced by sickness through love to thee, and ready to bestow all these honors upon thee, and still thou dost not listen unto my voice? And if thou be afraid of thy master, that he might punish thee, as the king liveth no harm shall befall thee in this matter. Do then listen unto me and gratify my desire for the honor which I have shown thee, and free me from this disease; for why should I die on thy account? And when she ceased speaking Joseph answered unto her saying: Get thee from me and leave that matter to my master. Behold my master wotteth not what is with me in the house and he hath committed all that he hath into my hand. And he hath bestowed upon me great honors in his house and he hath made me overseer over his house and he hath elevated me, for there is none greater in this house than I. Neither hath he kept back anything from me but thou, because thou art his wife, and how then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God and against thy husband, to do this thing in my master's house? Now therefore abandon me, and do no more speak unto me such words, for I will surely not listen unto thy voice. And Zulycah would not hearken unto his voice, but she enticed him day after day to give ear unto her. And after this the river of Egypt became full above all its sides, and all the people of Egypt, and the king with his princes, went out to see it amidst music and dancing, for there is great rejoicing and a great holiday in Egypt whenever the sea Shichor overfloweth and they go thither to make merry the whole day. And when the Egyptians went forth to the river, to rejoice according to their custom all the people of Potiphar’s house hold went along. But Zulycah would not go, for she said: I am quite ill, and she remained at home all alone in order to find an opportunity of meeting Joseph that day. And when all had left and Zulycah was alone in the house, she arose and went up into the temple of the house, and she put on her garments, like the garments of a queen, and she placed upon her head an ornament of precious stones, made of onyx stones set in silver and gold and she beautified her face and body with all sorts of mixtures used by women, and she perfumed the temple and the entire house with cassia and frankincense, and she scattered myrrh and aloes all over the temple, and then she seated herself at the door of the temple in the passage of the house where Joseph had to pass in order to do his work. And behold Joseph returned from the field to do his master's work in the house and he entered his house, and when he came to the place where he had to pass, he saw Zulycah’s work and he turned backwards. And when Zulycah saw that Joseph went back she called unto him saying: What is the matter with thee Joseph 2 Come to do thy work, and I will clear the way before thee until thou shalt have passed unto thy seat. And Joseph returned to the house and passed on to his seat to do the work of his master as usual, and behold Zulycah came and stood before him in queenly garments and the perfume of her clothes reached into the distance. And she seized Joseph suddenly and she said unto him: As the king liveth, if thou wilt not gratify my desire thou shalt die this day. And she stretched out her other hand hastily and she drew a sword from under her garments and she placed it upon Joseph’s neck and she said: Arise now and gratify my wishes or else thou diest this very day. And Joseph was afraid of her and her action and he rose up to flee from her. But she had taken hold upon the front of his garments and when Joseph fled in terror, the garment which Zulycah had seized was torn, and Joseph left the garment in Zulycah’s hand and ran away into the street, because he was afraid. And when Zulycah saw that Joseph’s garments were torn and he had left them in her hands and fled, she was afraid lest the matter might become known concerning her, and she rose up and acted cunningly, and she removed the costly garments from herself and put on her other garments. And she took Joseph’s garment and laid it near her and she went back to the place where she sat during her sickness, before the people of her household had gone to the river, and she called unto a youth who came into the house and she commanded him to go and summon the people of her household into her presence. And when she saw them she spoke unto them in a loud lamenting voice: Behold the Hebrew whom your master hath brought into my house hath come to me this day to lie with me. And when you had left he came into the house, and seeing that no one was in the house with me he came to forcibly lie with me. And I took hold upon his garments and tore them and I cried out against him with a loud voice. And when I had lifted up my voice he was in fear of his life and he left his garments before me and he fled into the street. And the people of the house said not a word, but their anger was burning within them against Joseph, and they went to their master and they told unto him the words of his wife. And Potiphar came home with a raging wrath and his wife cried out to him saying: What is it that thou hast done unto me, to bring into my house a Hebrew servant, for he came unto me this day to sport with me, and after this manner did thy servant do unto me? And when Potiphar heard the words of his wife he commanded his servants to take Joseph to give unto Joseph a terrible beating and they did so unto him. And whilst they were beating him Joseph cried out with a loud voice and he lifted up his eyes unto the heavens and he said: Oh Lord my God thou knowest that I am innocent in this matter and why shall I die this day through a falsehood by the hands of these uncircumcised and wicked men whom thou knowest? And whilst Potiphar’s men were beating Joseph he kept on weeping and crying. And there was present a child only eleven months old, and the Lord opened the mouth of that child and he spoke these words before the men of Potiphar who were beating Joseph: What have you to do with this man and why do you inflict upon him this great evil? My mother hath spoken falsehoods and hath stated lies for such was the translation. And the child related unto them correctly all the things that had happened and all the words which Zulycah spoke unto Joseph day after day he told unto them. And when the child had finished speaking he became silent. And all - the men heard the words of the child and they were greatly astonished at the child’s words. And Potiphar was exceedingly ashamed at the words of his son and he ordered his men not to beat Joseph any longer, and the men ceased beating him. And Potiphar took Joseph and he had him brought for judgment before the priests, the king’s judges, and he said unto them: Pronounce ye judgment over this slave for thus was his behavior. And the priests said unto Joseph: Why hast thou done this thing unto thy master? And Joseph answered them, saying: Not so my lords, but such is the matter. And Potiphar said unto Joseph: have I not put into thy hands all that is mine? and I have not kept from thee the least thing but my wife; and how could thou do unto me this evil? And Joseph replied, saying: Not so my lord, as the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth, oh my master, there is no truth in the words, which thou hast heard from thy wife, but these are the facts. Behold it is now a full year that I have been in thy house, hast thou seen in me anything wrong, or the slightest thing whereby I could summon guilt upon my head? And the priests said unto Potiphar: Do thou send we pray thee and let them bring the torn garment of Joseph before us and let us see the rent within it. And if the garment be torn in front, before his face, then she has seized upon him forcibly, to draw him unto her, and all that thy wife hath spoken is a matter of deceit. And they brought Joseph’s garment before the priests, that were the judges, and they examined it and behold the tear was in front of Joseph. And all the priests who were the judges, knew at once that she hath assaulted him, and they said: This slave is not under the judgment of death, for he hath not done anything wrong. But we will sentence him to be cast into the prison on account of the report which hath gone forth against thy wife through him. And Potiphar harkened unto their words, and he took Joseph and placed him into the prison house, the place where the prisoners of the king were bound; and he was in the prison for twelve years. And for all that, the wife of his master did not turn from him, and she never ceased speaking unto Joseph day after day, that he should listen unto her. And at the end of three months, Zulycah went once more unto Joseph into the prison house, and she persuaded him to listen unto her. And Zulycah said unto Joseph: How long wilt thou remain in this house? do but listen unto my voice, and I will release thee from thy prison. “And Joseph answered unto her saying: It is better for me to remain in this house, than to listen unto thy words, and transgress against God. And she said unto him: If thou wilt not do my wishes, I will put out thine eyes, and I will put additional chains upon thy feet, and I will surrender thee into the hands of such as thou hast not known, neither yesterday nor day before yesterday. And Joseph replied unto her saying: Behold the God of all the earth, he is able to deliver me from all that thou wouldst do unto me. For he giveth sight to the blind and he freeth the captives and he preserveth the strangers that are in the land they never knew. And it came to pass, when Zulycah saw that she could not succeed in persuading Joseph to listen unto her, she ceased from going after him to entice him. And Joseph was still bound in the prison house, and Jacob, the father of Joseph and all his brothers, were still mourning and weeping for Joseph in those days; for Jacob refused to be comforted concerning Joseph his son. And Jacob was crying and weeping and mourning for Joseph all the time. And at that time in the year of Joseph’s going down to Egypt after his brothers had sold him, Reuben the son of Jacob went to Timnah and he took unto him for a wife Eliuram, the daughter of Avi the Canaanite, and he came to her. And Eliuram the wife of Reuben conceived and bare him Hanoch, and Palu, and Chetzron and Carmi, four sons. And Simeon his brother took his sister Dinah for a wife, and she bare unto him Memuel, and Yamin, and Ohad, and Jachin and Zochar, five sons. And he came afterward to the Canaanitish Bunah, the same Bunah whom Simeon took captive from the city of Shechem, and Bunah was before Dinah and attended upon her, and Simeon came to her, and she bare unto him Saul. And Judah went at that time to Adulam, and he came to a man of Adulam, and his name was Hirah. And Judah saw there the daughter of a man from Canaan, and her name was Aliyath, the daughter of Shua, and he took her, and came to her, and Aliyath bare unto Judah, Er, and Onan and Shiloh; three sons. And Levi and Issachar went into the land of the east, and they took unto themselves for wives the daughters of Jobab the son of Yoktan, the son of Eber. And Jobab, the son of Yoktan, had two daughters; the name of the older was Adinah, and the name of the younger was Aridah. And Levi took Adinah, and Issachar took Aridah, and they came unto the land of Canaan, to their father's house, and Adinah bare unto Levi, Gershon, and Kehath and Merari; three sons. And Aridah bare unto Issachar, Tola, and Puvah, and Job and Shomron, four sons. And after the death of Asher's wife he went and took Hadurah for a wife, and brought her to the land of Canaan. And Serach her daughter he brought also with them, and she was three years old; and the damsel was brought up in Jacob's house. And the damsel was of comely appearance, and she went in the holy ways of the children of Jacob, and the Lord gave her wisdom and understanding. And Hadurah, the wife of Asher, conceived and bare unto him Yimnah, and Yishvah, and Yishvi and Beriah; four sons. And Zebulun went to Midian, and took for a wife Merishah the daughter of Molad, the son of Abida, the son of Midian, and he brought her to the land of Canaan. And Merushah bare unto Zebulun, Sered, and Elon and Yachleel; three sons. And Jacob sent to Aram, the son of Zoba, the son of Terah, and he took for his son Benjamin Mechalia the daughter of Aram, and she came to the land of Canaan to the house of Jacob. And Benjamin was ten years old when he took Mechalia the daughter of Aram for a wife. And Mechalia conceived and bare unto Benjamin, Bela, and Becher, and Ashbel, and Gera and Naaman, five sons. And Benjamin went afterward and took for a wife Aribath, the daughter of Shomron, the son of Abraham, in addition to his wife, and he was eighteen years old; and Aribath bare unto Benjamin Achi, and Vosh, and Mupim, and Chupim, and Ord; five sons. And in those days Judah went to the house of Shem and took Tamar the daughter of Elam, the son of Shem, to wife for his first born Er. And Er came to Tamar, and she became his wife, and when he came to her he outwardly destroyed his seed, and his action was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord slew him. And it was after the death of Er, Judah’s first born, that Judah said unto Onan: Go to thy brother's wife and marry her as the next of kin, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan took Tamar and he came to her, and Onan also did like unto his brother, and his work was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him likewise. And when Onan died, Judah said unto Tamar: Remain thou in thy father's house until my son Shiloh shall have grown up. And Judah did no more delight in Tamar, to give her unto Shiloh, for he said: Perad venture he will also die like his brothers. And Tamar rose up and went home and remained in her father's house, and Tamar was in her father's house for some days. And at the revolution of the year, Aliyath the wife of Judah died; and Judah was comforted for his wife, and Judah went up with his friend Hirah to Timnah, to shear their sheep. And Tamar heard that Judah had gone up to Timnah to shear the sheep, and that Shiloh was grown up, and Judah did not delight in her, and she rose up and put off the garments of her widowhood, and she put a vail upon her, and she covered herself entirely, and she went and sat in the public thoroughfare, which is upon the road to Timnah. And Judah passed by and saw her, and he came to her, and she conceived by him. And at the time of being delivered, behold, there were twins in her womb; and he called the name of the first Perez, and the name of the second Zarah. In those days Joseph was still bound in the prison house in the land of Egypt. That time the officers of Pharaoh were standing before him, the chief butler, and the chief baker, which belonged to the king of Egypt. And the butler took wine and placed it before the king to drink, and the baker placed bread before the king to eat, and the king drank of the wine and ate of the bread, he and his servants and his officers that ate at the table of the king. And whilst they were eating and drinking, and the chief butler and the chief baker were sitting among them, the princes of Pharaoh found many flies in the wine which the chief butler had brought, and nitre stones were found in the bread of the chief baker. And when Pharaoh saw what his officers had done unto him, he ordered them to be punished and to be confined in the prison house. And the chief of the guards placed Joseph to wait on Pharaoh's officers, and they were in confinement a full year. And at the end of the year both of them dreamed dreams in one night in the place where they were imprisoned. And Joseph came in unto them in the morning, and behold they were dejected. And Joseph asked Pharaoh’s officers: Wherefore look ye so sadly to-day? And they said unto him: We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter for it. And Joseph said unto them: Relate ye your dreams unto me and God will answer your peace as you desire. And the chief butler told his dream unto Joseph, and he said: In my dream behold I have seen a great vine was before me, and upon that vine I saw three branches, and they grew up suddenly, and they budded and blossomed and the clusters thereof brought forth ripe grapes, and I took the grapes and I pressed them into a cup and I gave the cup into Pharaoh’s hand and he drank. And Joseph said unto him: The three branches that were on the vine are three days, and within three days the king will command and will release thee and they will restore thee unto thy place, and thou shalt deliver Pharaoh’s cup into his hand after the former manner when thou wast his butler. But think thou on me and let me find grace in thine eyes, that thou wilt mention me unto the king when it will be well with thee, and show mercy unto me, I pray thee, and bring me out of this prison, for I have been stolen from the land of Canaan, and sold for a slave into this place, and also what has been told unto thee concerning the wife of my master, is false, and they have placed me into this pit without any cause. And the chief butler replied unto Joseph, saying: If the king will do well with me as heretofore according to thy interpretation, I will do unto thee all that thou desirest and I will get thee out of this pit. And when the chief baker saw that the interpretation of Joseph was good, he approached Joseph likewise and related his dream, saying unto him: In my dream I saw, and behold, I had three white baskets on my head, and I saw, behold, in the uppermost basket there was of all manner of bake meats for Pharaoh, and the birds did eat them out of the basket upon my head. And Joseph said unto him: The three baskets that thou hast seen are three days; yet within three days shall Pharaoh lift up thy head from off thee, and shall hang thee on a tree; and the birds shalt eat thy flesh from off thee as thou hast seen in thy dream. And in those days the queen was delivered, and on that very day she bare a son unto the king of Egypt. And when it was reported that the first born son hath been born unto the king all Egypt rejoiced exceedingly, the princes of Pharaoh as well as his servant. And it was on the third day of his birth that Pharaoh made a feast for all his princes and subjects, and the armies of the land of Zoan and of Egypt. And all the people of Egypt and all the subjects of Pharaoh came to eat and to drink with the king at the feast of his son, and to rejoice with the joy of the king, and all the princes of the king and his servants made merry at that time through all the eight days of the feast, and they rejoiced with all sorts of instruments with music and dancing in the house of the king. And the chief butler unto whom Joseph had interpreted his dream, and who was restored by Pharaoh into his former place, forgot Joseph and mentioned him not unto the king as he had promised unto him; for it was so ordained by the Lord in order to punish Joseph for his trusting in man. And Joseph still remained in the prison house for two more years, until he had fulfilled his twelve years. And Isaac, the son of Abraham, was yet alive in those days, in the land of Canaan, being quite aged—one hundred and eighty year...old. And his son Esau, Jacob's brother, was in the land of Edom, and he acquired possessions in the midst of the sons of Seir, he as well as his sons. - And when Esau heard that his father's dying days were approaching, he came with his sons and with his household to Isaac, his father, into the land of Canaan. And Jacob and his sons departed likewise from the place of their abode in Hebron, and all of them came unto Isaac, their father, and there they met Esau and his sons in the tent. And Jacob and his sons seated themselves before their father Isaac, and Jacob was yet mourning over Joseph his son. And Isaac said unto Jacob: Bring thy sons unto me and I will bless them. And Jacob brought his eleven children into the presence of Isaac, his father. And Isaac placed his hands on all the sons of Jacob and he took hold of them and embraced them and kissed them, one by one, and Isaac blessed them on that day, and he said unto them: God of your fathers may bless you and multiply your seed like the stars of heaven in multitude. And the sons of Esau Isaac blessed likewise, saying: May the Lord make you the fear and terror of all those that will see you, and of all your enemies. And Isaac called unto Jacob and his sons, and all of them came and seated themselves before Isaac, and Isaac said unto Jacob: The Lord, the God of all the earth spoke unto me saying: Unto thy seed will I give this land to inherit it, if thy sons will observe my statutes and my ways, and I will fulfill on them the oath which I have sworn unto Abraham, thy father. And now, my son, teach thou thy children, and thy children’s children, to fear the Lord and to walk in the good path which will be pleasing in the eyes of the Lord thy God. For if ye will observe the ways of the Lord and his statutes, the Lord will also keep his covenant with Abraham concerning you, and he will do well unto your seed through all the days. And when Isaac - had finished instructing Jacob and his sons he died, and was gathered unto his people. And Jacob and Esau fell upon the face of their father, Isaac, and they wept. And Isaac was one hundred and eighty years old when he died in the land of Canaan, in Hebron. And his sons carried him to the cave of Machpelah, which Abraham had bought from the sons of Heth as a possession of a burial place. And all the kings of the land of Canaan went along with Jacob and Esau to bury Isaac. And all the kings of the land of Canaan showed great honors unto Isaac when he died. And the sons of Jacob and the sons of Esau went around barefooted, going around, crying and lamenting until they reached, Kerjath-arba. And Jacob and Esau buried their father Isaac in the cave of Machpelah, in Hebron, amidst exceedingly great honors according to the funerals of kings. And Jacob with his sons and Esau with his sons and all the kings of Canaan, mourned a great and heavy mourning over him, and after they buried him they still mourned for him through many days. And it was at the death of Isaac that he left all his cattle and all those belonging unto him unto his sons. And Esau said unto Jacob: Behold here is all that our father hath left, and we will divide it into two parts, and I will take my choice. And Jacob said let us do so. And Jacob took all that Isaac had left unto them in the land of Canaan, the cattle and all the other property, and he divided it into two parts in the presence of Esau and his sons, and said unto Esau : Behold all is here before thee, and now select the half thou wishest to take. And Jacob said unto Esau: Listen now at my proposal. The Lord God of heaven and of earth spoke unto our fathers, Abraham and Isaac, saying: Unto thy seed shall I give this land to possess it forever. And now behold here is before thee all the personal property of our father on one side, and the possession of Canaan on the other, and - select whichever thou pleaseth. If thou wishest to have the land then take it for thee and thy sons forever, and I will take all these riches; and if thou wishest these riches, then take them, and I will have this land for me and my sons to possess it forever. And Nebayoth, Ishmael’s son, was there with his sons in the land, and Esau went on that day, and he consulted him, saying: Such and such was Jacob’s proposal unto me, and now give me thy advice, and I will act accordingly. And Nebayoth said unto him: What are those words that Jacob hath spoken unto thee? Behold all the sons of Canaan are dwelling in the land, and Jacob speaketh of possess ing it with his seed forever, and now go thou and take all the riches of thy father, and leave unto thy brother Jacob the land, according to his words. And Esau rose up and returned unto Jacob, and he did according as he was advised by Nebayoth, Ishmael’s son. And Esau took all the wealth that Isaac had left, the slaves and the cattle, and all the other property and of all that great wealth he gave nothing unto Jacob. And Jacob took the entire land of Canaan, from the river of Egypt even unto the Euphrates, as an inheritance forever for himself, and his sons and his seed after him for all time. And also the cave of Machpelah which was in Hebron, and which Abraham had bought from Ephron, Jacob took for the possession of a burial ground for himself and his seed forever. And Jacob wrote down all of these transactions into a book of sale and he sealed it and had it testified to by trustworthy witnesses concerning everything. And these are the words which Jacob wrote into the book, saying: The land of Canaan and all the cities of the Hittites and of the Hivites, and of the Jebusites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and of the Gergasites, of all the seven nations from the river of Egypt even unto the river Euphrates, and the entire city of Hebron, to-wit, Kirjath-arba, and the cave that is in it, all these Jacob hath bought of Esau his brother for value received, to possess and to inherit it for himself and his sons and his seed after him forever. And Jacob took the book of sale, and the seal, the laws and the statutes, and the public documents, and he placed them into an earthen vessel so that it be preserved for many days, and he gave it into the hands of his sons. And Esau took all that his father had left after his death, men and servants and camels and asses and oxen and sheep and gold and silver and precious stones, all the wealth that belonged to Isaac, the son of Abraham. And Esau left not the least thing of all the great wealth but he took it all, and he went into the land of Seir, the Horite, and he returned with his sons and procured pos sessions in the midst of the sons of Seir. And Esau never returned unto the land of Canaan after this day. And all the land of Canaan was an inheritance to the sons of Israel forever, and Esau and his sons possessed the mountain of Seir.
and Potiphar said unto them: Name the value of that youth. And they said: We want for him four hundred pieces of silver. And Potiphar said unto them: I am ready to pay you the amount if you will bring unto me him that hath sold the youth unto you and inform me concerning his affairs; peradventure he hath been stolen, for the youth is neither a slave nor the son of a slave, for I see noble blood within him. And the Midianites went away and they brought the Ishmaelites who had sold Joseph unto them, and the Ishmaelites said unto Potiphar: He is a slave, and we have sold him unto these men. And when Potiphar heard their words he paid the silver unto the Midianites and they went away and the Ishmaelites returned likewise to their place. And Potiphar took Joseph and he brought him into his house and he served Potiphar. And Joseph found grace in Potiphar’s eyes, and he trusted in him, and he made him overseer in his house and all that he had Potiphar surrendered into his care. And the Lord was with Joseph and he was a prosperous man and the Lord blessed the house of Potiphar for Joseph’s sake, and he left all that he had in Joseph’s hand. And Joseph was all-in-all, and upon his command everything was done in Potiphar’s house. And Joseph was eighteen years of age, a youth of beautiful eyes and pleasant appearance, and there was not his like in the whole land of Egypt. At that time when Joseph was in his master's house, coming in and going out and attending to his master's affairs, Zulycah, his master's wife, lifted up her eyes unto Joseph, and she beheld his comely appearance, and his beauty tempted her heart. And her soul became attached unto Joseph, and she beguiled him and persuaded him day after day, but he would not lift up his eyes to look at his master's wife. And Zulycah said unto him: How comely is thy appearance and how graceful thy figure. Verily I have looked at all the servants, but I could not find one as fair as thou art. And Joseph replied unto her: He who hath created me hath created likewise all the sons of man. And she said unto him: How beautiful are those eyes of thine and thou hast captivated with them all the inhabitants of Egypt, men and women alike. And he said unto her: Verily they are beautiful while alive, but if thou wert to see them in the grave thou wouldst tremble before them. And she continued: How pleasant and sweet are thy words, do take the harp which is in the house and play with thy hands and let us hear thy voice. And Joseph said: How pleasant and sweet are my words when I sing the praises and the glory of my Lord.
And Shechem and his father heard the words of the sons of Jacob, and their words pleased them, and Shechem and his son deferred not to do the thing, because Shechem had delight in Jacob’s daughter, and his soul was bound to her. And Shechem and his father hastened to the gate of their city, and they assembled all the people of their city, and they spoke unto them the words of Jacob's sons, saying: We came to these men, to the sons of Jacob, and we communed with them concerning their daughter, and these men agreed to do what we desired of them; and behold our land so very spacious is before them and they can trade and dwell therein, and we will be as one people with them. Their daughters we will take to ourselves, and our daughters we will give unto them to wives. But they have consented only on the condition that we circumcise every male person amongst us, even as they are circumcised, for thus their God had commanded them. And as soon as we comply with their demand then all of them with their wealth and cattle will dwell with us, and we will become one people with them. And the people of the city hearing the words of Shechem and his father, Hamor, accepted the proposal, and they agreed to be circumcised; for Shechem and his father, Hamor, were highly respected in their eyes, being the princes of the land. And next morning Shechem and his father, Hamor, rose early and gathered together all the male persons unto the middle of the city, and they called the sons of Jacob and they circumcised every male among them on that day and the following one. And they circumcised also Shechem and his father, Hamor, with his five brothers, and they each of them returned to his house. For this was from the Lord, as also the advice of Simeon, in this matter, so that the Lord might deliver the city of Shechem unto the hands of Jacob’s two sons. And the numbers of all the males then circumcised were six hundred and forty-five men and two hundred and seventy-six children. But Hidekem, the son of Pered, Hamor's father, and his six brothers, were not circumcised for the proposal of the sons of Jacob was abominable in their eyes, and they were greatly wroth at the people of the city for not re fusing, also, according to their advice. And it was on the second day, in the evening, that eight small boys were found which were not circumcised, for their mothers had concealed them from Shechem and his father, and from the people of the city. And Shechem and his father, Hamor, sent for those boys to have them brought before them to be circumcised, but Hidekem and his six brothers jumped at them with their swords and sought to kill them. And they sought to kill Shechem and his father, Hamor, and Dinah was to be killed likewise on account of that matter.
And they said to them: What is this thing that you have done? is there not among the daughters of your brothers, the Canaanites, a woman, that you must take to you one from the daughters of the Hebrews whom you have not known neither yesterday nor day before, and besides, you do such things as have never been commanded unto us by our fathers? Do you really believe to prosper in this matter, and what answer will you make to your brethren, the Canaanites, if they come and question you to-morrow concerning these things? and if your actions should not be regarded just in their eyes, what will you do for your souls, for not having listened to our voices? And further, if all the inhabitants of the land and all your brethren, the sons of Ham, will hear of your action, saying: On account of a Hebrew woman Shechem and his father, Hamor, and all the people of their city com mitted things of which they never knew, and which their forefathers never commanded unto them, whither then will you flee and whither shall ye go with all your endless shame before the inhabitants of Canaan, your brethren? And now, we cannot stand this thing that you have done, and we cannot endure it to carry upon us this yoke, something our forefathers never commanded unto us. Behold, we will go to-morrow and assemble all our brethren, the Canaanites that dwell in the whole land, and we will smite you and all those that trust in you, that there will not be left of you or of them a remnant. And Hamor and Shechem, his son, and the in habitants of the place, hearing these words were in great fear of Hidekem and his brothers, and they were afraid of their lives, and they repented of all that they had done. And Shechem and his father, Hamor, replied unto Hidekem and his brothers, saying unto them: Every one of the words you have spoken is correct, but do not say or think in your hearts that we have done out of love to the Hebrews, these things, which our forefathers never commanded unto us. For we did it because we have seen that they had not the heart nor the willingness to grant us our wish concerning their daughter, so that we could take her unto us, save upon this condition; and we have listened to their voice and done these things merely to obtain what we desired from them. And after we shall have gained what we sought of them we will do unto them whatsoever you may say unto us. And now, we pray ye, wait and be patient until our flesh shall be healed and we gain strength, and we will unite and go against them and do unto them as it is in your hearts and in ours.
אחר הדברים האלה, after these events,” i.e. after Avram had successfully waged war against the armies under the leadership of Kedorleomer. He had suddenly become very worried that other nations would feel called upon to avenge this defeat of the pagans; we encounter a similar reaction by Yaakov, after his sons Shimon and Levi had killed the males of the city of Sh’chem, and his other sons had looted that town. (Genesis 34,30). G-d had reassured him telling him that not only would He protect him against any other attacks by kings for having saved Lot, but that he would also qualify for additional rewards. You are entitled to this because you demonstrated that you placed more faith in My promises than in those of the King of Sodom, plus in the fact that you went to such length to rescue your relatives.
Jacob is horrified. “You have made me odious to the people of the land,” he says (Gen. 34:30). What then were we supposed to do, ask the two brothers? “Should we have left our sister to be treated like a prostitute?” (Gen. 34:31). With that rhetorical question, the episode ends and the narrative moves elsewhere. But Jacob’s horror at the action of his sons does not end there. He returns to it on his deathbed, and in effect curses them:
Now even though this is all true, (19. Kaspi now deals with the problem that if, according to his argument, there was nothing reprehensible in the act of Jacob’s children in killing the Shechemites, then why did Jacob rebuke them in Gen. 34:30?) the writer of the Torah demonstrated to us the wisdom of old, experienced men, as Aristotle said in the Ethics, that to listen to the old is no less than to listen to demonstrative proof. (20. Aristotle, Ethics, VI, 11, 1143b: “Therefore we ought to attend to the undemonstrated sayings and opinions of … older people … not less than to demonstrations, for because of experience … they see right.”) For this reason, while Jacob the old man saw that justice required that his sons do what they did, he became angry and said that one should not endanger oneself on account of what may or may not be. (21. The reference of these enigmatic words is not clear. Perhaps Kaspi means that Dinah might well have been freed by the Shechemites without the attack; or else that the risk of failure was not offset by the continued imprisonment of Dinah.) One should certainly not (endanger oneself) in order to hasten the appointed time that had been told to Abraham. (22. The reference is to Gen. 15:13 with its decree of a four-hundred-year exile.)
AND NOT DIE. For it is possible that he will be as a person who lives a certain number of years and then dies. (In other words, Moses prayed that the tribe of Reuben exist forever and not disappear with the death of the present generation.)
FEW IN NUMBER. I have already explained the meaning of mete (few). (Mete (few) means men of. Anything that can be numbered is deemed a few. See I.E. on Gen. 34:30 (Vol. 1, p. 330).)
LET MY SOUL NOT COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL. Rabbi Aaron (Gaon of the school of Pumbedita. The great Hai Gaon was among his students.) explained the word tavo (come) in Let my soul not come (tavo) as having the meaning of set like the meaning of ba (goeth down, to set) in and the sun goeth down (ba) (Eccles. 1:5). (The word ba means to come. In Eccles. 1:5 the word ba means sets, i.e., when the sun goes down (sets) it is no longer in the sky. Similarly the word tavo, which comes from the same root, here means will set. Let my soul not set from their council means let my soul always be in their council.) He interpreted let my soul not come into their council as meaning, I do not want to be outside of their council. However, Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation inverts the meaning of the verse. (Rabbi Aaron interpreted Let my soul not come in to their council to mean let my soul not set from their council. The verse means I do not want my soul to be in their council. Thus Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation is precisely the opposite of what the verse actually says.) If Jacob praised Simeon and Levi, why did he mention weapons of violence? Furthermore, Jacob told his sons, Ye have troubled me, to make me odious unto the inhabitants of the land (Gen. 34:30). (We thus see that Jacob was angry at what his sons did to the inhabitants of Shechem and on his deathbed would not praise them for this act.) The truth of the matter is that Simeon and Levi placed Jacob and his household in great jeopardy by their actions in Shechem. Indeed, were it not for the terror of God that was upon the cities that were round about them (Gen. 35:5), they would have surrounded Jacob and his family and exterminated them all. He (Rabbi Aaron) similarly explained (That is, in a positive manner, not that Jacob castigated his sons but praised them for slaying the inhabitants of Shechem and destroying its wall. Rabbi Aaron interprets verses 6-7 as follows: Let my soul not set from their council, from their assembly let my glory not be excluded; For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they uprooted a cursed wall; For their anger was fierce, and their wrath it was cruel. Rabbi Aaron interprets verse 8 as follows: I will give them a good portion in Jacob (achallekem be-ya’akov) and may they multiply in Israel (va-afitzem bi’yisra’el) (Filwarg).) Cursed be their anger (v. 7) as meaning and in their self will they uprooted a cursed wall, (Rabbi Aaron renders ikkeru shor (they houghed oxen) as they uprooted a wall.) for their anger was fierce. The above explanations are unpalatable. (Literally, cold, i.e., unpalatable as cold food (Krinsky).) Let my soul not come into their council. (I reject them. I.E. takes Jacob’s words and gives them a new twist.) Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen (Rabbi Moses ben Samuel Gikatilla, an 11th century Bible commentator. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 and the notes thereto.) says that kevodi (my glory) is synonymous with nafshi (my soul). He notes that we find the two often used synonymously in the book of Psalms. Rabbi Moses’ interpretation is correct since our text repeats itself in different words, (The point is that the second half of the line repeats what the first half said but in different words. In the first half it uses nafshi, in the second kevodi. However, both mean one and the same.) as is the style of prophetic statements. We thus find, Ask thy father, and he will declare unto thee, Thine elders, and they will tell thee (Deut. 32:7), and (in Num. 23:8) How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? And how shall I execrate, whom the Lord hath not execrated? Thus into their council means the same as unto their assembly, come (tavoh) the same as be united (techad), and nafshi the same as kevodi. However, Rabbi Judah ben Balam the Spaniard (Bible commentator and grammarian who lived in the 10th and 11th centuries. “His commentaries (in Arabic) on most of the Bible are remarkable for their philosophical method and use of comparison with Arabic.” (Cecil Roth, Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 940).) says that Rabbi Moses erred. He maintains that kavod (glory) refers to the body because the body is the glory (kavod) of the soul in the same way that a necklace is the ornament to the neck, (The body is inferior to the soul, yet it is considered the soul’s glory in the same way that a necklace, although certainly less important than the neck, is nevertheless called the ornament of the neck (Cherez).) as we find in the verse Who satisfieth thy body (edyekh) with good things (Ps. 103:5). (The Hebrew edyekh ordinarily means your ornament. J.P.S. translates it as thine old age. Rabbi Judah Balam interprets edyekh as referring to the body. However, I.E. in Psalms interprets edyekh as referring to the soul.) Rabbi Judah offers as a proof text, (That kavod refers to the body.) Yea, let him lay my glory (kevodi) in the dust. Selah. (Ps. 7:6). (Which proves that glory cannot refer to the soul for it is impossible to lay the soul in the dust.) However, I say that Rabbi Judah errs, for we find Scripture saying, So that my glory (kevodi) may sing praise to Thee (Ps. 30:13), (I.E. interprets this verse in his commentaries on Psalms as follows: So that all that have a soul (kavod) may sing praise to thee. We thus see that kavod refers to the soul. Rabbi Judah might retort that Ps. 30:13 should be interpreted: so that my body may sing praise to thee, or all that have a human form (kavod) may sing praise to thee.) and Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory (kevodi) rejoiceth; My flesh (i.e., my body) also dwelleth in safety (Ps. 16:9). (Kavod must refer to the soul for otherwise body is mentioned twice in our verse. I.E. in Psalms interprets my heart as referring to man’s intelligence, my glory (kevodi) to man’s soul, and my flesh to the body.) As to the proof which Rabbi Judah offered from Yea, let him lay my glory in the dust, it is figurative. What the verse means is that my soul will be lowered as low as possible, i.e., to the dust. Positive proof that my interpretation is correct comes from My soul (nafshi) cleaveth unto the dust (Ps. 119:25). (This verse certainly must be taken figuratively. Similarly, Ps. 119:25.)
יצו ה׳ אתך את הברכה באסמיך, "G'd will command the blessing for you in your storehouses, etc." Why was this blessing not included with blessings listed earlier? Its place is certainly not after the blessing that G'd will strike down people attacking us! Here the Torah gives us an assurance that the Israelites will not experience what happened to someone who experienced a miracle and whose peers were so upset that this individual was found worthy of G'd performing a miracle for him, i.e. reversed the laws of nature for his sake, so that celestial forces acted as his servant. We are told in Taanit 24 that it happened that Rava was challenged to demonstrate to scoffers who refused to consider G'd's answering prayers for rain in winter (when there was supposed to be rainfall) as an act of providence. He claimed that the same G'd could make it rain in the middle of the summer in response to his prayer. He prayed for rain in summer and so much rain descended that it overflowed the town and ran into the Tigris river not too far away. On the following night Rava's father appeared to him in a dream demanding to know who had had the effrontery to put heaven to such trouble as to make it rain in summer? He told his son to change his bed because he had caused so much anger in heaven. Rava did so and on the following morning he found traces of a knife with which his bed had been slashed. This is why the Torah writes after speaking about G'd frustrating our enemies' designs that we will enjoy blessings even in the hidden storage houses. The evil eye does not exercise any influence on hidden places; this is why the Torah emphasised that this blessing will occur in places which are out of reach of the evil eye. The Torah goes on וברכך בארץ, "and He will bless you in the land, etc." meaning that the nations of the world will not make a united front against you as Jacob had been afraid they would after Shimon and Levi had killed all the males in the city of Shechem (Genesis 34,30).
ויאמר אל עמו הנה עם בני ישראל, He said to his people: "here we have the nation of the children of Israel, etc." The expression הנה in this verse may be understood once we remember the interpretation of Genesis 34,30 where Jacob censured his sons saying עכרתם אותי, "you have made my image clouded" (as opposed to clearly transparent). Bereshit Rabbah 80,12 states that Jacob and the Canaanites had a long standing tradition that the Jews would overpower the Canaanites. This was supposed to take place after the Jews numbered at least 600.000. Now that Shimon and Levi had jumped the gun by destroying the inhabitants of Shechem, Jacob was afraid that such a premature action would backfire. Pharaoh, king of Egypt referred to this ancient prediction that the Jewish people would display such military strength, when he observed how the Jews constantly gained in numbers and vigour. הנה, i.e. the time has arrived of which the prophecy foretold.
LET REUBEN LIVE. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that “he began with Reuben because he was the firstborn. He did not mention Simeon because of the sin of [Baal] Peor, because the worshippers were Simeonites, the proof being their numbers, (In the first census the tribe of Simeon numbered 59,300 (Numbers 2:13). In the second census [after the Peor affair] they numbered 22,200 (ibid., 26:14), a decrease of 37,100 people. In the opinion of Ibn Ezra the decrease would be accounted for by the 24,000 people that died in the plague because of the Peor affair (ibid., 25:9) thus indicating that the idol-worshippers were exclusive of that tribe. On this point, Ramban will comment that even assuming that all 24,000 who died in the plague were from the tribe of Simeon, there are still 13,100 people unaccounted for, a discrepancy that cannot be explained by Ibn Ezra’s theory.) and their prince, too, being killed [in the affair].” In my opinion, the numbers are no proof because over thirteen thousand are still unaccounted for, aside from those who died in the plague. (In the first census the tribe of Simeon numbered 59,300 (Numbers 2:13). In the second census [after the Peor affair] they numbered 22,200 (ibid., 26:14), a decrease of 37,100 people. In the opinion of Ibn Ezra the decrease would be accounted for by the 24,000 people that died in the plague because of the Peor affair (ibid., 25:9) thus indicating that the idol-worshippers were exclusive of that tribe. On this point, Ramban will comment that even assuming that all 24,000 who died in the plague were from the tribe of Simeon, there are still 13,100 people unaccounted for, a discrepancy that cannot be explained by Ibn Ezra’s theory.) In addition, other tribes as well diminished in population, for the sons of Gad lost five thousand, (In the first census the Gadites numbered 46,500 (Numbers 2:15), and in the second census they were 40,500 (ibid., 26:18) — a decrease of 5,150. — And so perhaps we should assume that these deaths resulted from the plague because of Peor.) and the sons of Ephraim, eight thousand! (In the first census the tribe of Ephraim numbered 40,500 (Numbers 2:19), and in the second census they were 32,500 (ibid., 26:37) — a decrease of 8000.) Moreover, from the verse which states, And Israel attached himself unto Baal-peor, (Numbers 25:3.) and it is said again, Take all the chiefs of the people (Ibid., Verse 4.) it would appear that there were some among them from all the tribes, and that all their judges passed sentence on them. And similarly He said, so that I consumed not the children of Israel in My jealousy. (Ibid., Verse 11.) Now do not rejoin against me from the affair of Achan where He said, Israel hath sinned (Joshua 7:11. In this part of the verse the specific sin is not mentioned yet. It is stated at the end of that verse: Yea, they have even taken of the devoted thing. — For the significance thereof see Ramban further.) [although it was but a single individual who sinned; similarly we can say that it was the tribe of Simeon alone that sinned in the affair of Peor yet Scripture describes it as if the entire nation sinned. This rejoinder is not valid, for] there, [the details of] the sin had not yet been revealed, so He mentioned Israel generally [but in the case of Peor the facts of the sin were clearly given and still He spoke of all Israel, which shows that people from all the tribes were among the worshippers of Peor]. Similarly, the identity of the victim [i.e., Zimri, a leader of the Simeonites] is no proof [that only his tribe sinned, as Ibn Ezra argues], for he [Zimri, the son of Salu] was only a prince of a fathers’ house (Numbers 25:14.) of that tribe, not the prince of the [entire] tribe. Those who assembled against G-d in the congregation of Korach were greater and more honorable people than he [Zimri], for they were princes of the congregation, (Ibid., 16:2.) yet all their tribes did not follow them! Additionally, the psalm [that relates the sins of the wilderness] mentions Dathan and Abiram and their affair by name, saying, The earth opened and swallowed up Dathan, and covered the company of Abiram; (Psalms 106:17. The verse indicates that, despite the fact that princes of the congregation were in the company of Korach, the general population did not follow them, for the psalm specifies the participants in the strife.) and it [the same psalm] mentions They attached themselves also unto Baal-peor (Ibid., Verse 28.) together with Moreover, they scorned the desirable Land (Ibid., Verse 24.) which applies to the general population! (Thus it is clear that the worshippers of Baal-peor came from all the tribes, just as those who scorned the desirable Land came from among the entire people. This contradicts Ibn Ezra’s view that only the tribe of Simeon was involved in the affair of Peor.) Forbid it also that Moses should refrain from blessing the tribe of Simeon, [when it is said] that a tribe be not blotted out from Israel! (Judges 21:17.) For all those who had joined Baal-peor had already died, as it is said, for all the men that followed Baal-peor, the Eternal thy G-d hath destroyed from the midst of thee, (Above, 4:3.) and it is written of those who survived, But ye that did cleave unto the Eternal your G-d are alive every one of you this day. (Ibid., Verse 4.) And why should he not bless them? They all made the [golden] calf and sinned in the affair of the spies, yet they were forgiven, and he blessed them! Now, I have seen in Midrash Rabbah the following text: (Bamidbar Rabbah 21:9.) “Six families were eliminated because of the immorality caused by Balaam’s advice [that Israel could be corrupted through seduction], and so Scripture listed one family less of Simeon (Genesis 46:10 lists six sons of Simeon, while in the second census only five are given (Numbers 26:12-13).) and five less of Benjamin.” (Genesis 46:21 lists ten sons of Benjamin, while in the second census only five are given (Numbers 26:38-39).) Thus, according to the opinion of the Rabbis [the tribe of] Benjamin had a greater part in the sin than did the tribe of Simeon — yet Benjamin is included in the blessing! (Further, Verse 12.) In my opinion, the correct interpretation is that Scripture considers the tribes of Israel as only twelve. So it stated in Jacob’s blessing, All these are the twelve tribes of Israel. (Genesis 49:28.) Now Jacob mentioned his twelve sons and considered Joseph to be one tribe (Ibid., Verses 22-26.) [instead of enumerating Ephraim and Menasheh separately as is sometimes done]. Moses saw fit to consider Joseph as two tribes, as he said, And they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Menasheh. (Further, Verse 17.) This was for two reasons: one, since the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded and made them two tribes regarding the dedication of the altar, (Numbers 7:48 and 54.) the flags (Ibid., 2:18-21.) [designating the tribal encampments in the wilderness], and the inheritance of the Land, (Ibid., 34:23-24.) he [Moses] had to count them as two [separate tribes] for their blessing. Secondly, he referred to Joshua, who would make them possess the Land, and he was from Ephraim, the younger son [of Joseph], therefore Moses had to mention his brother [Menasheh] who was older than him. Now, he also wanted to bless [the tribe of] Levi, for, through his blessing, all Israel would be blessed, in that his offerings shall be acceptable before G-d on their behalf. Hence it was necessary to omit one of the tribes, for nowhere [in Scripture] are they enumerated except as twelve, corresponding to the twelve constellations in the firmament, (Bamidbar Rabbah 14:29.) the twelve months of the year, and the twelve “border diagonals” (Sefer Habahir, 95. — This is a Cabbalistic term for the twelve mystic powers emanating from various combinations of the letters of the Great Divine Name. See my Hebrew commentary p. 495.) concerning which the Rabbis have said in the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 14:29.) that they are the everlasting arms. (Further, Verse 27.) As the Sages mentioned in Tractate Berachoth: (Berachoth 32b.) “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to the prophet, (I.e., Isaiah. In our text of the Gemara: “The Holy One, blessed be He, said ‘to her': My daughter …”) Go and tell the congregation of Israel: My daughter, I have created twelve constellations in the firmament to correspond to the twelve tribes.” Similarly, at Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal where Scripture counts Levi, (See above, 27:12.) Joseph is not mentioned as two tribes (See above, 27:12.) [because, there Simeon (See above, 27:12.) is mentioned]. Likewise you will see in the distributions of Ezekiel that he counts Joseph as two tribes (See Ezekiel 48:4-5.) with reference to the apportioning of the Land and did not mention Levi. On the other hand, in enumerating the city exits [of Jerusalem] he mentioned, the gate of Levi, one (Ibid., Verse 31.) and did not list the tribe of Joseph as two tribes; instead he said, the gate of Joseph, one, (Ibid., Verse 32.) since the tribes are always counted as only twelve. I have already mentioned this in the section Vayikach Korach. (Numbers 17:12 (see Vol. IV, pp. 189-190).) Accordingly, Simeon was left out [of Moses’ blessings] since his tribe was not large and it was not the intention of the blessing of Jacob, their father, that they become numerous. Instead he divided them in Jacob and scattered them in Israel, (See Genesis 49:7.) and to that extent they, too, were blessed through the blessing of the rest of the tribes among whom they were. Now the order of this blessing [of Moses] was by [dictate of] Ruach Hakodesh (the Holy Spirit) according to their inheritance. He began with Reuben for he occupied his inheritance first; (Joshua 13:15.) and, also, for he was the firstborn, (I Chronicles 5:1.) and Moses prayed for him that his name not be blotted out because of his sin; therefore, in his blessing, he accorded him the right of the firstborn. (Above, 21:17.) Then he mentioned Judah for he was the first to inherit within the Land [proper] (Reuben’s possession was beyond the Jordan eastward.) and of him came he that is the prince, (I Chronicles 5:2. Reference is to David.) and he was the first to advance to war [against the Canaanites], (Judges 1:2.) concerning which Moses blessed him [saying, his hands shall contend for him, and Thou shalt be a help against his adversaries]. (Verse 7.) Thus Judah’s blessing embraces all Israel. Then Moses blessed Levi — who dwelled with the children of Judah in Jerusalem, and there their offerings should be acceptable. Afterwards he blessed Benjamin because their inheritance was with the children of Judah, and, [because] the city of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary were between the children of Judah and the children of Benjamin, and the Levites abode with both of them. Then he blessed the children of Joseph for such was their inheritance, as it is said, And the lot of the tribe of the children of Benjamin came up according to their families; and the border of their lot went out between the children of Judah and the children of Joseph. (Joshua 18:11.) Afterwards he continued to bless the children of the mistresses, (I.e., Leah and Rachel, who were the heads of their households. Here, though, it refers only to Leah, since Rachel’s children — Benjamin and Joseph — were already blessed.) and mentioned Zebulun before Issachar (See further, Verse 18.) as Jacob had done. (See Genesis 49:13-14.) So, too, [in the division of the Land] the third lot fell to the children of Zebulun (See Joshua 19:10 (Zebulun). Ibid., Verse 17 (Issachar).) and the fourth lot to the children of Issachar. (See Joshua 19:10 (Zebulun). Ibid., Verse 17 (Issachar).) Then he blessed the children of the handmaids (Bilhah and Zilpah.) — Dan, Naphtali, and Asher — in order of their birth, (The order of their birth was: Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher (Genesis 30:6-13). Here, the order is: Gad (Verse 20-21), Dan, Naphtali, Asher (Verses 22-24). Ramban will proceed to explain why Gad is first.) and they were also [encamped] under the same standard. (Numbers 2:25-30.) He mentioned Gad [born after Naphtali] before all the children of the handmaids, because he occupied his inheritance earlier with Reuben, (See Joshua 13:23-24.) the first of all, and he was [encamped under] Reuben’s standard. (Numbers 2:10-14.) Let Reuben live, and not die. “The meaning thereof is that his tribe shall live and never die. (In other words, this is to be understood as a prayer rather than a blessing. — It is so clearly stated in our text of Ibn Ezra. Ramban also mentioned above, “and Moses prayed for him etc.”) And let his men be a number. This is like the verse, And I have not learned wisdom and the knowledge of the Holy One I have (Proverbs 30:3.) [where the word not from the first part of the verse, applies to the second part as well – ‘and the knowledge of the Holy One I have not.’ Here, too, the word not from the expression and ‘not’ die applies to the second part, thus meaning] ‘and let his men not be a number,’ that they may not become few, for whatever can be counted, is few. So also, and I am few in number.” (Genesis 34:30.) This is the language of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra. It is more correct to explain: “Let Reuben live in Israel; and not die, that his tribe at no time should be cut off, and that his numbers always be among the count of the children of Israel.” He prayed for him that his name not be cut off from Israel because of the anger with which his father was wroth with him when he defiled his couch. (Ibid., 49:4.) This is similar to what is stated there, and Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve; (Ibid., 35:22.) Scripture made it be known that he was not excluded from that number on account of his sin. Rashi also explained it this way. And the meaning of his men [and let ‘his men’ be numbered among the men of Israel] is that all his men should deserve this [to be included in the ranks of Israel], and not even part of their tribe be cut off because of his [Reuben’s] sin. Perhaps the expression his men refers to the heads of the four families [of the tribe of Reuben — Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi], (Exodus 6:14.) and the meaning of the word mispar (number) is like b’mispar [with the prefix beth meaning “in the number,” the verse stating: “and let his men be ‘in’ the number” of the children of Israel]. Similarly, to play the harlot ‘beith’ [literally: “the house of”] her father (Above, 22:21.) [means b’veith — “in the house of” her father]; they shall wash ‘mayim’ (Exodus 30:20.) [literally: “water,” means b’mayim — “with water”]. There are many similar cases. Or it may be that the meaning thereof is that in the census of Israel his men be counted first as is the right of the firstborn, for number one is the unit from which all numbers originate. (See Ibn Ezra to Exodus 3:1.) Onkelos rendered it: “And his children will receive their inheritance among their numbers.” He meant what we have explained, saying that Reuben will live and not be cut off [from Israel] and his men will be counted among their numbers forever. His tribe will not be blotted out from Israel but they will not be counted on account of their large numbers as forming two tribes. Thus he deprived him of the birthright [that awards the firstborn with a double share], but he assured him of being forever one tribe. And some commentators (I have found this interpretation in Chizkuni: “Let Reuben live, and not die when he will pass over the Jordan armed before the children of Israel. And his men be a number — in the same number that they will pass over there [into the land of Canaan] may they return, without a single one lacking.”) explain that this blessing refers to the conquest of the Land, the verse stating that the Reubenites will live when crossing [the Jordan] armed for war before the children of Israel. And the purport thereof is that they will prevail, and not be defeated, similar in meaning to the expression, and by thy sword shalt thou live. (Genesis 27:40.) And let him not die, that none of them should die in battle, and his men be a number that they should return to their homes in their [original] number, there lacking not one man of them. (Numbers 31:49.) Similarly, in the blessing of Gad (Further, Verse 20.) his companion [under the same standard] (Numbers 2:10-14.) Moses mentioned this subject. This interpretation is likely [to be true]. But the first one appears to me to be more correct, for Moses’ blessing corresponds to the manner and thought that Jacob mentioned. And by way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], the expression Let [Reuben] live and not die is associated with visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children (Exodus 20:5 (see Vol. II, p. 300, and Notes 361-362).) and there I alluded to its secret. (Exodus 20:5 (see Vol. II, p. 300, and Notes 361-362).) Moses’ blessing helped Reuben gain atonement for the affair of Bilhah, that he not be cut off and be denied [the World to Come] for it, forever. However, He visited upon him, along with the rest of the tribes [the sin of] the sale of Joseph, according to the narrative in Pirkei Heichaloth. (“Chapters of the Palaces.” — Heichaloth Rabboth, 6. A reference to this work is also found in Ramban’s Introduction to the Commentary on the Torah (see Vol. I, p. 10, Note 22). This is a mystic Midrash describing the process of ascending to heaven and of the palaces therein leading up to the Holy Throne. The principal narrator in this account is Rabbi Yishmael, one of the martyrs who was executed during the religious persecutions of Hadrian. The Midrash mentions the executions on account of the tradition that the ten martyrs suffered their fate in order to atone for the sale of Joseph by ten of his brothers.)
Technically, there is no comparison between Moshe’s taking a foreign woman before the Torah was given and Zimri’s doing so afterward. Nevertheless, in view of Shimon and Levi’s history regarding pre-Sinaitic intermarriage, it is likely that Zimri was making a meta-legal point. Since Levi had so strongly opposed this very notion in the past, and Moshe, the Levite national leader, was now betraying the cause, (At this point in time, there were none of the extenuating circumstances of earlier days that might have made intermarriage more understandable, since the Jews were now a large enough group to no longer have any practical need for it.) it was up to the leader of Shimon to protest. For up until this point it appears that there was an unspoken agreement between these two tribes to take difficult stands when such was called for; they had continued in their zealotry even though their actions had been challenged by their father twice (Bereshit 34:30 and Bereshit 49:5-7).
ואל ימות ויהי מתיו מספר, may he not die out in this life on earth so that his numbers will become too insignificant. (Yaakov already described people who are few in numbers as being in danger of being wiped out, Genesis 34,30) Moses prays that the tribe of Yehudah be included in the blessing of Deut. 11,21 “so that you will enjoy many years on the earth, etc.”
Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: “You have brought trouble on me, making me odious among the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and Perizzites. My men are few in number, so that if they unite against me and attack me, I and my house will be destroyed.” Genesis 34:30
At that time we captured all his towns, and we doomed (doomed I.e., placed under ḥerem, which meant the annihilation of the population. Cf. note at Num. 21.2; Josh. 6.24.) every town—men, women, and children (men, women, and children (So NJPS.) Or “combatants, women, and other noncombatants.” Cf. Gen. 34.30; Num. 31.9–18.) —leaving no survivor.
יהוה will scatter you among the peoples, and only a scant few of you shall be left among the nations to which יהוה will drive you.
Her (Her I.e., Zion’s; cf. vv. 16, 17; Heb. “your.”) men shall fall by the sword, Her force, in battle;
Yaakov said to Shimon and Leivi, You have made trouble for me, making me obnoxious to [putting hatred between us and] the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites. [Since] I am few in number, they will gather together and attack me. I and my house [family] will be destroyed.
And Jakob said to Shimeon and Levi, You have made my name to go forth as evil among the inhabitants of the land, among the Kenaanites and Phezerites. And I am a people of (small) number, and they will gather together against me, and destroy me and the men of my house.
| וַיֹּאמְר֑וּ הַכְזוֹנָ֕ה יַעֲשֶׂ֖ה אֶת־אֲחוֹתֵֽנוּ׃ | 31 J | But they answered, “Should our sister be treated like a whore?” |
?הכזונה יעשה את אחותנו, ,“is he (Sh’chem) to be allowed to treat our sister as if she were a harlot?” Rashi explains the word את in this phrase as emphasising the singular mode as the word אחותנו, occurs several times in the Bible in the plural mode although not spelled in the plural mode with the letter י. [In Aramaic it would then have to be spelled אחותנא instead of אחתנא.
AND THEY SAID. Simeon and Levi.
SHOULD ONE DEAL WITH OUR SISTER AS WITH A HARLOT. Should Shechem deal with our sister as with a harlot. (The subject is missing in the sentence, hence I.E.’s comment.)
ויאמרו הכזונה יעשה את אחותינו, They said: "Should we have let him treat our sister like a harlot?" We need to understand how such a reply could have had any bearing on Jacob's concern for the survival of his family in a possible confrontation with the other Emorites in the region? After all, Jewish law provides that if the surrender of a specific individual is demanded by enemy forces as a condition to save the lives of the remaining prisoners, then such an individual must be surrendered (Jerusalem Talmud Terumah chapter eight) in order to save the lives of all the people who this individual is part of. There is no requirement for all the people to become martyrs even if the alternative is the commission of a serious crime of ערוה, incest or other sexual crime. Seeing that this is so before such a sin has been committed, it is all the more so after the crime has already been committed and cannot be reversed!
Perhaps the brothers merely wanted to calm the fears of their father saying that a confrontation with the Emorites would be a real danger only if they had killed the people of Shechem without an adequate reason. Under the circumstances, when kidnapping and rape had been committed, they did not think the other Emorites would raise much of a fuss. Legally speaking, of course, Shechem had not been guilty of harlotry seeing Dinah had been unattached at the time. Categories of sexual intercourse forbidden to the Gentiles include only homosexuality, adultery, bestiality, and intercourse with the sister of the same mother.
It is also possible that the brothers considered their action as one that would serve notice on the Emorites not to take liberties with their family. Having seen what happened to an individual who used violence against a member of Jacob's family, the Emorites would take this to heart and be forewarned of the consequences of such deeds in the future.
הכזונה יעשה את אחותנו, “is our sister to be treated like a whore?” Rashi wrote כתרגומו ית אחתנא, but I have not been able to understand what he had in mind.
?ויאמרו הכזונה, is Shechem to be allowed to treat our sister as if she were a harlot, and we should not avenge the shame she was subjected to?
הכזונה implies as one unprotected.
אחותנו The Targum renders it as an accusative — ית אחתנא “our sister”,) so that the meaning is: Should one (be permitted to) make our sister become as a woman who has no-one to protect her (Genesis Rabbah 80:12).
?הכזונה, only a harlot does not have anyone standing up in her defense, avenging violence done to her. יעשה, “shall the people who you are afraid of rising up against us be allowed to get away with such conduct? את אחותנו, who was not a harlot. It is incumbent upon us to avenge her disgrace. Once the inhabitants of the region will understand this they will have no reason to attack us.”
Abandoned. Rashi is answering the question: Only a woman who willingly abandons herself to relations with any man is called a harlot. If so, how could Shechem possibly make her a harlot, when she did not willingly abandon herself? Thus Rashi explains [that here it means] “abandoned.” I.e., Shechem acted as if she was [property that has been] abandoned.
To our sister. Rashi is answering the question: Perhaps הכזונה should be interpreted as missing a ב, as if it said הכבזונה עשה את אחותינו? Then it would mean, “Should he do with our sister as one does with a harlot?” Accordingly, זונה would indeed mean harlot, [contrary to Rashi’s explanation of “abandoned”]. Therefore Rashi cites Onkelos who translates [את as] ית, proving that it does not mean “with.” This explains why Rashi said that הכזונה means “abandoned.”
They, the two sons, said: Shall he render our sister as a harlot? Simeon and Levi argue that the marriage proposal presented by Hamor and Shekhem was disingenuous. They refused to come to terms with the treatment of their sister as merchandise in a financial deal.
The kind of tolerance G-d displays depends on who He needs to relate to. In the first instance there are the spiritual, completely disembodied beings inhabiting the "upper" world, who are closest to Him. Since these beings by their very nature are close to perfection, tolerating them does not require a major effort on G-d’s part. Also the bodies in outer space whose regular and constant orbit represent service of G-d on a non-stop basis, do not require a great deal of tolerance on the part of G-d. These heavenly bodies, which provide the four basic raw materials for our physical universe, in a sense support this earth. At the time of the garden of Eden being at man's disposal, G-d had a home in the material universe because His spirit was present within man. This was the connection between the worlds above the rakiyah, firmament, and the world "below." Both harbored the Divine spirit. The commandment, "Do not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil," meant "do not become engrossed in the material world except to the extent of doing good. Engrossing yourself in evil will make you part of this finite world, make you mortal." Since we have defined mavet, death, as being equal to ra, evil, and chayim, life, as being equal to tov, good, it is quite clear that contact with ra is contact with death (Deut. 30,15, compare our Chapter 7). Breaking this commandment, then, had to result in the Shechinah, G-d’s Presence withdrawing. Shechinah cannot associate with death; since there did not remain any immortal human beings on earth, there was no alternative but to withdraw to a level further removed from earth. At this point, the author describes successive withdrawals of G-d from different planets in outer space as being connected with the individual functions of these planets in our world. Abraham made up for the commandment that Adam had transgressed, by taking upon himself to command his offspring to observe the commandments of the Lord. G-d acknowledged this when He said, "As a result of Abraham having listened to My voice etc." (Genesis 26,5). Isaac repaired the damage done by Cain who had committed murder, when he voluntarily submitted to the command of His Creator, in contrast to Cain who had acted as if there were no judge or judgment in the world. His deed was acknowledged when the angel instructed Abraham, "Do not lay a hand on the lad, do not touch him" (Genesis 22,12). Jacob, who had been able to prevail on all his children to remain loyal to G-d and to proclaim His Unity when they said, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our G-d is One," enabled G-d to return His Presence still closer to earth. Jacob had thus repaired the damage done by Enosh who had been the first to introduce the concept of G-d not being One. When Levi appeared, risking his life to avenge the shame of the rape of his sister Dinah, he repaired the damage done by the generation of the deluge, who had practiced immorality, incest etc. Kehot was the leader of the Jewish people when the latter were forced to commence performing slave labor for the Egyptians. The Jews who had been singled out for this cruel treatment, because they had failed to assimilate to the Egyptians, maintained a profile of being different by keeping their Hebrew names, language, and religion in spite of persecution suffered. This fact enabled G-d to move still closer to earth, as the damage done by the collective insubordination of the generation that built the tower of Babel had now been repaired. Amram in turn repaired the damage done by the people of Sodom, who through lack of concern for their fellow man, had driven the Shechinah still further away. Amram demonstrated his concern for the future of his nation when he responded to the admonition of his daughter not to stop having children, even at the risk of a baby boy being drowned by the Egyptians. When Moses finally made his appearance, and instead of persecuting the just, stood up against terror, injustice, and "might is right," he repaired what Nimrad/Amrafel had destroyed when he made war against the weak who had not provoked him. G-d was thus able to feel at home again on earth since the counterweight to everything the serpent had helped ruin had appeared on earth, and had made its impact. The Talmud Yevamot 112 says that when Israel stood at Mount Sinai, their "filth" departed from them. What is meant is that they reverted to the state of innocence that existed when Adam had just been created. The book of Exodus deserves to be called the book of redemption, since it tells of the redemption of the Jewish people from a cruel and barbaric fate at the hands of a cruel and barbaric nation. Apart from the physical redemption from slavery, the promise of being given the land of Israel with all its abundant natural wealth, would enable the Jewish people to live a life of ease and to be tested if they would indeed prove obedient to G-d, so that He could allow His Presence to dwell amongst them. Moses’ss accomplishment in restoring G-d’s Presence to earth, made him the intermediary between G-d and His people. To be a good intermediary requires that the intermediary himself feels in harmony with the objectives and methods of the one who has made him intermediary. Such rapport can exist either naturally, or in spite of one's natural inclinations. When Moses was shown a kind of wood that sweetens the waters at Marah (Ex. 15,25), our sages are in two minds about the nature of this wood. Some say that it was sweet wood, and that the resultant sweetening of the waters was a natural process. Others maintain that the wood itself was bitter, in which case the transformation of the waters was miraculous (Mechilta Beshalach). We find that G-d employs both kinds of agents as leaders of the Jewish people at different times. Gideon, who abandoned his preoccupation with salvaging his harvest, and who challenged the angel about G-ds apparent abandonment of His people, demonstrated selflessness and lack of concern with his private business to such an extent that the angel could say to him "go forth with this strength of yours and save the Jewish people." (Judges 6,14) He succeeded because he possessed the major ingredient needed for leadership. The reverse may be the case when the emissary of G-d is motivated by a feeling of obedience to G-d, but lacks the characteristics that put him in harmony with the purpose of his Sender. When attacking Amalek, Saul allowed considerations of economic gain to persuade him not to kill the best of the herds; he also displayed pity just when G-d had forbidden pity. This led to tragic results for his dynasty (Samuel I Chapter 15). His downfall can be traced not to lack of basic obedience, but to internal conflict between his own aims and methods, and G-ds aims and methods. Therefore, G-d looked for another man, David, who would be in tune with His objectives heart and soul, and who is held up as a model human being whose inner strivings coincide with G-d’s. When Jerobam is chastised by Achyah (Kings I 14,8-9), the point emphasized is that he failed to be with G-d "like My servant David, who observed My commandments, who followed Me with his whole heart to do only what is right in My eyes." This same David describes his own world outlook in Psalms 139,20 in the following words, "Those who hate You O G-d, I hate, and those who rebel against You, I quarrel with." When the Messiah is described, three characteristics are described as essential (Psalms 72,12-14). "For he will deliver the defenseless man who cries, and the poor who has no helper; he will care for those who have been brought low." "He will redeem their souls from malice and violence, and their blood will be precious to him." Our Parshah tells us that Moses possessed the qualities enumerated in Psalms and that therefore he was the ideal intermediary and saviour for Israel. When Moses, on his first outing to his brethren, saw an Egyptian torture a Jew, he could not stand this and he slew the Egytian. This corresponds to the line, "He will deliver the defenseless man who cries out." On the second day, when he observed injustice being perpetrated among his Jewish brethren, he stood up for the victim, the defenseless, as he did when he helped the daughters of Yitro at the well. In each case he risked his life or safety. Despite his disappointing experiences, he continued to involve himself in other peoples' problems. It is clear then that with the advent of Moses, G-d had found the person who was likely to lead the Jewish people successfully.
They did not speak with her after Shekhem took her and abused her. And they did not even ask what she wanted, as it is stated, And Chamor and Shekhem his son they killed by the sword, then they took Dinah from Shekhem’s house and went off (Genesis 34:26). And they did not speak to her after she conceived, as is it stated, But they said, "Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot" (Genesis 34:31); will they say in the whole land that there is a wanton woman in the tents of Jacob?!"
“Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have troubled me, to render me loathsome to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizites, and I am few in number; they will mobilize against me and smite me, and I and my household will be destroyed” (Genesis 34:30). “They said: Shall he render our sister as a harlot?” (Genesis 34:31). “Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have troubled me” – the Rabbis said: [Jacob said:] ‘The barrel was clear, and you rendered it murky. There is a tradition of the Canaanites, that they are destined to fall into my hands; however, the Holy One blessed be He said: Until you multiply and reach six hundred thousand.’ (But because of the action of Simeon and Levi the Canaanites will conclude that Jacob is an immediate threat.) Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [Simeon and Levi replied:] ‘The barrel was murky, and we rendered it clear.’ They said: ‘“Shall [he render our sister] a harlot?”’ – they said: ‘What, will they treat us as worthless people?’ Who caused it? “Dina…went out.”
“Like troops of robbers waylay a man, a company of priests murders its way to Shekhem, for they have formulated a plot” (Hosea 6:9). Just as these robbers sit on the way, kill people, and take their wealth, so, Simeon and Levi did to Shekhem. But, like “a company of priests”? I wonder. Just as these priests join together at the threshing floor to take their portion, so Simeon and Levi did in Shekhem, as it is stated: “Murders its way to Shekhem” – it was proper for Simeon and Levi to have killed in Shekhem. “Shall [he render our sister] a harlot?” (Genesis 34:31) – they said: ‘What, will they treat us as worthless people?’ Who caused it? “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.”
Simeon and Levi were moved by a great zeal on account of the immorality, as it is said, "And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?" (Gen. 34:31). And each man took his sword and slew all the men of Shechem. When Jacob heard thereof, he became sorely afraid. For he said: Now all the people of the land will hear, and they will gather together against me || and smite me. He began to curse the wrath of his sons, as it is said, "Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce" (Gen. 49:7); and he also cursed their sword in the Greek language, for he said: "Weapons of violence are their swords" (Gen. 49:5). All the kings of the earth heard (thereof) and feared very much, saying: If two sons of Jacob have done all these great things, if they all band themselves together, they will be able to destroy the world. And the dread of the Holy One, blessed be He, fell upon them, as it is said, "And the terror of God was upon the cities,… and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob" (Gen. 35:5).
And Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, heard all these words which Hidekem and his brothers had spoken, as also the answer of Hamor and his son, Shechem, and all the people of their city. And Dinah sent hastily one of her maidens, which her father had sent to take care of her in the house of Shechem, to Jacob and his sons. And the maid servant went and spoke all their words to: Jacob and his sons, saying: Such was Hidekem's advice, and such the answer of Hamor, and Shechem, and the people of their city. And when Jacob and his sons heard these words they became filled with wrath, and they were furious and their anger burnt within them. And Simeon and Levi said: As the Lord liveth there will not be left of them to-morrow a remnant. And twenty young men had also concealed themselves and they were not circumcised, and these young men fought against Simeon and Levi, and Simeon and Levi killed eighteen of them. And two of them fled and escaped into the slime pits that were in the city, and Simeon and Levi searched for them but they could not find them. And Simeon and Levi went further into the city and they killed all the people of the city at the edge of the sword, and there was not left a remnant. And there was a great tumult in the city, and the cry of the people of the city ascended to the very heavens, and the women and children cried terribly. And Simeon and Levi smote the whole city, they left not one male person in the entire city. And Hamor and his son, Shechem, they slew, also, at the edge of the sword, and then they led away Dinah from the house of Shechem, and went away. And then the sons of Jacob returned among the slain and took all the spoil that was found in the city and in the field. And while they were engaged in taking the spoil, some three hundred women stood up throwing dust at them and pelting them with stones, and Simeon turned at them and slew them all with his sword. And Simeon returned unto Levi, and they came into the city and they took also their sheep and oxen and all the cattle and the rest of the women and children, and they opened the gates and went out and came to their father in triumph.
Since the commission of even such a "shade of an impropriety" can harm the public image of someone perceived as a צדיק, Jacob had to be punished. Dinah was raped, i.e. became someone's sex partner without benefit of the holy state of matrimony. Her brothers described such relations as only being conducted with a harlot, i.e. that only harlots were sexually violated (34, 31). The episode in which Reuben is described as having slept with Bilhah (35, 22) is also perceived as an indirect result of the flaw in Jacob's piety discovered by the guardian angel of Esau.
Then comes the terrible episode of the rape and abduction of Dina. Simeon and Levi, Jacob’s second and third sons, rescue her, but at the brutal cost of the killing of all the males of Shechem, and the looting of all their property. Jacob, appalled, rebukes them, but they are unapologetic: “Should he have treated our sister like a prostitute?” (Gen. 34:31).
Jacob is horrified. “You have made me odious to the people of the land,” he says (Gen. 34:30). What then were we supposed to do, ask the two brothers? “Should we have left our sister to be treated like a prostitute?” (Gen. 34:31). With that rhetorical question, the episode ends and the narrative moves elsewhere. But Jacob’s horror at the action of his sons does not end there. He returns to it on his deathbed, and in effect curses them:
נשיא בית אב לשמעוני, “prince of a father’s house of the Shimonites.” He was one of five such princes of the tribe of Shimon (Ibn Ezra). Concerning him Solomon said in Kohelet 10,8: “he who breaks down a wall will be bitten by a snake.” The ancestral father, Shimon, had killed the people of Shechem for treating his sister like a whore (Genesis 34,31) and now one of his descendants had himself become guilty of tearing down the wall of chaste sexual mores established and defended by his forebear (Tanchuma Pinchas 2).
His concubine strayed away from him She strayed away from his home to the outside. The word זְנוּת, "promiscuity," always denotes departure—"One who departs to the outside," (This is Targum Yonasan’s rendition of זוֹנָה, “promiscuous woman.”) who leaves her husband and loves another.
Genesis 33:18-34:31
“Yaakov came home in peace to the city of Shekhem” (33:18) continues the theme of resolution. Not only has Esav accepted his gift, but Yaakov has arrived home safely, in fulfillment of his prayer in 28:21. Like Avraham he purchases land; again like him he builds an altar. Chap. 34, however, shatters the newly created atmosphere of security and peace (“peaceably disposed” in v.21 is a bitter twist). Whereas Avraham and Yitzhak had been able to conclude treaties with the inhabitants of Canaan, Yaakov winds up in the opposite position. The text implies, as usual, that Canaanite sexual behavior is odious (v.7, “such [a thing] is not to be done!”), and this provides the spring for the action. Interestingly, Yaakov’s sons act somewhat like their father had, “with deceit” (v.13); and love once again leads to an unfortunate end. The vengefulness and brutality of Yaakov’s sons in this story anticipates their later behavior in the Yosef story (Chap. 37); surprisingly, it is for the present crime and not the sale of Yosef that their father condemns them on his deathbed (49:5–7). The chapter is notable for the latitude it allows its characters to express their thoughts and emotions: Shekhem’s desire and love, the sons’ anger and cunning, the Hivvites’ gullibility and greed, and Yaakov’s fear. Like other stories in the Yaakov cycle, it presents us with a somewhat ambiguous situation, where right and wrong are not always simple and the putative heroes are not always heroic.
Startlingly, the narrative doesn’t end there. Simeon and Levi had the last word: “Shall our sister be treated like a whore?” (Genesis 34:31).
They said, Should he make our sister [be treated] into a harlot [like one who goes outside]?
The two sons of Jakob answered together, and said to Israel their father, It would not be fit to be said in the congregations of Israel, in their house of instruction, that the uncircumcised polluted the virgin, and the worshippers of idols the daughter of Jakob; but it is fit that it be said in the congregations of Israel and in their house of instruction, that the uncircumcised were put to death for the sake of the virgin, and the worshippers of idols because they had defiled Dinah the daughter of Jakob. And Shekem bar Hamor will not boast in his heart and say, As a woman who hath no man to avenge her injury, so hath Dinah the daughter of Jakob been made. And they said, As an impure woman and an outcast would he have accounted our sister.
And Shimeon and Levi answered, It would not have been fit to be said in the congregations of Israel that the uncircumcised polluted the virgin, and the worshippers of idols debased the daughter of Jakob: but it is fit that it should be said, The uncircumcised were slain on account of the virgin, and the worshippers of idols on account of the daughter of Jakob. Shekem bar Hamor will not (now) deride us with his words; for as a whorish woman and an outcast who hath no avenger would he have made our sister, if we had not done this thing.
| וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֔ב ק֛וּם עֲלֵ֥ה בֵֽית־אֵ֖ל וְשֶׁב־שָׁ֑ם וַעֲשֵׂה־שָׁ֣ם מִזְבֵּ֔חַ לָאֵל֙ הַנִּרְאֶ֣ה אֵלֶ֔יךָ בְּבׇ֨רְחֲךָ֔ מִפְּנֵ֖י עֵשָׂ֥ו אָחִֽיךָ׃ | 1 E | God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and remain there; and build an altar there to the God who appeared to you when you were fleeing from your brother Esau.” |
Arise, go up. Yaakov was afraid of reprisals, so Hashem told him to take refuge in Beis Eil, where the lingering sanctity of his previous revelation would protect him. Make an altar there. To express gratitude to Hashem for appearing to him there. If a person neglects to thank Hashem for a benefit, He will not perform a similar one in the future. Who appeared to you. All the while that Yaakov was abroad Hashem did not appear to him in person, but only through an angelץ
קום עלה בית אל, “arise and go to BetEl!” Rashi explains that Yaakov was commanded to keep the vow he had made at the time when he had the dream with the ladder. G-d implied that if he had not delayed keeping that vow the problem with Dinah would not have befallen him. If you were to argue that Rashi himself, when commenting on Yaakov presenting only eleven of his children before Esau because he was afraid that Esau might violate her, was punished for having failed to seize the opportunity that she might bring him back to the faith of his father? How does this tally with what he writes here? It tallies absolutely! She could not have become the victim of Sh’chem if Esau would have expressed a desire for her. [I do not see a problem at all. If Yaakov thought he had to protect her from his own brother, why was Dinah not chaperoned and allowed to leave the house on her own and roam amongst Canaanites?Surely this was an additional act of neglect by her father, who was punished here for this act of neglect. Ed.]
קום עלה בית אל, "Arise and proceed to Bet El, and settle there." The reason G'd said that Jacob should settle there though Bet El is in the land of the Canaanites is to reassure Jacob that he had nothing to fear from the local population.
The meaning could also be that G'd told Jacob to settle in Bet El in preference to his present location near Shechem. He should not settle anywhere until he had built an altar at the site he had experienced the vision of the ladder.
ויאמר אלוקים אל יעקב קום עלה בית אל ושב שם, G’d said to Yaakov: “rise and move to Bet-El and settle down there.” The meaning of the word ושב, in this instance is “let your mind come to rest.” He was to erect an altar to G’d there when he had recovered from his disturbed frame of mind. The fact that G’d appeared to him would contribute to Yaakov’s recovering his peace of mind.
ויאמר אלוקים, an angel appeared to him while he was at Shechem and told him to proceed to Bet El, and to redeem his vow there. Regarding the words of the angel: ושב שם, “and settle down there!,” this did not mean that Yaakov was to settle there permanently, but that he was to remain there long enough to build the house of G’d which he had undertaken to do as part of his original vow. The angel on this occasion hinted that Yaakov’s “dream” with the ladder had in fact been more than a dream, it had been the first vision of the Divine he had experienced. The incident with Dinah’s rape and the subsequent upheaval had delayed Yaakov’s progress in the direction of his father’s home. Yaakov’s having built himself a house in Sukkot and his purchase of real estate had given the impression that he intended to settle in that vicinity permanently. His duty at that time had been to proceed to Bet El and to pay his vow of 34 years ago. He was supposed to proceed directly in the direction of his father’s home without allowing himself to be distracted on the way. Having failed to do this, G’d punished him with the incident involving Dinah. Even though we explained that Yaakov’s punishment was due to his having experienced fear in spite of repeated assurances by G’d that He would be with him, this delay he had allowed himself was an additional reason for his being punished.
לא-ל הנראה אליך, a reference to what he saw in his dream when G’d appeared to him to be standing on top of the ladder (28,13). At this juncture, the angel addressing him told him to build there an altar to the attribute of G’d Who had appeared to him at that location. The reason for the angel adding: בברחך, “when you were fleeing, etc.,” was a reminder to him that at that time he had been all alone and that G’d had given him His assurance that He would look after him and would bring him back to the land of Canaan. Seeing that G’d had kept His promise, it was now Yaakov’s turn to keep his vow.
GO UP TO BETH-EL AND ABIDE THERE, AND MAKE THERE AN ALTAR. I do not know the significance of the expression, and abide there. Now it is possible that G-d commanded him to abide there at first in order to purify the camp from the idols taken from Shechem or from the dead they had touched, similar to, And encamp ye without the camp seven days, (Numbers 31:19. Said to the soldiers who returned from the war against the Midianites.) since they had not yet been commanded concerning the Waters of Sprinkling, (Ibid., 19:17-19. Used in purification from the defilement of touching a dead body.) and afterwards they were to make the altar. But Jacob was zealous in observing the commandment to be purified before he came to Beth-el. It may be that Jacob’s words, And let us arise, and go up to Beth-el, (Verse 3 here.) actually preceded the purification mentioned in the previous verse. And perhaps the command, and abide there, means that he was to direct his thought to cleaving to G-d. (See Ramban, Deuteronomy 11, for further elucidation of this matter.)
קום עלה ARISE: GO UP [TO BETHEL] — Because you have delayed to fulfil your vow to sacrifice to me at Bethel you have been punished by this trouble of your daughter coming upon you (Genesis Rabbah 81:2).
Das vorangehende Ereignis hatte gezeigt, wie das Zusammenwohnen mit dem kanaanitischen Landeseinwohner die Jakobsfamilie gefährdete. Es hätte auch Jakob wohl nicht sich in solcher Nähe derselben niederlassen sollen, hätte vor allem die Stätte aufsuchen sollen, wo er beim Ausgang aus väterlichem Hause den Grundstein zu seiner Zukunft gelegt und dabei das Gelübde seines Lebens getan, und hätte dann die Heimat aufsuchen sollen, die seine Eltern und Großeltern bereits für die ruhige Entfaltung des abrahamitischen Familienlebens geeignet gefunden hatten, und wo deren geachtetes Andenken auch ihn und die Seinigen schützend umfangen konnte. Zu beiden wird er hier veranlasst. Er zieht zuerst nach Bethel und dann nach Mamre - Kirjat Arba - Chebron. —
ושב שם, bleibe dort, lasse dich dort eine zeitlang häuslich nieder: wohl, um sich und die Seinigen ganz mit dem Geiste zu durchdringen, den die Bedeutung dieser Stelle und die an sie sich knüpfenden Erinnerungen so sehr zu wecken geeignet waren.
ועשה שם מזבח. Er hatte dort eine מצבה zur Erinnerung an das von Gott ihm dort Gewordene errichtet, hatte aber gelobt, die von Gott zu erhoffende Selbständigkeit dazu zu verwenden, diesen Denkstein in ein "Haus Gottes", d. h. in eine Stätte menschlichen Strebens und Schaffens umzuwandeln, das zum Ziele hat, der Gegenwart Gottes auf Erden würdig zu werden. Die Erfüllung dieses Gelöbnisses heißt: einen מזבח bauen, wo bis jetzt nur eine מצבה stand. Und das Ganze heißt: an der Stätte der Gottesoffenbarung sein Haus bauen und dabei einen Altar errichten, heißt: ושב שם ועשה שם מזבח לאל הנראה אליך der מזבח neben dem Hause (vergl. Kap. 28, 17. f .; Kap.38, 20).
ושב שם. An invitation to prepare himself mentally and spiritually before beginning to build the altar that he had in mind to erect. This corresponds to what our sages have described as being the manner in which they prepared for prayer and subsequently unwound before pursuing mundane activities. According to Berachot 30 they spent an hour “gearing up” before commencing their prayers and then spent an hour unwinding before going about the business of earning their daily bread.
ועשה שם מזבח לא-ל הנראה אליך בברחך, in order to give thanks to G’d Who has kept His promise which He gave you on that occasion. We have a long standing tradition that when one passes a location where one had once experienced G’d’s help in a clearly supernatural format one is to recite a special benediction giving thanks to G’d for having done so, even though the event may have taken place a long time ago. (Berachot 54).
Because you lingered on your journey you have been punished... [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why did Hashem need to command him, “Arise, go up [to Beis Eil]”? Yaakov had already vowed to do this! Perforce, Hashem was telling him: Go up quickly and linger no longer. But Yaakov was not punished for lingering in Lavan’s house, because the vow went into effect only when he began to return [home]. For it is written [when he made his vow], “And if I return in peace...” (28:21).
God said to Jacob: Arise, ascend to Beit El, and settle there; and make there an altar to the God who appeared to you when you fled from Esau your brother.
ושב שם ועשה שם מזבח, “and settle there, and erect an altar there.” Nachmanides writes that he does not understand the meaning of the words ושב שם, but he considers it possible that the meaning was that Yaakov should establish a temporary residence at Beyt El before proceeding to erect the altar mentioned in the second half of the verse. The purpose of the altar would be to cleanse themselves of all the ritual impurities connected with various types of idolatry, or the state of defilement incurred through contact with the slain people of Shechem. This is based on the verse (Numbers 31,19) “and you encamp outside the encampment for seven days.” This was necessary as the legislation for such defiled persons to sprinkle water laced with the ashes of the red heifer on themselves, to purify themselves before they could re-enter the camp. had not yet been given. Perhaps G’d commanded Yaakov to shift his focus to matters of a religious nature before building the altar at Beyt El.
“Arise, go up to Bethel” [35:1]. Rashi asks a question here. Why does he have to say, “arise”? This means, stand up and go. He should have said: ascend, go up. The explanation is that the Holy One said to Jacob. You have delayed long enough with your vow that you made that you want to bring an offering. Therefore, stand up and go to Bethel and bring your sacrifice. Because you have tarried long, therefore, you have sinned and your daughter was taken to Shechem with disgrace and transgression. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:1.) Hizkuni asks a question. Rashi wrote above that Jacob sinned and therefore Dinah was taken to Shechem because he did not give Dinah to Esau, Now, Rashi writes that he sinned because he delayed and had not brought an offering. The explanation is that he should not have tarried. As soon as he came from Padan Aram, he should have given Dinah to Esau, in order to make him pious. Jacob tarried in Sukkot and in Shechem and also delayed fulfilling his vow. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 35:1.)
We observe at the end of the Parshah that as soon as Jacob was no longer within the immediate vicinity of the idol worshipping Laban, he is once more surrounded by angels.
But some explanation is still needed. For Jacob's having prevailed against the angel was beneficial in itself, that angel being the heavenly plenipotentiary of Esau, as we are told by our sages (Genesis Rabbah 67:2). His prevailing against him connotes the angel's not contesting Jacob's domination of Esau, but consenting to Isaac's blessing in full, as is implied by (Genesis 32:30): "And he blessed him there." And this is in accordance with our sages' dictum: "The Holy One Blessed be He does not exact payment from a people until He exacts it from its heavenly plenipotentiaries first." But Jacob's grasping Esau in the womb was merely a portent of what was to come and not anything beneficial in itself deserving of mention in the Blessed One's chastisements to Jacob.
Under such circumstances the senses cease to act, and the [Active Intellect] influences the rational faculties, and through them the imaginative faculties, which become perfect and active. Sometimes the prophecy begins with a prophetic vision, the prophet greatly trembles, and is much affected in consequence of the perfect action of the imaginative faculty: and after that the prophecy follows. This was the case with Abraham. The commencement of the prophecy is, “The word of the Lord came to Abraham in a vision” (Gen. 15:1); after this, “a deep sleep fell upon Abraham”; and at last, “he said unto Abraham,” etc. When prophets speak of the fact that they received a prophecy, they say that they received it from an angel, or from God; but even in the latter case it was likewise received through an angel. Our Sages, therefore, explain the words, “And the Lord said unto her” that He spake through an angel. You must know that whenever Scripture relates that the Lord or an angel spoke to a person, this took place in a dream or in a prophetic vision.
Instances of the first form are the following:—“And the angel of the Lord said unto me in a dream, Jacob” (Gen. 31:11); “And an angel said unto Israel in a vision of night” (ibid. 46:2); “And an angel came to Balaam by night”; “And an angel said unto Balaam” (Num. 22:20-72). Instances of the second form are these: “And Elohim (an angel), said unto Jacob, Rise, go up to Bethel” (Gen. 35:1); “And Elohim said unto him, Thy name is Jacob,” etc. (ibid. 35:10); “And an angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time” (ibid. 22:15); “And Elohim said unto Noah” (ibid. 6:13). The following is an instance of the third form: “The word of the Lord came unto Abraham in a vision” (ibid. 15:1). Instances of the fourth form are: “And the Lord said unto Abraham” (ibid. 18:13); “And the Lord said unto Jacob, Return,” etc. (ibid. 31:3); “And the Lord said unto Joshua” (Josh. 5:9); “And the Lord said unto Gideon” (Judges 7:2). Most of the prophets speak in a similar manner: “And the Lord said unto me” (Deut. 2:2); “And the word of the Lord came unto me” (Ezek. 30:1); “And the word of the Lord came” (2 Sam. 24:11); “And behold, the word of the Lord came unto him” (1 Kings 19:9); “And the word of the Lord came expressly” (Ezek. 1:3); “The beginning of the word of the Lord by Hosea” (Hos. 1:2); “The hand of the Lord was upon me” (Ezek. 37:1). There are a great many instances of this class.
“Take the Levites in place of all the firstborn among the children of Israel, and the animals of the Levites in place of their animals; the Levites shall be Mine, I am the Lord” (Numbers 3:45). “Take the Levites…” – our Rabbis said: Why did the Holy One blessed be He command to redeem the firstborn of Israel with the Levites? It is because initially the firstborn were performing the sacrificial service, until the tribe of Levi arose, as our Rabbis taught: Until the Tabernacle was established, private altars were permitted and the sacrificial service was performed by the firstborn. From the establishment of the Tabernacle, private altars were prohibited and the sacrificial service was performed by the priests. ( Zevaḥim 112b.) Know that the firstborn were sacrificing until the tribe of Levi arose; take proof from the beginning of the creation of the world. Adam the first man was the firstborn of the world. When he sacrificed his offering, as it is stated: “May it please the Lord more than a bull with horns and hooves” (Psalms 69:32), he donned the vestments of the High Priest, as it is stated: “The Lord God made for Adam and for his wife hide tunics, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). They were praiseworthy garments, and the firstborn would perform the service in them. When Adam died, he bequeathed them to Seth. Seth gave them to Methuselah. When Methuselah died, he bequeathed them to Noah. Noah arose and sacrificed an offering, as it is stated: “He took from every pure animal…[and offered up burnt offerings]” (Genesis 8:20). Noah died, and he bequeathed them to Shem. Was Shem the firstborn? Was it not Yefet who was the firstborn, as it is stated: “Brother of Yefet the eldest” (Genesis 10:21)? Why, then, did he bequeath them to Shem? It is because Noah foresaw that the line of the patriarchs would be established from him. Know that Shem would sacrifice, as it is stated: “And Malkitzedek (Commenting on this verse, Rashi quotes a midrash (perhaps from Bereshit Rabba 56) that identifies Malkitzedek with Shem the son of Noah.) king of Shalem…[he was a priest of God the Most High]” (Genesis 14:18). Was priesthood granted to him? Priesthood was not given until Aaron stood. What is it that it says here: “He was a priest”? It is because he would sacrifice like priests. Shem died, and he bequeathed it to Abraham. Was Abraham the firstborn? Rather, because he was righteous, the birthright (I.e., the status of firstborn.) was passed to him and he sacrificed, as it is stated: “He offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). Abraham died, and bequeathed it to Isaac. Isaac arose and gave it to Jacob. Was Jacob firstborn? It is, rather, that you find that Jacob took it from Esau cunningly. He said to him: “Sell me your birthright today” (Genesis 25:31). Do you think, perhaps, that it was for nothing that Jacob said to Esau that he should sell him the birthright? No. It is, rather, that Jacob sought to sacrifice, but he could not because he was not a firstborn. Esau said: What do I want with this birthright, as it is stated: “Esau said: Behold, I am going to die, [and why do I need a birthright]” (Genesis 25:32). At that moment, Ezekiel’s prophecy applied in his regard and said to him: “Surely, you hated blood, and blood will pursue you” (Ezekiel 35:6). Did Esau hate blood? Did he not kill several righteous men, did he not kill several pious men, and it says: “Surely, you hated blood, and blood will pursue you”? Rather, he said to him: ‘Surely, you hated the blood of an offering,’ as he was firstborn, and the firstborn sacrifice. Therefore, “blood will pursue you.” At that moment, when Jacob acquired the birthright, he began sacrificing, as it is stated: “God said to Jacob: Arise, ascend to Beit El…and make there an altar…” (Genesis 35:1). Likewise, when Moses sacrificed at Sinai, it was the firstborns who sacrificed, as it is stated: “He sent the lads of the children of Israel, [and they offered up burnt offerings]” (Exodus 24:5). Who are the “lads”? They were the elite of the firstborn. “They offered up burnt offerings” – you learn that no person would sacrifice other than the firstborn. When Israel performed that deed, (They sinned with the Golden Calf.) they said: Let the firstborn come and sacrifice offerings before it, as it is stated: “They arose early the next day, and they offered up burnt offerings and they presented peace offerings” (Exodus 32:6). God said to them: ‘I promoted the firstborn, and I rendered them prominent in the world, but they rejected Me and arose and sacrificed before the calf. I will remove the firstborn and bring in the children of Levi.’ Therefore, God said to Moses that he should count them, as it is stated: “Count the children of Levi” (Numbers 3:15). Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi said: Who whispered to you that God removed the firstborn from sacrificial rites and appointed the children of Levi, as it is stated: “Take the Levites”? In place of whom? “In place of all the firstborn among the children of Israel, and the animals of the Levites in place of their animals; the Levites shall be Mine, I am the Lord.” The Rabbis said: To what is this matter comparable? To a provincial money changer regarding whom a matter of corruption was attributed. The king knew, and said to his governor, ‘remove him and appoint another in his place.’ Nevertheless, that money changer is found to be obligated to repay a debt. The king said: Let the one who inherited his place repay his debt. So, the firstborn were prominent in the world, but arose and sacrificed before the calf. God said: Let the firstborn depart, and let the children of Levi enter. Nevertheless, the firstborn incurred liability to be eliminated. God said: Let the Levites come and redeem them. Therefore, you find the Levites redeeming the firstborn. That is what is written: “Take the Levites…” “And the animals of the Levites in place of their animals” – because priests and Levites are exempt from redeeming their firstborn, the firstborn of man and the firstborn of a donkey, [the latter of] which is likened by the verse to the firstborn of man, as it is written: “However, you shall redeem [the firstborn of man], and the firstborn of an impure animal you shall redeem” (Numbers 18:15). But they are not exempt from [redeeming] the firstborn of a pure animal, as it is sacred. What is, “the Levites shall be Mine, I am the Lord”? I am trustworthy to pay them a good reward because they sanctified My Name at the time of the calf.
“God said to Jacob: Arise, ascend to Beit El, and settle there, and make there an altar to the God who appeared to you when you fled from Esau your brother” (Genesis 35:1). “God said to Jacob: Arise, ascend…” “It is a snare for a person to spout [yala] sanctity [kodesh]; scrutiny must follow vows” (Proverbs 20:25) – may a curse come upon one who eats consecrated items [kodashim] in his throat [belo’o]. (One who eats consecrated items when he is not permitted to do so is punished. ) Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: May a curse come upon a person who benefits from consecrated items. Consecrated items is [a reference to] none other than Israel, as it is stated: “Israel is sacred to the Lord…” (Jeremiah 2:3). “Scrutiny must follow vows” – Rabbi Yanai said: If a person delays his vow, his ledger is scrutinized. (The midrash asserts that Jacob was punished for delaying the fulfillment of his vow (see Genesis 28:20–22). )
“God said to Jacob: Arise, ascend to Beit El.” “If you were demeaned, it is due to arrogance [behitnaseh]; if you conspired [zamota], put hand to mouth” (Proverbs 30:32). Ben Azzai and Rabbi Akiva, Ben Azzai says: If you demean yourself for matters of Torah, ultimately, you will be exalted [lehitnaseh] through them. If [others] conspired to slander you, place hand to mouth; (Be silent and it will stop.) one knows, two do not know. (If you are silent, most people will not hear of it; if you engage in a battle against the slanderers, everyone will hear of it. ) Rabbi Akiva says: What caused you to be demeaned in matters of Torah? It is because you exalted yourself through them. (You sought to exalt yourself with your Torah knowledge. Consequently, you forgot some of that knowledge, and were embarrassed when you were not able to answer the questions posed to you (Etz Yosef). ) Rabbeinu (Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.) was passing through Simoneya and the people of Simoneya went out to greet him. They said to him: ‘Rabbi, provide us with someone who will teach us Bible, teach us Mishna, and adjudicate our trials.’ He provided them with Rabbi Levi bar Sisi. They built a large platform and seated him upon it, but he was unable to articulate matters of Torah. They asked him three questions. They said to him: ‘A yevama without an arm, how does she perform ḥalitza?’ (Part of the ceremony of ḥalitza involves her removing her brother-in-law’s shoe.) He did not answer them. ‘If she spit blood, what is the law?’ (Spitting is another part of the ḥalitza ceremony.) He did not answer them at all. They said: ‘Perhaps he is not expert in Talmud, but, he is expert in aggada. Let us ask him verses.’ They said to him: ‘What is [the meaning of] that which is written: “However, I will tell you] what is recorded in the script of truth”? (Daniel 10:21). If truth, why recorded, and if recorded, why truth?’ (The term recorded, [rashum], implies something that is written casually and in a temporary manner, and may be erased. But if it is true, it should be written in a permanent manner (Etz Yosef). ) He did not answer them. When he saw his own great distress, he awoke early in the morning and went to Rabbeinu. [Rabbeinu] said to him: ‘What did the people of Simoneya do to you?’ He said to him: ‘Do not remind me of my distress. They asked me three questions and I was unable to answer them.’ He said to him: ‘What are they?’ He said to him: ‘A woman without an arm, how does she perform ḥalitza?’ He said to him: ‘Did you not know how to answer?’ He said to him: ‘Yes, [I know the answer, she may perform ḥalitza] even with her teeth, and even with her body.’ [He told Rabbeinu the second question:] ‘If she spits blood, what is the law?’ He said to him: ‘Did you not know how to answer?’ He said to him: ‘[I know the answer,] even if there was a scintilla of spittle in it, it is valid, but if not, it is not valid.’ [He told Rabbeinu the third question:] ‘“However, I will tell you what is recorded in the script of truth” (Daniel 10:21). If truth, why recorded, and if recorded, why truth?’ He said to him: ‘Did you not know how to answer?’ He said to him: ‘It is recorded before the edict has been decreed; it is truth after the edict has been decreed. What is the seal of the Holy One blessed be He? Rabbeinu said in the name of Rabbi Reuven: Truth [emet]. What is emet? Reish Lakish said: Alef is the first of the letters, mem in the middle, tav at the end, based on the verse: “I am first and I am last…”’ (Isaiah 44:6). [Rabbeinu] said to him: ‘Why did you not answer them as you answered me?’ He said to him: ‘They prepared a great platform and seated me upon it. I became arrogant and I was unable to articulate matters of Torah.’ This verse was read in his regard: “If you were demeaned, it is due to arrogance” (Proverbs 30:32). Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: If you thought in your heart to perform a mitzva, but you did not perform it, it would have been preferable for you to place a muzzle on your mouth and not articulate it. (If one vows to fulfill a mitzva or a positive act and does not do so, one is punished. It is better therefore to leave one’s intentions unarticulated. ) Rabbi Yudan said: Just as your hand is adjacent to your mouth, so, [the fulfillment of] your vow should be adjacent to your mouth. (One may take a vow, but should be careful to fulfill it right away. ) The Rabbis say: Just as your hand precedes your mouth, so, your vow should be before your mouth. (One first takes food in one’s hand and then places it in one’s mouth. Similarly, one should already have the means to fulfill a vow at the time one takes the vow. ) Know that it is so, as Jacob our patriarch, because he delayed his vow, his ledger was scrutinized, (He suffered many difficulties as a result.) as it is stated: “God (The name "God" is understood by the Sages to refer to God when He acts with the attribute of justice. This is in contrast to the name “Lord” which refers to God when He acts with compassion. ) said to Jacob: Arise, ascend to Beit El, and settle there, and make there an altar” (Genesis 35:1). Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: In times of trouble – a vow; in times of relief – it is swept away. (He interprets the verse as criticizing Jacob for taking a vow in his time of need, and neglecting to fulfill it when he experienced relief from his troubles. ) Rabbi Levi said: When your sieve is blocked, bang on it. (This is a metaphor, meant to express that if one forgets to fulfill his vow, one experiences suffering until remembering to do so (Yefeh To’ar). ) The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Jacob, you have forgotten your vow: “Arise, ascend to Beit El” – to the house of God [beit El], “and make there an altar to the God who appeared to you [when you fled from Esau your brother],” and if you do not do so, you are like Esau. Just as Esau vows and does not fulfill, so, you vow and do not fulfill.’
It is written: “Who may ascend the mountain of the Lord? Who may stand…? He who has clean hands…. He will receive the blessing from the Lord…” (Psalms 24:3–5). (These phrases are all interpreted as applying to Jacob. The first, “who may ascend the mountain of the Lord?” is an allusion to the verse: “Arise, ascend to Bet El” (Genesis 35:1) (Etz Yosef; see Midrash Tehillim 24:9). ) It is written: “So said the Lord of hosts, God of Israel: They will again say…the Lord will bless you, abode of righteousness, mountain of sanctity…” (Jeremiah 31:23). (The blessing mentioned in this verse, which refers to the God of Israel, is understood as applying to Jacob, also known as Israel (Etz Yosef). ) It is written: “A man of faith will abound with blessings” (Proverbs 28:20) – this is Jacob. “And one who hastens to become rich will not be absolved” (Proverbs 28:20) – this is Esau. It is written: “The blessing of the Lord, it will enrich” (Proverbs 10:22). “And one who hastens to become rich will not become rich” is not written here, but rather, “will not be absolved” – this is the wicked Esau, who married Yehudit, Basmat, and Maḥalat in order to increase wealth; he will never be cleansed. It is written: “I will cleanse; their blood I will not cleanse” (Joel 4:21) – that is what is written: “For his pursuit of his brother with the sword; and suppressing his mercy” (Amos 1:11). “God appeared to Jacob again, upon his arrival.” Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “You shall craft for Me a stone altar…[I will come to you and I will bless you]” (Exodus 20:21) – the matters can be derived a fortiori: If one who crafts an altar to My name, I appear to him and bless him, Jacob, whose image is fixed on My throne, all the more so. “God appeared to Jacob.” Rabbi Levi began: “And a bull and a ram for a peace offering…[for today the Lord shall appear to you” (Leviticus 9:4) – the matters can be derived a fortiori: If one who sacrifices a ram to my name, I appear to him and bless him, Jacob, whose image is fixed on My throne, all the more so. “God appeared” – “Blessed are you upon your arrival, and blessed are you upon your departure” (Deuteronomy 28:6). Upon his arrival at his father-in-law’s house, he was laden with blessings: “May God Almighty bless you…” (Genesis 28:3), and upon his departure from his father-in-law’s house, he was laden with blessings: “God appeared to Jacob…[and He blessed him].” “Who confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers” (Isaiah 44:26) – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: When He “confirms the word of his servant,” do we not know that He “fulfills the counsel of His messengers”? It indicates that one angel appeared to Jacob our patriarch and said to him: ‘The Holy One blessed be He is destined to appear to you in Beit El and change your name, and I am destined to be standing there.’ That is what is written: “In Beit El He will find us and there He will speak with us” (Hosea 12:5) – “will speak with you” is not written here, but rather, “there He will speak with us.” The Holy One blessed be He appeared to him to fulfill the angel’s words; [and for] Jerusalem, in whose regard all the prophets prophesy, all the more so that He will fulfill the words of His prophets.
(Gen. 35:1:) THEN GOD SAID UNTO JACOB: ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. Let our master instruct us: When one prays, (The particular prayer under consideration is the Tefillah, also known as the ‘Amidah or the “Eighteen Benedictions” (Shemoneh ‘Esreh). This prayer, which ultimately came to contain nineteen benedictions, is recited as part of the daily services.) where should he direct his heart? Thus have our masters taught: One who prays should (according to Ber. 4:5-6) DIRECT HIS HEART TOWARD THE HOUSE OF THE HOLY OF HOLIES. (PR 33:1; also Sifre Deut. 3:26 (29); TBer. 3:14-16; yBer. 4:5 (8bc); Ber. 30a; see Yev. 105b; Cant. R. 4:4:9.) R. Eliezer ben Jacob says: One who prays outside of the land [is to direct his heart towards the land of Israel. One who prays in the land of Israel is to direct his heart toward Jerusalem. One who prays in Jerusalem is to direct his heart toward the Sanctuary. When one prays in the Sanctuary], he is to direct his heart to the House of the Holy of Holies. R. Abbin the Levite said: It is written (in Cant. 4:4): LIKE THE TOWER OF DAVID (i.e., the Temple), YOUR NECK IS BUILT FOR TLPYWT (TURRETS). What is the meaning of FOR TLPYWT? That all mouths PYWT pray through it. (Cf. PR 33:1: “The hill (TL) towards which all mouths (PYWT) turn.” This explanation succeeds in accounting for all the letters in TLPYWT.) [R. Judah the Levite said: It is written (in I Kings 6:17): THAT IS THE TEMPLE LPNY. What is the meaning of LPNY? That all the faces (PNYM) turn to (The Buber text here reads B (“in,” “on,” “by means of,” etc.). A more likely reading is that of the Hebrew Bible, i.e., L (“to” or “toward”), which accounts for the L in LPNY.) it.] The Holy One said: Everyone is going to and yearning for my house. Are you not going there? (Gen. 35:1) ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. (BETHEL means “the house of God.”)
It is written (in Ps. 50:14): SACRIFICE A THANK OFFERING TO GOD. When Jacob left his father's house, he left with nothing but his staff, as stated (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): WITH ONLY MY STAFF I CROSSED THIS JORDAN. Immediately Jacob had made a vow before the Holy One, as stated (in Gen. 28:20): THEN JACOB VOWED A VOW. What is written at the end of the passage (in vs. 22)? AND OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME. But, when he enriched him, as stated (in Gen. 30:43): SO THE MAN (Jacob) BECAME VERY VERY PROSPEROUS, he forgot his vow. Immediately he provoked Laban against him, as stated (in Gen. 31:23): SO HE (Laban) TOOK HIS RELATIVES WITH HIM < AND PURSUED HIM (Jacob) SEVEN DAYS' JOURNEY >. When he had escaped from Laban, Esau was incited against him. Immediately the angel appeared to him. He said to him: Are you not aware of all this trouble? Why has all the trouble come over you? Because you have been late with your vow. Jacob said to him (in Gen. 32:30 [29]) {WHAT IS} [PLEASE TELL] YOUR NAME. He said to him (ibid.): WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? Sometimes the angel is made into a spirit, as stated (in Ps. 104:4): HE HAS MADE HIS ANGELS SPIRITS. Sometimes he is made a into lightning bolt, as stated (in Job 38:35): CAN YOU SEND FORTH LIGHTNINGS SO THAT THEY GO? But as for the miracles (of transformation), he (God) acts himself. And so the angel said to Manoah (in Jud. 13:18): YOU ARE NOT TO ASK MY NAME. (Gen. 32:30 [29]:) WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? (Yalqut Shim‘oni, Jud., 69, explains that names are useless because the angel would not know into what form God might change him.) Immediately the angel blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE BLESSED HIM THERE. (Hos. 12:5 [4]:) SO HE STROVE WITH AN ANGEL AND PREVAILED. What did he say to him? Go, fulfill your vow. (Eccl. 5:4 [5]:) IT IS BETTER NOT TO VOW < THAN TO VOW AND NOT FULFILL >. What did Simeon and Levi do immediately? TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, [SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD] … < AND KILLED EVERY MALE >. < Jacob > immediately fell on his face and did not get up until < the Holy One > gave him permission (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. So also with Joshua (according to Josh. 7:6 & 10): [AND HE FELL ON HIS FACE] < .. . > THEN THE LORD SAID UNTO JOSHUA: ARISE, GO. WHY IS IT THAT YOU FALL UPON YOUR FACE? So also with David (according to I Chron. 21:16): SO DAVID AND THE ELDERS, COVERED IN SACKCLOTH, FELL UPON THEIR FACES. Then what was said to him (in II Sam. 24:18)? GO UP, ERECT AN ALTAR TO THE LORD ON THE THRESHING FLOOR OF ARAUNAH. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. He immediately journeyed with his whole house; and the Holy One put his fear upon all about him, as stated (in Gen. 35:5): AND, AS THEY JOURNEYED, A TERROR FROM GOD CAME < UPON THE CITIES THAT WERE ROUND ABOUT THEM >. It is also stated (in Deut. 28:10): AND ALL THE PEOPLES OF THE EARTH SHALL SEE THAT THE NAME OF THE LORD IS PROCLAIMED OVER YOU, AND THEY SHALL BE AFRAID OF YOU.
< Once > When he went away from his father's house, as stated (in Gen. 28:13): AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD OVER HIM. Once with Laban (in Gen. 31:3): < THEN THE LORD SAID UNTO JACOB > : RETURN UNTO THE LAND OF YOUR ANCESTORS. Once (in Gen. 35:1): < THEN GOD SAID UNTO JACOB >: ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. Once (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN. And once (in Gen. 46:2,4): THEN GOD SPOKE TO ISRAEL AND SAID…. I MYSELF WILL GO DOWN WITH YOU….
And God said unto Jacob: “Arise, go up to Beth-El” (Gen. 35:1). May our master teach us: How many times is a man’s “account book” (The heavenly ledger wherein man’s deeds are recorded.) open? Thus did our masters teach us: A man’s account book is opened three times: when he journeys alone upon a highway; when he resides in a dilapidated house; when he vows and fails to fulfill. R. Aha the son of Jacob deduced the first statement from the biblical verse If harm befall him by the way (Gen. 42:3). R. Eliezer the son of R. Yosé the Galilean stated: If you should discover that a righteous man is setting out on a journey, leave even three days earlier or three days later in order to travel with him. But if you should see a wicked man setting out on a journey, leave three days earlier or three days later in order not to go with him, as it is said: Set thou a wicked man over him; and let an adversary stand at his right hand (Ps. 109:6). A righteous man, however, is accompanied by angels of peace, as it is said: For He will give his angels charge over thee (ibid. 91:11).
The Holy One, blessed be He, declared: How long shall this righteous man continue to be punished without comprehending the sin for which he is being afflicted? Indeed, I will inform him. And it is written: God said unto Jacob: “Arise, go up to Beth-El, and dwell there” (Gen. 35:1). R. Aibu said: When your sieve is clogged, strike it. (A proverb telling us that Jacob’s mind had become clogged, causing him to forget his vow, and so God beat upon it by causing him to suffer.) The Holy One, blessed be He, told him: These trials have befallen you only because you have not fulfilled your vow. If you do not wish to experience other afflictions, Arise, go up to Beth-El, dwell there, and erect an altar, at the very place at which you made your vow. I am the God of Beth-El, where thou didst anoint a pillar, where thou didst vow a vow unto Me (ibid. 31:13). R. Abba the son of Kahana stated: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob: When a man has problems he will make a vow, but when he is enjoying ease and comfort he will quickly disregard his vow. When you were in difficulty you made a vow, but after you attained security you forgot it. Then Jacob said unto his household, and to all that were with him: “Let us arise, and go up to Beth-El” (ibid. 35:2–3).
And God said unto Jacob (Gen. 35:1). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: Thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness; evil shall not sojourn with Thee (Ps. 5:5).
Observe what is written: Be in pain, and labor to bring forth, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail; for now thou shalt go forth out of the city and shalt dwell in the field (Micah 4:10). The ketiv (traditional spelling) is “I shall dwell” (rather than the Masoretic “thou shalt dwell” as in the preceding quotation) to indicate that though I shall exile you from its midst, my Shekhinah will not depart from the city. The field mentioned here alludes only to Zion, as it is said: Zion unto a field will be plowed (ibid. 3:12). The Holy One, blessed be He, declared: You shall pray unto me in the direction of the Holy City, and I will hearken from heaven and heal your land. Therefore Jacob said to his sons: Let us arise, and go up to Beth-El. What shall we do there? they asked. And he answered: The Holy One, blessed be He, has commanded me to arise, go up to Beth-El and dwell there.
Another interpretation: Who will ascend? This refers to our father Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 35:1), "Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there." Who will stand? This refers to Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 28:11), "And he encountered the place." Clean of hands. This refers to Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 31:38), "I worked for you for fourteen years." And with a pure heart. This refers to Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 37:3), "For he was the son of his old age." "Who did not lift up my soul in vain." This refers to Laban. And he did not swear to deceive, as it is said (Genesis 31:53), "And Jacob swore by the fear of his father Isaac." He will receive a blessing from the Lord, as it is said (Genesis 35:9-10), "And God appeared to Jacob and blessed him."
In the stories of Jacob, however, the Torah always uses “Lord,” for he was more complete than was Isaac. Thus, unlike Isaac, who had not been as | complete as Abraham, (36. Kaspi says that in the following verses, which refer to Isaac, the memory and merits of Abraham are invoked in order to increase the well-being of Isaac. This indicates that Abraham was the greater of the two.) it is not said of Jacob, “because that Abraham hearkened to my voice,” (37. Gen. 26:5.) or “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” (38. Gen. 26:24.) The exception (where “God” appears in the stories of Jacob) is “the house of God,” (39. Gen. 28:17.) and that is on account of its being followed by “and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob said that because he recognized that the place was conducive to prophecy and perception because of the celestial cause that predominated there, as Ibn Ezra noted. (40. Ibn Ezra says on this verse: “This is the house of God—in which a person can pray in time of need, for his prayer will be heard on account of its being a special place.”) He continued to say, “If God will be with me …” (41. Gen. 28:20.) (using ’Elokim) in accordance with the opinion of our Torah that the world of Separate Intelligences is the first cause. (42. As explained above, ’Elokim refers to the upper two worlds, which are here referred to by Kaspi as ha-sekhel ha-nifrad (“the separate intellect”), which as an entity influences the events of the sublunar world below them.) The proof of this is provided by the opening verse of the Torah, “In the beginning God created …” as I have explained. (43. See above chap. II, n. 1.) When Jacob’s wives speak, and when Jacob speaks to them, they mention “God,” (44. Gen. 31:5, 9, 11, 16.) for that is appropriate for them, as we have already mentioned. This is especially the case as they are the daughters of (the pagan) Laban, as is proved by Rachel when she coveted the teraphim. (45. Gen. 31:19.) When on occasion they do mention “Lord,” (46. Gen. 29:32–33, 30:24.) it is only because they learnt this from Jacob. Notice the precision regarding Laban when the Torah says, “and God came to Laban,” (47. Gen. 31:24.) similar to what was written of Abimelech, (48. Gen. 20:3.) in accordance with his confused belief in the power of the Heavenly Sphere and that of the imagination. Laban said to Jacob, “the God of your father spoke unto me yesternight saying …,” (49. Gen. 31:29.) for how could the god of Laban assist Jacob when (Jacob) did not believe in him. Similarly he said, “the Lord watch between me and thee,” (50. Gen. 31:49.) in accordance with Jacob’s belief. Furthermore Laban made Jacob swear by the Lord, for Jacob feared Him, and not God. In summarizing in conclusion, Laban said, “The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor … judge betwixt us …” (51. Gen. 31:53.) whereas “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.” (52. Ibid.) Jacob uses “God” when saying “and the angels of God met him,” (53. Gen. 32:2.) and “this is God’s camp,” (54. Ibid.) as well as “I have seen God face to face” (55. Gen. 32:28.) and “for thou hast striven with God,” (56. Gen. 32:20.) for all of them are in a prophetic use of the imagination. (57. He means that they take place in a prophetic vision, which with the exception of Moses, necessarily involves the imaginative faculty.) It is similar with “And God said unto Jacob,” (58. Gen. 35:1.) | and “there God was revealed unto him,” (59. Gen. 35:7.) as well as “and God appeared unto Jacob again” (60. Gen. 35:9.) and “where God spoke with him.” (61. Gen. 35:15.)
THIS IS NONE OTHER THAN THE HOUSE OF G-D, AND THIS IS THE GATE OF HEAVEN. This refers to the Sanctuary which is the gate through which the prayers and sacrifices ascend to heaven. Rashi comments, Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra said, ‘This ladder stood in Beer-sheba and its slope (“Its slope.” In our text of Rashi: “the middle of its slope.” Ramban will explain later that the reference is to “the end” of the slope, which is the head of the ladder.) reached unto the Sanctuary in Jerusalem. Beer-sheba is situated in the southern part of Judah, and Jerusalem is to its north on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin, and Beth-el was in the northern portion of Benjamin’s territory, on the boundary between Benjamin’s territory and that of the children of Joseph. It follows, therefore, that a ladder whose base is in Beer-sheba and whose top is in Beth-el has its slope (“Its slope.” In our text of Rashi: “the middle of its slope.” Ramban will explain later that the reference is to “the end” of the slope, which is the head of the ladder.) reaching opposite Jerusalem. Now regarding the statement of our Rabbis that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘This righteous man has come to the place where I dwell, [namely, the Sanctuary in Jerusalem, and shall he depart without spending the night?’], (Chullin 91b.) and with regard to what they also said, ‘Jacob gave the name Beth-el to Jerusalem’ (Pesachim 88b.) this place which he called Beth-el was Luz and not Jerusalem! And whence did they learn to say so, [implying that Luz is identical with Jerusalem]? I therefore say that Mount Moriah [the Temple site in Jerusalem] was forcibly removed from its place and came here to Luz, and this movement of the Temple site is ‘the springing of the earth’ which is mentioned in Tractate Shechitath Chullin. (“The slaughtering of unconsecrated beasts.” This tractate is now generally called Chullin (Unconsecrated Beasts). 91b.) It means that the site on which the Sanctuary was later to stand came towards Jacob to Beth-el. And this too is what is meant by vayiphga bamakom (and he met the place): (Verse 11 here.) [as two people meet, who are moving towards each other]. If you should ask, ‘When our father Jacob passed the site of the Sanctuary [on his way from Beer-sheba to Haran] why did He not detain him there?’ The answer is: If it never entered his mind to pray at the place where his fathers had prayed, should Heaven make him stop there? He had journeyed as far as Haran, as we say in the chapter of Gid Hanasheh, (“The sinew of the hip.” It is the seventh chapter of Tractate Chullin (see Note 18) 91b.) and Scripture itself helps us clarify this point by saying, And he went to Haran. (Verse 10 here.) When he arrived at Haran he said, ‘Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without praying there myself?’ He decided to return and had returned as far as Beth-el, whereupon the ground of the Temple site sprang for him until Beth-el.” All these are the words of the Rabbi. (Rashi. See also Note 139, Seder Bereshith.) But I do not agree with them at all for ‘the springing of the earth’ which the Rabbis mention in connection with Jacob is like that which they have said happened to Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, namely, that he reached Haran in one day. As they have said in Tractate Sanhedrin, (95a.) “The earth sprang for three persons: Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, our father Jacob, and Abishai the son of Zeruiah.” (II Samuel 21:17. In coming to the rescue of David, a miracle occurred, and he reached him at once though he was far away from him.) And the Rabbis explained: “Eliezer, the servant of Abraham — for it is written, And I came this day unto the fountain, (Above, 24:42.) which teaches that on that very day he embarked on his journey. Jacob — for it is written, And he met the place. (Verse 11 here.) When he arrived at Haran he said, ‘Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without praying there myself?’ As soon as the thought of returning occurred to him, the earth sprang for him, and immediately he met the place.” Thus the Rabbis explicitly say that as soon as the thought to return occurred to him in Haran, the earth sprang for him and he met the place where his fathers prayed, but not that he returned to Beth-el, nor that Mount Moriah sprang and came there to Beth-el. In Bereshith Rabbah (59:15.) the Rabbis further equated them both [Eliezer and Jacob] with respect to “the springing of the earth.” Thus they said: “And he arose, and went to Aram-naharaim (Above, 24:10.) — on the very same day. And I came this day unto the fountain (Above, 24:42.) — this day I embarked on the journey, and this day I arrived.” With respect to Jacob the Rabbis interpreted in a similar vein: “And he went to Haran (Verse 10 here.) — the Rabbis say on the very same day.” And furthermore, what reason is there for Mount Moriah to “spring” and come to Beth-el, as Rashi claims, after Jacob had troubled himself to return from Haran to Beth-el, a journey of many days? (If such a miracle was to be performed, why did not Mount Moriah spring all the way to Haran?) Moreover, Beth-el does not lie on the border of the Land of Israel which faces towards Haran for Haran is a land which lies to the east [of the Land of Israel while Beth-el lies in its western part]. (Above, 12:8.) Additionally, the middle part of a ladder is not referred to as its “slope.” (Thus Rabbi Elazar who said that “its slope” reached to the Sanctuary did not refer to its middle, as Rashi has it.) And, finally, what reason is there for the middle of the ladder to be opposite Beth-el, [where, according to Rashi, the side of the Sanctuary had been transported], when the middle part of an object does not possess significance beyond that of its whole? There is, however, another intent to these Midrashim. The Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah, (68:6.) “Rabbi Hoshayah said, ‘It has already been stated, And Jacob hearkened to his father and his mother, and was gone to Paddan-aram. (Above, 28:7.) What then does Scripture teach by repeating, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba? (Verse 10 here.) Rather, the redundancy teaches us that Jacob said, “When my father desired to leave the Land of Israel, at what location did he seek permission for it? Was it not in Beer-sheba? I, too, shall go to Beer-sheba to seek this permission. If He grants me permission, I shall leave, and if not, I shall not go.” Therefore Scripture found it necessary to state, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba.’” (Verse 10 here.) The intent of this Midrash is that the Rabbis were of the opinion that Jacob was blessed by his father in Hebron, the land of his father’s sojournings, and it was to Hebron that he came when he returned to his father from Paddan-aram, as it is said, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, to Kiriath-arba — the same is Hebron — where Abraham and Isaac sojourned. (Further, 35:27.) Now if so, the verse stating, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba (Verse 10 here.) teaches that when his father commanded him to go to Laban (Above, 28:5.) he went to Beer-sheba to receive Divine permission, and that is the place wherein he spent the night and saw visions of G-d, and it was there that He gave him permission to exit from the Land of Israel, even as He said, And I will keep thee wherever thou goest and will bring thee back unto this land. (Verse 15 here.) And the ladder which he saw, in the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, he saw with its feet in Beer-sheba, in the very place where he lay, and with the end of its slope which is the top of the ladder reaching to a point opposite the Sanctuary. It was supported by heaven at the gate through which the angels enter and exit. The revered G-d stood over him, and therefore he knew that Beer-sheba was the gate of heaven, suitable for prayer, and the Sanctuary was the house of G-d. And in the morning Jacob continued his journey from Beer-sheba and arrived at Haran on the same day, and this was “the springing of the earth” mentioned with respect to Jacob. This is the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra who said in Bereshith Rabbah, (69:5.) “This ladder stood in Beer-sheba and its slope reached to the Sanctuary, as it is said, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba; (Verse 11 here.) And he was afraid and said, How fearful is this place.” (Verse 17 here.) And the stone which he erected as a pillar (Verse 18 here.) he did not erect in the place where he slept, for Beer-sheba is not Beth-el and it was in Beth-el that he erected it, and there he went upon his return from Paddan-aram, as it is said, Arise, go up to Beth-el … and make there an altar unto G-d who appeared unto thee, etc. (Further, 35:1.) But he erected it [after carrying the stone from Beth-el to Jerusalem] (Thus comments Rabbi David Luria (R’dal) in explanation of Ramban’s words. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 160.) opposite the slope, at the place where the head of the ladder stood, which he had called the house of G-d, and this is the city which had previously been called Luz. (Verse 19 here.) Thus in the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, Luz was Jerusalem which Jacob called Beth-el. (Verse 19 here.) Possibly this may be so, according to the verses in the book of Joshua. (The source intended is not clear to me. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 160, for further discussion of this matter.) It is certainly true that it is not the Beth-el near Ai (Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz.) for that Beth-el was originally so named in the days of Abraham (Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz.) and prior to that. But Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon differs there (Bereshith Rabbah 69:8.) with Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, and he says: “This ladder stood upon the Sanctuary site and its slope reached to Beth-el. What is his reason? And he was afraid, and said, (Verse 17 here.) etc. And he called the name of that place Beth-el.” (Verse 19 here.) Thus in the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon the verse stating, And he lighted upon the place, (Verse 11 here.) means Mount Moriah. And he tarried there all night, because the sun was set for him not at its proper time [so that he should spend the night there], for as our Rabbis have stated: (Chullin 91b.) “[The Holy One, blessed be He, said], ‘This righteous man has come to the place where I dwell. Shall he then depart without staying there over night?’” And so Jacob saw the ladder with its feet standing in that place, and its slope, which is its top, reached to a point which was opposite that particular Beth-el [which was mentioned in connection with Ai during Abraham’s era], (Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz.) and that was the city of Luz. And Jacob said that the very place where he spent the night was the house of G-d, and the slope of the ladder was the gate of heaven, thus Mount Moriah is excellent for prayer, and Beth-el also is a suitable place for the worship of G-d. And he erected the pillar in Beth-el, for in the opinion of all Rabbis he erected it opposite the slope of the ladder. The opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon, [i.e., that Jacob slept on Mount Moriah, and he erected the pillar in Beth-el], is in agreement with the Midrash in the Gemara of the chapter concerning Gid Hanasheh, (“The sinew of the hip.” It is the seventh chapter of Tractate Chullin (see Note 18) 91b.) and that of Chapter Cheleck, (“Portion,” i.e., in the World to Come. This is the tenth chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin, 95b.) which states that Jacob left Beer-sheba and came to Haran, and when he reconsidered and decided to return and pray at Mount Moriah, the place where his fathers had prayed, then the earth “sprang” for him and he lighted immediately upon Mount Moriah. Perhaps it is the Rabbis’ opinion that the earth “sprang” for him both when going from Haran to Mount Moriah and when returning from Mount Moriah to Haran. This would be in agreement with the opinion of the Rabbi who says: (Bereshith Rabbah 68:9.) “And he went to Haran (Verse 10 here.) — on the same day. And he lighted upon the place (Verse 11 here.) — at once, very suddenly.” I found it more explicitly in Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol: (Chapter 35.) “Jacob was seventy-seven years of age when he left his father’s house, (He was sixty-three when he was blessed by his father (Megillah 16 a), and for the following fourteen years he was secluded in the house of Shem and Eber for the purpose of studying Torah. This makes Jacob seventy-seven years old when he left Haran. The Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer refers to it as “when he left his father’s house,” but the intent is as explained. (Rabbi David Luria.)) and he followed the well that travelled before him from Beer-sheba to Mount Moriah, a two-day journey, and he arrived there at midday, etc. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, ‘Jacob, you have bread in your travelling-bag, the well is before you, enabling you to eat and drink and lie down in this place.’ Jacob replied, ‘Master of all worlds, the sun has yet to descend fifty stages, and shall I lie down to sleep in this place?’ Prematurely, the sun then set in the west. Jacob looked and saw that the sun had set in the west, so he tarried there all night, because the sun was set. (Verse 11 here.) Jacob took twelve stones from the stones of the altar upon which his father Isaac had lain bound as a sacrifice (Above, 22:9.) and put them under his head. By the fact that his resting-place contained twelve stones, G-d informed him that twelve tribes were destined to be established from him. But then all twelve stones were transformed into one stone to inform him that all twelve tribes were destined to become one nation in the earth, as it is said, And who is like Thy people, like Israel, a nation one in the earth? (II Samuel 7:23.) In the morning Jacob awoke with great fright, and said, ‘The house of the Holy One, blessed be He, is in this place,’ as it is said, And he was afraid, and said: How fearful is this place! (Verse 17 here.) From here you learn that whosoever prays in Jerusalem is considered as if he prayed before the Throne of Glory, for the gate of heaven is open there to receive the prayer of Israel, as it is said, And this is the gate of heaven. (Verse 17 here.) Jacob then wanted to collect the stones [which he had used as a resting-place for his head in order to build an altar], but he found them all to be one stone, and so he set it up as a pillar in that place. Thereupon oil flowed down for him from heaven, and he poured it on top of the stone, as it is said, And he poured oil upon the top of it. (Verse 18 here.) What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? With His right foot He sank the anointed stone unto the depths of the abyss to serve as the key-stone of the earth, just as one inserts a key-stone in an arch. It is for this reason that it is called Even Hashethiyah (The Foundation Stone), (On this stone, the Ark of G-d, which contained the two Tablets of the Law, rested in the Holy of Holies in the Sanctuary in Jerusalem. (Yoma 53b.)) for there is the center of the earth, and from there the earth unfolded, and upon it stands the Temple of G-d, as it is said, And this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be G-d’s house. (Verse 22 here. The use of the present tense in the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer — “and upon it stands the Temple of G-d” — may either be a reference to the remains of the ancient Sanctuary and its environs, which were still visible in the days when the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer was composed, or it may preferably indicate that although the Temple is now in ruins the place thereof is still deemed sacred as in the days when the House of G-d was firmly established on the sacred mountain.) From there he [Jacob] went on his journey, and in the twinkling of an eye he arrived in Haran.” Thus far [extends the quotation from the Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol]. Thus, all Midrashim — despite some minor differences among them — acknowledge that “the springing of the earth” occurred to Jacob through which he travelled a journey of many days in the twinkling of an eye. It is possible that all Midrashim concede to one another, and that on all these journeys of his — when going from Beer-sheba to Haran, when he desired to return to Mount Moriah, and when he left there to go to Haran — the earth “sprang” for him. But there is not one of all these Midrashim which says, as Rashi said, [that Mount Moriah was forcibly removed from its location and was transported to meet him in Beth-el].
והאבן הזאת אשר שמתי מצבה THEN THIS STONE WHICH I HAVE SET UP FOR A PILLAR etc. — Explain it as the Targum translates it: “I shall serve the Lord upon it” This, indeed, he did on his return from Padan-aram, when God said to him, (Genesis 35:1) “Arise, go up to Bethel”. What is stated there? “And Jacob set up a pillar … and he poured out a drink-offering thereon” (Genesis 35:14).
... 37... And it appears to require more explanation: The word, substitution (chalifin), is different than the word, exchange (temurah), in that substitution is a change in the body of the thing, such that another comes in its place, as in "and change your clothes" (Genesis 35:1); whereas exchange is only an emotional change, as in "And they exchanged their glory with the edifice of a bull" (Isaiah 40:31). And the matter is understood.
יהוה appeared to Abram and said, “I will assign this land to your offspring.” And he built an altar there to יהוה who had appeared to him.
Elohim said to Yaakov, Arise, go up to Beis Eil and live there; make an altar there to the Almighty Who appeared [became revealed] to you when you were fleeing from your brother Eisov.
And the Lord said to Jakob, Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there, and make there an altar unto Eloha, who revealed Himself to thee in thy flight from before Esau thy brother.
| וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יַעֲקֹב֙ אֶל־בֵּית֔וֹ וְאֶ֖ל כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר עִמּ֑וֹ הָסִ֜רוּ אֶת־אֱלֹהֵ֤י הַנֵּכָר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּתֹכְכֶ֔ם וְהִֽטַּהֲר֔וּ וְהַחֲלִ֖יפוּ שִׂמְלֹתֵיכֶֽם׃ | 2 E | So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Rid yourselves of the alien gods in your midst, purify yourselves, and change your clothes. |
As it is written concerning Avraham, “the souls they made.” Likewise, it is written (Genesis 37:1), “Yaakov settled in the area of his father’s megurey (dwelling)”; and the Midrash states: This teaches that Yitzchak would make GeiRim (converts)—this is “his father’s meGuRey” (Bereishit Rabbah 84:4). And of Yaakov it is written (Genesis 35:2), “Yaakov said to his family and to those who were with him”—i.e., the converts—“Get rid of the alien gods.”
The esoteric reason for this is as follows: A person who makes a vow must see to fulfill it immediately. Someone who delays in fulfilling his pledge brings about these four measures. This is brought in the Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 37:1), whichlearns this from Yaakov. Because he delayed fulfilling his vow, he came to the aforementioned four things: [i] idolatry: as it is stated, “Get rid of the alien gods” (Genesis 35:2); [ii] immorality: “And Dinah went out…” (ibid. 34:1) ; [iii] bloodshed: in Shekhem (see ibid. 34:25-26) ; [iv] slander: “And he heard the words of Lavan’s sons” (ibid. 31:1).
הסירו את אלוהי הנכר, “remove the alien deities!” This was required in order to avoid giving the impression that prayers or sacrifices were intended for them.
והחליפו שמלתיכם, “Change your garments!” because they were worn when engaging in idol worship.
PUT AWAY THE STRANGE GODS. Heaven forbid that the prophet would live with women who served strange gods. (Our verse reads: Then Jacob said unto his household, and to all that were with him, “Put away the strange gods that are among you.” This implies that his wives had strange gods.) The explanation of this verse will be found in the Torah portion va-yelekh moshe (And Moses went). (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Deut. 31:16.)
AND PURIFY YOURSELVES. Wash your bodies.
AND CHANGE YOUR GARMENTS. From this verse we learn that an Israelite must have a clean body and spotless garments when he goes to pray in a place set aside for worship.
הסירו את אלוהי הנכר, "Remove the foreign gods!" Seeing that Jacob was about to leave the present location he was afraid that perhaps someone would take along trinkets which had served the people of Shechem as idols. Since Jacob's entourage did not include idol worshippers of the local population there had not been anyone who could neutralise these gods before they had come into the tents of Jacob's camp. Once that happened there is no way a Jew can neutralise these gods except by destroying them completely.
Avodah Zarah 43 teaches that when one forces a Gentile to renounce his idol or even that belonging to a friend of his, such renunciation is legally valid. Once the idol has become the possession of a Jew, the only way it can be neutralised is by utterly destroying it. The Talmud distinguishes between adult Gentiles and children, however. The reason Jacob or the brothers did not force the surviving women of Shechem to neutralise these gods may have been that those women were halachically in the same category as children, i.e. that their actions had no validity in law. It is also possible that the sons of Jacob had simply not been careful to differentiate between different kinds of the loot. When they examined it at home it was already too late to do anything about neutralising these objects and making them usable for a Jew. Some of these idols may even have been hidden within other larger vessels which the sons of Jacob had captured. Another possibility is that the gods which had been neutralised in time somehow became mixed with others which had not.
Jacob instructed the members of his household to purify themselves because contact with idols defiles a person. Maimonides writes in Hilchot Avot Ha-Tumah chapter six that any אב הטומאה, source of serious impurity, which confers impurity through touch or through carrying same, not only confers impurity on any person who touches same but also on anyone touching or carrying objects that have been in touch with the person who is אב הטומאה. Accordingly, Jacob was quite right when he instructed his people to purify themselves and their clothing even if not they personally, but only their clothing had been in contact with the idolatrous trinket. Jacob was also very precise in referring to שמלותיכם, your garments. He meant that the garments worn by the people of Shechem at the time they were slain had to be purified also.
You may ask that there should have been no need to change clothing seeing that clothing could have become defiled only through direct contact with the idolatrous object, an אב הטומאה, and even if these garments had been in direct contact with the idolatrous object they could not have conferred impurity on a human being seeing they themselves were not primary sources of impurity. When we read in Psalms 106,28: ויאכלו מזבחי מתים, "they ate sacrifices offered to the dead," the word "dead" is understood to be a reference to idolatry. Idolatry and the dead are equated halachically for the purpose of the transference of impurity. Chulin 3 states that the sword of a slain person is of the same degree of impurity as the person who has been slain with it. [normally it would be of a lesser degree, seeing it is not the original source of that impurity, Ed.] According to Maimonides Hilchot Tum-at met chapter chapter 5 the example of "sword" is applicable to any of the objects that were attached to the slain person at the time he died, including his garments. According to the foregoing the garments of the people of Shechem then were capable of transferring impurity to human beings just as the sword which kills a person.
הסירו את אלוהי הנכר, “remove the alien deities!” These were the various images captured as part of the loot of the town of Shechem which the Torah mentioned as described already by Rashi. In spite of the fact that such artifacts were permissible for use by people prior to the Torah having been given seeing that they had undergone a process of involuntary abandonment by their owners which disqualified them from further use as idols, (Avodah Zarah 52), Yaakov commanded the members of his household to remove these former idols and to sanctify themselves in order for them to qualify to serve G’d. This is what is implied in the words: “let us arise and go to Bet-El.” He meant that he would offer a sacrifice there to G’d. Yaakov based himself on a concept found in Kohelet 4,17: שמור רגלך כאשר תלך אל בית אלוקים, “watch your step when you are on the way to the House of the Lord.”
והטהרו, “and become ritually clean!” The verse teaches us that sin itself is called ritual impurity. We have a similar verse in Ezekiel 20,7 where the prophet warns his compatriots ובגלולי מצרים אל תטמאו, “and do not defile yourselves by committing the kind of sins committed by the Egyptians.” On the other hand, anyone who abandons sin is described as ritually pure, as we know from Leviticus 16,30 מכל חטאתיכם לפני ה’ תטהרו, “you will become cleansed (ritually pure) from all your sins against G’d.” Another verse expressing a similar sentiment is found in Joshua 22,17 המעט לנו את עון פעור אשר לא הטהרנו ממנו, “is it perhaps not enough to have committed the sin of Pe-or from which we have not yet been cleansed (completely)?” King David also mentioned such a thought when he said (Psalms 51,9) “Remove my sin by means of hyssop until I am pure.” In verse 4 of the same psalm he said: ”wash me thoroughly of my iniquity so that I may be purified from my sin.”
והחליפו שמלותיכם, “and change your garments!” From this we learn that both they and their garments had become defiled through contact with idolatrous images, or through contact with the bodies of the people who had been slain in Shechem.
אל ביתו, to his children.
ואל כל אשר לו, to his men and maidservants.
הסירו את אלוהי הנכר, the silver and gold the sons of Yaakov had looted from Shechem had idolatrous images engraved upon them, as had the various pieces of jewelry they had taken with them from there. Even though Yaakov’s sons had not taken these items in order to worship them but in order to melt them down and to put them to other uses, i.e. to use the melted down gold and silver, [something halachically acceptable as the idolatrous nature of these artifacts had been nullified through the melt down, Ed.] Yaakov did not want his children or household to benefit from anything which had once served idolatrous purposes although it was no longer recognisable as something that had once served such a purpose. Moses is on record as expressing similar sentiments when he said (Deuteronomy 7,25) “do not covet the silver or gold which was upon them.” (after the idols themselves had already been destroyed) He repeated this sentiment even more strongly in Deuteronomy 13,18 when he said “no part of the banned property may adhere to your hand, etc.” [these injunctions were especially called for after the Israelites had not only been allowed to loot the property of the former owners, but other Torah legislation such as even the eating of pig had been temporarily suspended during the years when the conquered the land of Canaan and had not yet settled there and received their tribal heritage. Ed.]
והטהרו; they needed to purify themselves as contact with idolatrous objects confers ritual impurity on the person who had been in touch with it.
והחליפו שמלותיכם, your garments too have become contaminated by the same ritual impurity so that you have to put on others. Alternatively, what is meant are the garments of the people of Shechem which were part of the loot.
אלוהי הנכר, which they had looted from Shechem.
הנכר [PUT AWAY] THE STRANGE [GODS] —which you have in your possession from the spoil of Shechem.
ותטהרו AND PURIFY YOURSELVES of idol-worship.
והחליפו שמלותיכם AND CHANGE YOUR GARMENTS — lest you have in your possession a vestment that has been employed in idolatrous worship (Genesis Rabbah 81:3).
נֵכָר, das nie für sich allein in der Bedeutung wie נכרי, sondern stets in Verbindung mit einem Stat. constr. vorkommt: אלהי הנכר ,בן הנכר. usw. scheint nicht adjektivisch der Fremde, sondern ein Substant. abstr.: die Fremde zu sein, und zwar sowohl das Ausland im Gegensatz zum jüdischen Lande, als die nichtjüdische Welt und das nichtjüdische Wesen im Gegensatz zur Judenheit und zum Judentum zu bedeuten. Nur einmal in Nehem. 13, 30 heißt es: וטהרתים מכל נכר und scheint dort die entfernten נשים נכריות zu bezeichnen. Es dürfte jedoch auch dort: von allem Ausländischen, allem unjüdischen Wesen bedeuten.
והטהרו והחליפו שמלתיכם, ähnlich dem ויקדש את העם ויכבסו שמלתם, Schmot 19,14. Das Hinaufziehen zu der Offenbarungsstätte des Vaters in Bethel war für die Jakobsfamilie, was für ihre Urenkel die Versammlung am Sinai war.
הסירו את אלוהי הנכר, which you have taken from Shechem. Even though the adherents of these idols had already disowned them, (the surviving females of the city of Shechem), and we know from Avodah Zarah 43, and 52 that such items are subsequently permitted to Jews, Yaakov commanded his household to get rid of them before proceeding to Bet El. He wanted all his people to mentally completely dissociate themselves from anything connected wit items formerly used in idolatrous pursuits.
Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, including his slaves and maidservants: Remove the foreign gods that are in your midst that were looted from Shekhem or belonged to people who accompanied their camp. And furthermore, purify yourselves by immersion in water and change your garments.
The impurity of false deities is of Rabbinic origin. There is an allusion to it in the Torah Genesis 35:2: "Remove the foreign gods that are in your midst. Purify yourselves and change your garments." There are four primary categories of ritual impurity associated with the worship of false deities: the false deities themselves, their accessories, something offered to it, and a wine libation offered to it. The impurity associated with all of these is of Rabbinic origin.
Man attains his ideal state via a threefold process. 1) He must fulfil his duties towards himself. 2) He must fulfil his duties towards his fellow man. 3) He must fulfil his duties towards G'd. The prophet Michah, in chapter six, describes man's tasks as follows: "What is it that the Lord asks of you, except a) to do justice, b) to practice loving kindness, and c) to walk humbly with the Lord your G'd." Duties towards oneself are easily understood, therefore the prophet refers to them by the word mishpat. When Manoach was told about the impending birth of Samson, he asked the angel "what is the mishpat of the boy, and how is he to be treated? (Judges 13,11) He meant "how can one ensure the boy's survival?" Duties towards oneself are to ensure one's survival. Performance of duties towards one's fellow man consists of putting acquired good character traits to practical use. David asked his son Solomon (Chronicles I 28,9) "and you my son Solomon, know the G'd of your father, serve Him with a perfect heart and a willing soul." Our sages display a negative attitude towards people who make vows. Prompt fulfilment of the vow is equated with offering a sacrifice on a private altar at times when private altars are forbidden. (Gittin 56) The reason is that though there clearly is a good intention, the venue is unwelcome. This is so when the subject of the vow is a devar mitzvah, something desirable in the eyes of G'd. When the subject matter of the vow is merely a devar reshut however, i.e. something merely permissible, the vow itself is viewed as reprehensible, since it presupposes that by accepting the gift, G'd indicates His need of it. What could be more laughable? Since vows are subject to annulment, the question why some famous vows have never been annulled is in order. Why was the vow of Yiphtach who offered the life of the first living thing that would come towards him when he would return from war victorious, and which resulted in his own daughter being that sacrifice, not annulled? Our sages blame the pride of both Yiphtach and the High Priest Pinchas. Supposedly, each waited for the other to make the first move. Both were punished for their pride. Pinchas no longer enjoyed the ear of G'd. (Chronicles I 9,20) Yiphtach's body was scattered all over the place, as parts of it were buried in different part of Gilead. (Judges 12,7) In the case of the aftermath of the pilegesh be-givah, Judges chapter twenty one, one must ask why the annulment procedure was not used to cancel the vow to kill all the men of Yavesh Gilead? Surely, this would have been even more important than to save the life of a single person, the daughter of Yiphtach at the time? Surely a lesson could have been learned from the former event? Also, why was the vow not to give daughters in marriage to the the remnant of the tribe of Benjamin not annulled? One of the main reasons for this national paralysis, could have been the absence of a central authority at that time. After all, the era has been characterised by the book of Judges as "in those days, there was no king in Israel." (Judges 19,1) Again, at the end of the book of Judges (Judges 21,25) we read "in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in." When an entire nation had vowed a vow, only an even greater authority can absolve from such a vow. Since many of the people had died since the vow had been made, it could not even have been annulled by an equal number of people. (Moed Katan 17) For that reason they had to resort to the subterfuge described there, i.e. letting the young men of Benjamin kidnap their brides to be. (see commentary by Kimchi) All of the above illustrates the severity of the laws concerning vows, once they have been made. Surely then it is preferable not to make vows in the first place. Man's tendency not to make payment promptly when he pledges a donation, is a sign that he overestimates his own value, and his effort to compensate for this when the time comes to make payment. The Torah, therefore, provides objective valuations, so that the person who promised a value to the temple treasury that equals his own value, would not shortchange the temple treasury. When the vow concerns a devar mitzvah, a duty that had to be fulfilled anyways, even if no vow had been made at all, the Torah warns "do not be tardy to pay it, the Lord will surely demand it from you." (Deut 23,22) For that reason the Torah continues: "if you fail to make vows, this will not be counted a sin against you."
And there are passages that resemble commandments, but none of them are obligatory commandments, such as the case of a woman of beautiful appearance. The scripture does not permit taking her as a wife until certain conditions are met. Do not be puzzled by the verse in Deuteronomy 21:11 that states, "And you desire her and take her to yourself as a wife," for the meaning is similar to Pharaoh's thought in Genesis 12:19, "And take her for me as a wife," according to his own thoughts. The same applies to Balak in Numbers 21:1, "And he fought against Israel." The conclusive proof is found in Deuteronomy 21:13, which states, "And afterward, you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife." The conditions are that he brings her into his home, does not leave her in another domain, shaves her head, and lets her nails grow, similar to the case of a leper. There is no need to mention that she must undergo ritual purification with the waters of menstruation, as it is written elsewhere in Numbers 31:19, "You and your captives." In Deuteronomy 21:13, it is stated, "And she shall remove the clothing of her captivity from upon her," which she used in idolatrous worship, as it is written in Genesis 35:2, "And change your garments." In Deuteronomy 21:13, it is also stated, "And she shall weep for her father and her mother," whether they are alive or deceased. All these conditions may cause the man to reconsider and not take her as a wife. The one who takes an Israelite woman as a wife should not impose these conditions on her, for they are more stringent than the desire he has for her. The entire passage does not contain obligatory commandments except for Deuteronomy 21:14, "You shall not sell her." Similarly, in the blessings (Birkat HaMitzvot), we are obligated to bless obligatory commandments.
“Jacob said to his household, and to all who were with him: Remove the foreign gods that are in your midst, and purify yourselves, and change your garments” (Genesis 35:2). “Jacob said to his household” – Rabbi Kruspedai said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: We are not expert in the minutiae of idol worship, like Jacob our patriarch, as we learned: One who finds vessels, and upon them, a figure of the sun, a figure of the moon, or a figure of a dragon, he casts them into the Dead Sea. (Mishna Avoda Zara 3:3. The mishna prohibits only items adorned with specific pictures, whereas Jacob insisted that the members of his household change their garments, meaning dispose of any garments with any pictures whatsoever, fearing that they were also made for the sake of idolatry. ) Rabbi Yoḥanan said: All garments are included in the category of idols. (Rabbi Yoḥanan derives from the actions of Jacob that garments with any images are prohibited due to idolatry, contrary to the statement of the mishna. ) “They gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that were in their possession, and the rings that were in their ears, and Jacob interred them beneath the terebinth that is near Shekhem” (Genesis 35:4). “They gave to Jacob” – Rabbi Yishmael ben Rabbi Yosei ascended to pray in Jerusalem. He passed Mount Gerizim and saw a Samaritan there. [The Samaritan] said to him: ‘Where are you going?’ He said to him: ‘I am ascending to pray in Jerusalem.’ He said to him: ‘Is it not preferable for you to pray on this blessed mountain, (See Deuteronomy 11:29.) and not on those ruins?’ (Is it not better to pray on Mount Gerizim, which was considered sacred to the Samaritans, rather than in Jerusalem? ) He said to him: ‘I will tell you to what you are comparable – to a dog that is eager for a carcass. So, because you know that idols are interred under [the mountain], as it is written: “Jacob interred,” that is why you are eager for it.’ They said [to each other]: ‘This one seeks to take them.’ (The Samaritans believed that Rabbi Yishmael ben Rabbi Yosei wanted to steal the idols that were interred underneath the mountain. ) . They reached a consensus to kill him, and he arose and fled at night.
Another matter: “Jacob settled…” – Abraham converted proselytes. That is what is written: “Abram took Sarai his wife…[and the people that they had made in Ḥaran]” (Genesis 12:5). Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra: Were all who entered the world to assemble, they would be unable to create even a small gnat, and you say: “And the people that they had made in Ḥaran”? Rather, these are the proselytes that Abraham converted. Why, then, did it say “made” and did not say “converted”? It is to teach you that anyone who draws a proselyte near, it is as though he created him. Lest you say that Abraham was converting [proselytes] and Sarah was not converting [them], the verse states: “And the people that they had made in Ḥaran.” It is not written here, “That he had made,” but rather, “that they had made.” Rabbi Ḥunya said: Abraham would convert the men, and Sarah would convert the women. Why does the verse state: “That they had made”? It teaches that Abraham would bring them into his house, feed them, give them to drink, draw them near, and bring them under the wings of the Divine Presence. (The expression “that they had made” implies physical action, which is not necessarily included in converting proselytes. The midrash explains that the phrase refers to the fact that Abraham and Sarah would invite them into their home, feed them, and give them to drink (Yefe To’ar). ) Jacob, too, converted proselytes, as it is written: “Jacob said to his household, [and to all who were with him: Remove the foreign gods that are in your midst, and purify yourselves].… They gave to Jacob [all the foreign gods that were in their possession]” (Genesis 35:2, 4). In Isaac’s regard we have not heard. Where did we hear? Rabbi Yitzḥak said, and some taught it in the name of Rabbi Hoshaya Rabba in the name of Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon: Here it is written: “Jacob settled in the land of his father’s residence.” What is [the meaning of] “his father’s residence [megurei]”? Those whom his father converted [migiyurei].
“It is better that you do not vow, than that you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). “It is better that you do not vow” – Rabbi Meir said: Better than both is one who does not vow at all, but rather brings his sheep to the Temple Courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it, as it is stated: “If you refrain from vowing, [there will be no sin in you]” (Deuteronomy 23:23). Rabbi Huna said: There was an incident involving one who vowed and did not pay. He set sail in the Mediterranean Sea, and his ship sank in the sea and he died. Rabbi Shmuel said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes for himself that his wife will die, as it is written: “I, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me…” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes [himself] to come to four transgressions: Idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander, and all of them are derived from Jacob. (While fleeing Esau, Jacob took a vow that he was to fulfill upon his return to Canaan (see Genesis 28:20–22), but he did not fulfill it immediately upon his return.) Idol worship, as it is written: “Remove the foreign gods” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, as it is written: “That he had defiled Dina his daughter” (Genesis 34:5). Bloodshed, as it is written: “Jacob’s two sons, […each] took [his sword…and killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). And slander, as it is written: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons [saying: Jacob has taken everything that was our father’s]” (Genesis 31:1). Rabbi Mana said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes death to come upon him, as it is stated: “For the Lord your God will demand it of you [and it will be a sin for you]” (Deuteronomy 23:22), and Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). And there is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgressions with a rod and their iniquity with plagues” (Psalms 89:33).
This is what God said to Israel: My children what do I seek from you? I seek no more than that you love one another, and honor one another, and that you have awe for one another
“Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:2). “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” – that is what is written: “It is preferable that you do not vow than if you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda: Rabbi Meir says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – but one who vows and pays is better. There is proof for Rabbi Meir from what is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Rabbi Yehuda says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – and better than both of them (Better than one who vows and does not pay, and one who vows and pays. ) is one who does not vow at all, but rather, brings his lamb to the Temple courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it. “If you refrain from vowing, there will be no sin in you” (Deuteronomy 23:23) – Rav Huna said: There was an incident involving one who took a vow but did not pay his vow, and he embarked to sail in the Mediterranean Sea. His ship sunk and he died at sea. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow, ultimately he will come to idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander. From whom do you derive all this? It is from Jacob; because he vowed and delayed fulfilling his vow, (Jacob’s vow is related in Genesis 28:20–22, and a midrash asserts that he did not fulfill his vow in a timely enough fashion when he returned to the Land of Israel. ) he came to all of them. Idol worship, from where is it derived? “Jacob said to his household…remove the foreign gods [that are in your midst]” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, from where is it derived? From Dina, as it is stated: “Dina went out.… [and Shekhem…lay with her and violated her]” (Genesis 34:1). Bloodshed, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “It was on the third day, when they were in pain…[Simeon and Levi…killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). Slander, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons” (Genesis 31:1). The Rabbis say: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow buries his wife. That is what is written: “And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and pays, he has reward for the vow and for the payment, as it is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Anyone who vows and delays fulfillment of his vow causes death to himself, as it is written: “As the Lord your God will demand it from you” (Deuteronomy 23:22) – payment is exacted from you, and not from your property. Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). There is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgression with a rod, and their iniquity with plague” (Psalms 89:33). Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: Just as regarding vows, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, (See Numbers 30:3. ) and: You shall not delay, (See Deuteronomy 23:23. ) so, regarding valuations, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, and: You shall not delay. That is why Moses cautions Israel and says: “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord.” (Moses mentions the term vow in the context of valuations in order to imply that the prohibitions against violating or delaying fulfillment of vows applies to valuations as well. )
הסירו את אלהי הנכר . Man must make an effort to return to G–d wholeheartedly at all times, and to remove from his home all alien and forbidden objects, foods, etc. Anything that is displeasing in the eyes of G–d is called Avodah Zarah, a form of alien deity. We must keep our homes pure so as to conform with the Torah's command to the Jewish soldier: והיה מחניך קדוש, "ensure that your camp is holy" (Deut. 23, 15).
והסירה את שמלת שביה, “and she is to remove the outer garment she wore when taken prisoner;” this was a garment she wore while worshipping her idols. We have examples in the Bible of such garments having to be scrapped in Genesis 35,2, where Yaakov commands his family members to scrap the captured garments they were wearing, which had originated in the city of Sh’chem. Anything that she was able to remove, which was a reminder of when she worshipped idols, had to be removed and destroyed.
AFTER THE FOREIGN GODS OF THE LAND. We know that God is one. (God is unchangeable. God remains the same at all times.) Change comes from the recepients. (Of Divine beneficence. According to I.E. praying to God does not change God’s mind. It changes the petitioner. The person changes his fate because he becomes a different person. Thus God’s decrees remain unchangeable.) God does not change His works, (The laws of nature, or any of His actions.) for they are executed in wisdom. It is part of the service of God to harness one’s power to receive spiritual inspiration in accordance with the place. (The Land of Israel. According to I.E. if a person follows a certain way of life, i.e., following God’s commandments, certain things will follow automatically. He also believed that God’s influence varies in accordance with the place. Hence certain laws have to be followed in the Land of Israel if the land is to maintain its sanctity and receive the amount of divine influence allotted to it. See I.E. on Gen. 4:14; 28:16. Also see Ex. 15:17.) Scripture therefore reads, the manner of the God of the land (II Kings 17:26). (The reference is to the people whom the king of Assyria brought to Samaria. They wanted to learn the manner of the God of the land because they knew that if they wanted to remain in the Land of Israel, they would have to alter their ways to fit the religious requirements of the land.) Jacob therefore said, (To his sons.) Put away the strange gods (Gen. 35:2). (According to I.E., Jacob told his sons, “Now that we are in the Land of Israel put away the images which you held on to while you were outside of the Land of Israel.”) The place is unlike other places with regard to engaging in sexual intercourse with women whom Scripture deems as being of close flesh. (A person is not allowed to marry a variety of close relatives. Among these are two sisters and an aunt. However, Jacob married two sisters and Amram married his aunt. According to I.E. they did so because they were outside of the Land of Israel. See I.E. on Lev. 18:26.) The intelligent will understand. (That the Land of Israel has special spiritual significance.)
A Midrashic approach to the word עשו is found in Bereshit Rabbah 39,14 where it is understood as applying to the converts Avraham and Sarah managed to make in Charan and whom they took with them to the land of Canaan. Avraham converted the males, Sarah the females. This is why the Torah speaks of that phenomenon in the plural, i.e. “they had made, each one separately.” If only Avraham had been busy proselytising the Torah should have written אשר עשה “whom he had made.” We also find that Yaakov did the same as his grandfather Avraham as the Torah speaks of his sojourn in the land of Canaan in these words (Genesis 37,1) וישב יעקב בארץ מגורי אביו, “and Yaakov settled in the land in which his (grand)father had had succeeded in making converts” (Bereshit Rabbah 84,4). From this you learn that Yaakov was also making converts.
AND THE LAND WAS DEFILED, THEREFORE DID I VISIT THE INIQUITY THEREOF UPON IT, AND THE LAND VOMITED OUT HER INHABITANTS. Scripture was very strict in forbidding these sexual relationships on account of the Land which becomes defiled by them, and which in turn will vomit out the people that do [these abominations]. Now forbidden sexual relationships are matters affecting personal conduct, and do not depend on the Land, [so why should the Land be affected by these personal immoral acts]? But the secret of the matter is in the verse which states, When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the children of men, He set the borders of the people, etc. For the portion of the Eternal is His people etc. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9.) The meaning thereof is as follows: The Glorious Name (Ibid., 28:58.) created everything and He placed the power of the lower creatures in the higher beings, giving over each and every nation in their lands, after their nations (Genesis 10:31.) some known star or constellation, as is known by means of astrological speculation. It is with reference to this that it is said, which the Eternal thy G-d hath allotted unto all the people, (Deuteronomy 4:19.) for He allotted to all nations constellations in the heavens, and higher above them are the angels of the Supreme One whom He placed as lords over them, as it is written, But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me, (Daniel 10:13.) and it is written, lo, the prince of Greece shall come. (Ibid., Verse 20.) They are called “kings,” as it is written [there], and I was left over there beside the kings of Persia. (Daniel 10:13.) Now the Glorious Name (Ibid., 28:58.) is G-d of gods, and Lord of lords (Deuteronomy 10:17.) over the whole world. But the Land of Israel, which is in the middle of the inhabited earth, (Aware of the fact that the earth is spherical [and not flat, as believed by most people in the Medieval Ages], Jewish sources being mindful of this fact speak of the Land of Israel as being in the middle of the “inhabited” earth, and not just “of the earth,” as there is no middle point in a spherical body.) is the inheritance of the Eternal designated to His Name. He has placed none of the angels as chief, observer, or ruler (Proverbs 6:7.) over it, since He gave it as a heritage to His people who declare the Unity of His Name, the seed of His beloved ones [i.e., the patriarchs]. It is with reference to this that He said, and ye shall be Mine own treasure from among all peoples; for all the earth is Mine, (Exodus 19:5.) and it is further written, so shall ye be My people, and I will be your G-d, (Jeremiah 11:4.) and you will not be subject to other powers at all. Now He [also] sanctified the people who dwell in His Land with the sanctity of observing the laws against forbidden sexual relationships, and with the abundant commandments, so that they [His people] would be dedicated to His Name. It is for this reason that He said, And ye shall keep all My statutes, and all Mine ordinances, and do them, that the Land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, vomit you not out, (Further, 20:22.) and it is further written, But I have said unto you: ‘Ye shall inherit their Land, and I will give it unto you to possess it’ … I am the Eternal your G-d, Who have set you apart from the peoples, (Ibid., Verse 24.) meaning to say, that He has set us apart from all the nations over whom He appointed princes and other celestial powers, by giving us the Land [of Israel] so that He, blessed be He, will be our G-d, and we will be dedicated to His Name. Thus the Land which is the inheritance of the Glorious Name, will vomit out all those who defile it and will not tolerate worshippers of idols, nor those who practise immorality. Now this section mentioned the Molech, (Above, Verse 21.) which is a form of idolatry, together with the forbidden sexual relationships, and with reference to all of them He said, Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things; for in all of these the nations are defiled, (Verse 24.) and the Land vomited out her inhabitants (In Verse 25 before us.) [thus showing that the Land is unable to contain idol worshippers or those who practise immorality]. And so also did He say in the second section [i.e., in Seder Kedoshim], and I have set you apart from the peoples, that ye should be Mine, (Further, 20:26.) which is [the basis for] the strict prohibition against idolatry. Therefore He stated that it is because they are dedicated to His Name that He gave them the Land, as it is said, And I have said unto you: ‘Ye shall inherit their Land, and I will give it unto you to possess it’ … I am the Eternal your G-d, Who have set you apart from the peoples. (Ibid., Verse 24.) Now outside the Land of Israel, although it all belongs to the Glorious Name, (Ibid., 28:58.) yet its purity is not perfect, because of “the servants” who hold sway there, and the nations go astray after their princes to worship them as well. It is for this reason that Scripture states, the G-d of the whole earth shall He be called, (Isaiah 54:5.) since He is the G-d of gods Who rules over all, and He will in the end punish the host of the high heaven on high, (Ibid., 24:21.) removing the celestial powers and demolishing the array of “the servants,” and afterwards He will punish the kings of the earth upon the earth. (Ibid., 24:21.) This is the meaning of the verse stating, The matter is by the decree of ‘irin’ (the wakeful ones), and ‘sh’elta’ (the sentence) by the word of the holy ones, (Daniel 4:14.) meaning, the matter that was decreed on Nebuchadnezzar [that he be driven from men and eat grass as oxen etc.] is the pronouncement of the guarding angels and the sentence of the word of the holy ones, who have ordained on the powers emanating from them that it be so. They [the angels] are called irin [literally: “the wakeful ones”], because from their emanations proceed all the powers that stir all activities, similar to that which it says, and behold ‘ir’ (a wakeful one) and a holy one came down from heaven. He cried aloud, and said thus: ‘Hew down the tree etc. (Ibid., Verse 10-11.) — [In the verse] And ‘sh’elta’ (the sentence) is by word of the holy ones, (Daniel 4:14.) [the word sh’elta] is like sha’alu, meaning first “they ask” what is the will of the Supreme One about it, and afterwards they decree that it be so done. It is with reference to this that Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar, it is the decree of the Most High, (Ibid., Verse 21.) for everything is from Him, blessed be He. Thus the Glorious Name, (Ibid., 28:58.) blessed be He, is G-d of gods, (Deuteronomy 10:17.) in the whole world, and G-d of the Land of Israel which is the inheritance of the Eternal. (I Samuel 26:19.) This is the meaning of the expression, and he will go astray after the foreign gods of the Land, (Deuteronomy 31:16.) for the gods are foreign to the Land of G-d and His inheritance. This is what Scripture means when it states [of the Cutheans who were settled by the king of Assyria in the cities of the kingdom of Israel], they knew not the manner of the G-d of the Land; therefore He hath sent lions among them, and, behold, they slay them, because they know not the manner of the G-d of the Land. (II Kings 17:26. The verse is thus stating that they did not live in the Land in a way befitting its special characteristic as G-d’s inheritance — hence the phrase “the G-d of the Land.”) Now the Cutheans were not punished in their own land when they worshipped their gods, by G-d sending lions among them, but only when they came into the Land of G-d and conducted themselves as before, did He send lions among them who slew them. And so the Rabbis taught in the Sifra: (Sifra Kedoshim 11:14.) “And the Land vomit not you out also etc. (Verse 28.) The Land of Israel is unlike other lands; it is unable to contain sinners.” And in the Sifre we find that the Rabbis taught: (Sifre Ha’azinu, 315.) “And there was no strange god with Him (Deuteronomy 32:12.) [when He took Israel out of Egypt, and protected them during their wandering through the wilderness], so that none of the princes of the nations should have power to come and exercise authority over you, something like that which it is said, and when I go forth, lo, the prince of Greece shall come, etc.” (Ibid., Verse 20.) This is the meaning of the saying of the Rabbis: (Kethuboth 110 b.) “Whoever lives outside the Land, is as if he had no G-d, for it is said, I am the Eternal your G-d, Who brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d, (Further, 25:38.) and it is further said, for they have driven me [David] out this day that I should not cleave unto the inheritance of the Eternal, saying: Go, serve other gods.” (I Samuel 26:19. “And who told David, ‘Go, serve other gods?’ This can only mean to teach you that he who lives outside the Land is like etc.’” (Kethuboth). Having been forced to leave the Land, David was thus justified in saying that those responsible for it had, as it were, said to him, “Go, etc.”) And in the Tosephta of Tractate Abodah Zarah the Rabbis have said: (Tosephta, Abodah Zarah 5:5. On the name Tosephta, see in Seder Tazria Note 124.) “Now it is said, And I [Jacob] will come back to my father’s house in peace, then shall the Eternal be my G-d, (Genesis 28:21.) and it is further said, to give you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d. (Further, 25:38.) When you are in the land of Canaan I am your G-d. When you are not in the land of Canaan, I am not your G-d if it were at all possible to say so [for He is our G-d under all circumstances and in all places]. Similarly it is said, about forty thousand ready armed for war passed on in the presence of the Eternal unto battle, (Joshua 4:13.) and it is further said, and the Land is subdued before the Eternal, and before His people. (I Chronicles 22:18.) But how could it enter one’s mind that Israel subdued the Land before the Eternal [as if to say that they captured it for His sake]? But [this teaches that] as long as they are upon the Land, it is as if it were subdued [before Him, since He is their G-d, as explained above], but when they are not upon it, it is not subdued.” It is on the basis of this matter that the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: (Sifre Eikev, 43.) “And ye perish quickly from off the good Land. (Deuteronomy 11:17. The following verse continues: And ye shall lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul etc. This clearly indicates even as the Sifre teaches, that after banishment from the Land they are to continue the observance of the commandments.) Although I banish you from the Land to outside the Land, make yourselves distinctive by the commandments, so that when you return they shall not be novelties to you. This can be compared to a master who was angry with his wife, and sent her back to her father’s house and told her, ‘Adorn yourself with precious things, so that when you come back they will not be novelties to you.’ And so did the prophet Jeremiah say [to the people in exile in Babylon], Set thee up waymarks. (Jeremiah 31:20.) These are the commandments, by which Israel is made distinctive.” Now the verses which state, and ye perish quickly … and ye shall lay up these My words etc. (Deuteronomy 11:17-18.) only make obligatory in the exile [the observance of those commandments] affecting personal conduct, such as the [wearing of] phylacteries and [placing of] Mezuzoth (A parchment on which is written Deuteronomy 6:4-9, and 11:13-21, and which is fastened to the right door-post. See further in Vol. II, p. 173.) [these being specifically mentioned there in the following words of Scripture], and concerning them the Rabbis [in the above text of the Sifre] explained [that we must observe them] so that they shall not be novelties to us when we return to the Land, for the main [fulfillment] of the commandments is [to be kept] when dwelling in the Land of G-d. Therefore the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: (Sifre R’eih, 80.) “And ye shall possess it, and dwell therein. And ye shall observe to do all the statutes etc. (Deuteronomy 11:31-32.) Dwelling in the Land of Israel is of equal importance to all the commandments of the Torah.” A similar statement is also found in the Tosephta of Tractate Abodah Zarah. (Tosephta, Abodah Zarah 5:3.) This in fact was the thought of the wicked ones who [misusing the intention of the above statement], said to the prophet Ezekiel [whose prophetic activity was in the Babylonian exile]: (Sanhedrin 105 a.) “Our master Ezekiel, if a servant is sold by his master, does the master still have any claim to him?” (In other words, “since G-d sold them to Nebuchadnezzar and banished them from before Him, does He still have any claim upon them?” (Rashi ibid.). The answer was that they were never “sold” since the exile was merely a form of temporary punishment for their sins, and therefore, and that which cometh into your mind etc. (see text).) For it is said, and that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all; in that ye say: We will be as the nations, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone. (Ezekiel 20:32.) And this was the command of our patriarch Jacob to his household, and to all that were with him, at the time that they came into the Land, Put away the strange gods that are among you, and purify yourselves. (Genesis 35:2.) And G-d, by Whom alone actions are weighed, (See I Samuel 2:3.) [brought it about] that Rachel died on the way when they started coming into the Land, (Genesis 35:16-19. See in Vol. I, pp. 330-332, where Ramban refers briefly to this problem, namely why Jacob married two sisters in their lifetime, and then concludes that “he married them only outside the Land.” Here Ramban completes the thought, by explaining that G-d, by Whom events are decided, therefore brought about the death of one of the sisters as soon as they came into the Land. The reason why Rachel had to die and not Leah, is explained in the text.) for on account of her own merit she did not die outside the Land, and for Jacob’s merit, he could not dwell in the Land with two sisters [in their lifetime, since this is forbidden in the Torah, and the laws of the Torah were observed by our ancestors in the Land of Israel even before the Torah was given on Sinai], and she [Rachel] was the one by whose marriage the prohibition against two sisters took effect [since Jacob was already married to Leah]. It would appear that Rachel became pregnant with Benjamin before they came to Shechem, and while in the Land Jacob did not touch her at all, for the reason that we have mentioned. And the prophet states, And first I will recompense their iniquity and their sin double; because they have profaned My Land; they have filled Mine inheritance with the carcasses of their detestable things and their abominations. (Jeremiah 16:18.) This matter [i.e., that the Land of Israel is the inheritance of the Eternal and thus cannot tolerate sinners] is found in many places in the Scriptures, and you will see it clearly after I have opened your eyes to it. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented in the section of Vayeilech: (Deuteronomy 31:16.) “We know that G-d is One, and changes arise because of those who receive [His beneficent deeds], but G-d does not change His deeds, as they are all done in wisdom. And included in the worship of G-d is to guard the ability to receive [His beneficence] according to the place [so that if a particular place is holier than others, one must observe there more strictly the laws of holiness]. Therefore it is written [of the Cutheans, that they did not know] the manner of the G-d of the Land, (II Kings 17:26. The Cutheans were thus punished for not being heedful of the holiness of the Land of Israel which is unable to retain worshippers of idols.) and of Jacob it is said [when he came into the Land he told his household], put away the strange gods, (Genesis 35:2.) and the extreme opposite of [the sanctity of] the place [i.e., the Land of Israel] is indulging in forbidden sexual relationships, as they are [sins of the] flesh. The student versed [in the mysteries of the Torah] will understand.” Thus are the words [of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra] of blessed memory. Now do not refute me [in what I have written above, that Israel is under the direct guidance of G-d alone, and no celestial power determines their fate], by citing the verse, Michael your prince, (Daniel 10:21.) for he is only a ministering angel who implores mercy for Israel, but is in no way a prince exercising any royalty or power. So was also the captain of the host (Joshua 5:14.) who appeared to Joshua at Jericho, showing him that G-d had sent him to fight their battles, similar to [that which happened in the days of] Hezekiah. (II Kings 19:35: And it came to pass at that night, that the angel of the Eternal went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians etc.) Besides, this matter [of Michael imploring mercy for Israel] was when we were already outside the Land of Israel. Now I do not have permission to explain on the subject of ha’aretz (“the earth” or “the Land”) more than this. (Ramban is alluding to the word ha’aretz, which is mentioned here repeatedly: vatitma ha’aretz … vataki ha’aretz (literally: “and the earth was defiled … and the earth vomited out”). This hints at the first ha’aretz, mentioned in the first verse of Creation, which Ramban has already explained in many places as referring to “the higher earth,” to which the souls finally return after their sojourn on the lower earth.) But if you will merit to understand the first “earth” mentioned in the verse of Bereshith (In the beginning G-d created the heaven and the earth), and also the one mentioned in the section of Im Bechukothai, (Further, 26:42. v’ha’aretz ezkor (literally: “and the earth I will remember”).) you will know a profound and sublime secret, and you will further understand what our Rabbis have said: (Tanchuma, Vayakheil 7.) “The Sanctuary on high is exactly opposite the Sanctuary below.” I have already alluded to this on the verse, for all the earth is Mine. (Exodus 19:5.) Now Scripture mentions that the people of the land of Canaan were punished on account of their immoral [sexual] deeds. And our Rabbis have said that they were warned about these matters from the time of creation, when these laws were declared to Adam (Sanhedrin 56 b. Rambam in the Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Melachim 9:1, puts it as follows: “The first man was commanded concerning six matters: idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, etc.”) and to Noah, (Incest is counted among the Seven Laws of the Noachides (see Vol. I, p. 417, Note 148).) for He does not punish unless He admonishes first. Scripture, however, did not state the admonition, but instead said that the Land would vomit them out, for the Land abhors all these abominations. (Verse 27.) Now the Canaanites were not the only ones who were admonished about these matters [for since these laws were declared to Adam and Noah, they applied to all mankind], and the Scriptural section mentions specifically, After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do, (Above, Verse 3.) which proves that the Egyptians also did all these abominations, and yet the land of Egypt did not vomit them out, nor did the lands of other nations vomit them out! Rather, this whole subject shows the distinction of the Land [of Israel] and its holiness [so that it alone is unable to retain sinners]. Scripture states, and the Land vomited out [using a past tense, although the Canaanites were still living there], for from the time that He was to punish [them] for the sins committed upon her [i.e. the Land], having decreed destruction upon the Canaanites, it is as if the Land had already vomited them out. Or it may be that the expression, and the Land vomited out is a reference to above, similar to what is said, their defense is removed from over them. (Numbers 14:9. See Ramban there.)
ותטמא הארץ ואפקוד עונה, “the land became contaminated and I recalled its inequity upon it.” Nachmanides writes that the extremely harsh attitude of the Torah to people violating the laws of incest and sexual perversions is due to the fact that the very earth of the land of Israel is revolted by such behaviour and will seek ways and means to eject people from it that so abuse their virility. The commandments involving incest and sexual perversions are commandments involving one’s body, and apply universally, wherever we are, so that we may wonder why the Torah linked non-observance to the Canaanites being ejected by that land, and the Torah threatening a similar rejection by the land to the Jewish people if they did not observe higher moral standards? We must understand this in terms of the concept that what goes on in our world has parallels in the celestial regions. When the Creator created the universe, He imbued certain celestial forces with the ability to strongly affect the affairs in the terrestrial universe. Thus He appointed a “שר,” minister, for each of the nations of the earth who represented their interests in the celestial spheres. In our parlance this is part of the discipline known as astrology. Celestial bodies, their constellations, the times at which each appears in the sky and where in the sky, all play a role in the fates of these nations. All this occurs under the guidance of the Supreme Authority, Hashem, seeing that these bodies are not free to vary their orbits. In Daniel 10,13 we read as follows: ושר מלכות פרס עמד לנגדי עשרים ואחד יום, והנה מיכאל אחד השרים הראשונים בא לעזרני, “but the heavenly prince of the Persian kingdom stood opposed to me for twenty one days; when behold! Michael one of the foremost heavenly princes came to my aid.” Daniel describes a confrontation between the heavenly forces appointed on behalf of the Persian Kingdom and the people of Israel, and describes that if not for the intervention of Michael, an angel appointed to look after the special interests of Israel, the opposing forces might have prevailed. The representatives of these various nations are described as מלכים kings, G’d by comparison being known as מלך מלכי המלכים, the King who is the supreme King,” just as we have the term אלוקי האלוקים, “the Supreme Divinity,” indicating that there are forces that are also perceived as divine but on a much lower level. When Avraham in his prayer for the good people of Sodom, if any, speaks of השופט כל הארץ לא יעשה משפט?, “is the One Who is in charge of Justice in the whole universe not going to perform justice?” He implies that there are forces, divinely appointed, to dispense justice in their narrow domain. The important thing to remember is that above all these “kings”: or “ministers” appointed by G’d as His agents to look after the affairs of the nations of the earth, exclude Israel. There is a Supreme Being from whom all the others receive the parameters of their authority. The Land of Israel, in this respect, has always had rules of its own, as we know best from when the King of Assyria transplanted nations to that land to fill the void created through the exile of the Ten Tribes, and these nations fell victim to lions, etc., until they learned by experience that in order to survive on that land they had to adopt different mores. (Compare Baba Kamma 38 based on Kings II 17, 24-34) In short, seeing that the land of Canaan, even before the land was occupied by the Canaanites, was נחלת ה', a special land set aside for the Jewish people, this land tolerated deviant behaviour much less than other lands not predestined for G’d’s personal supervision. [I have condensed and rephrased some of this in the interest of brevity. Ed.] If we needed further proof of the above, consider the fact that our matriarch Rachel died a premature death immediately after crossing the boundary of this land. Yaakov’s having married two sisters while both were alive, something forbidden by the Torah (after it was revealed to the Jewish people) did not apparently bother G’d while Yaakov had not yet crossed the boundary into the Land of Israel. The moment he did, G’d applied stricter yardsticks to the mode of conduct expected of him and her. Apparently she had become pregnant with Binyamin before they had reached Shechem, otherwise who knows if Binyamin would have not have died with her. Consider also, that once in that land, Yaakov ordered his servants to dispose totally of any objects that had ever been used as objects of idolatry. (Genesis 35,2) The fact that the Torah while speaking of the punishment of the Canaanites did not list where they had been warned about their sexual depravity, is proof that all of mankind had been warned about this ever since first man was given the 7 basic commandments of conduct on G’d’s earth. The very fact that the Torah testifies to the Egyptians having been guilty of similar excesses but they were never expelled from their country, proves that different rules of tolerance apply on the soil of Eretz Yisrael Further proof of the special status of the soil of the Holy Land, is the fact that the כותים whom the Assyrian King had transplanted to the land formerly occupied by the Ten Tribes had never been punished by G’d when they had worshipped the same deities in the country of their origin. We should also consider the statements of our sages Ketuvot 110 that anyone residing permanently outside the Land of Israel is considered as not having a “G’d,” i.e. Divine protection. Gentiles, especially while in their own countries, are allowed to co-opt deities such as horoscopes as long as they recognise Hashem as the Supreme G’d and Creator. When the sages said: “as if they had no G’d,” they meant that the fates of such people were not presided over by Hashem personally, but that they were subject to mazzolot, astrological constellations, etc., something that is not the case for people living in Eretz Yisrael of which G’d has said that He has His eyes on it from the beginning of the year till the end of the year (Deut. 11,12). You must not counter that the verse from Daniel we quoted before in which Michael is described as the שר ישראל, the angel appointed by G’d as especially in charge of protecting the Jewish people, proves that they were not under the direct guidance of Hashem. First of all, the function of that angel is to implore Hashem to use His mercy on behalf of His people; secondly, the Jewish people with whom Daniel associated were all in exile, most of them in voluntary exile, at least after Cyrus ascended the Persian throne having defeated the Babylonians, and having enabled the return to Zion under Zerubavel. 52 years after the destruction of the Temple. [Jews who chose to remain in Persia, even under the premiership of Mordechai were a primary target of the statement we quoted from Ketuvot 110 that “Jews who live outside the Holy Land are considered as if they had no G’d.” Ed.]
The explanation is “that they made in Haran” [12:5]. Abraham converted the men and Sarah converted the women. They took these people with them. Isaac did the same, as the verse says, “Jacob was settled in the land where his father sojourned” [Genesis 37:1]. (The Hebrew term for sojourned is “megurei” which is similar to the word for convert “ger.”) This means, Jacob lived in the city where his father, Isaac, had done conversions. Jacob did the same, as the verse says, “Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, rid yourselves of the alien gods” [Genesis 35:2]. This means, remove the false gods from yourselves. (Bahya, Genesis, 12:5.)
“Rid yourselves of the alien gods in your midst and change your clothes” [35:2]. Jacob said to his children. Remove the foreign gods that you took from the city of Shechem. (Bahya, Genesis, 35:2.) We will bring offerings to the Holy One and we should not make a mistake and bring offerings to the foreign gods. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 35:2.) Also, remove the clothes of the foreign gods. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:2.)
[74] Thus mark how the Man of Practice speaks: “Take away the alien gods who are with you from the midst of you, and purify yourselves and change your raiment and let us rise up and go up to Bethel” (Gen. 35:2, 3), so that, even though Laban demand a search, no idols may be found in all the house (Gen. 31:35) but veritable substantial realities graven, as though on stone, on the heart of the wise, realities which are the heritage of the self-taught nature, Isaac. For Isaac alone receives from his father the “real substance” (Gen. 25:5).
Yaakov [then] said to his household, and to everyone that was with him, Get rid of the foreign gods [false gods of the nations] in your midst. Purify yourselves and change your garments.
And Jakob said to the men of his house, and to all who were with him, Put away the idols of the peoples which are among you which you took from the temple* of Shekem, and purify you from the uncleannesses of the slain whom you have and change your raiment.
| וְנָק֥וּמָה וְנַעֲלֶ֖ה בֵּֽית־אֵ֑ל וְאֶֽעֱשֶׂה־שָּׁ֣ם מִזְבֵּ֗חַ לָאֵ֞ל הָעֹנֶ֤ה אֹתִי֙ בְּי֣וֹם צָֽרָתִ֔י וַיְהִי֙ עִמָּדִ֔י בַּדֶּ֖רֶךְ אֲשֶׁ֥ר הָלָֽכְתִּי׃ | 3 E | Come, let us go up to Bethel, and I will build an altar there to the God who answered me when I was in distress and who has been with me wherever I have gone.” |
And we will arise and ascend to Beit El; and I will make there an altar to the God who answers me on the day of my distress. He was with me on the path upon which I went.
The fact that Jacob's dream represented only the beginning of Divine revelations at its lowest level, is attested to by the following: 1) After G-d’s promise to Jacob in the dream, Jacob's statements and vow prefaced by the words "if G-d will be with me," shows that, to Jacob, the message had not been so clear. 2) Jacob is portrayed as being like the servant who serves his master for the sake of the reward. He promises to give tithes if things go well, hardly the stature prophets are made of. 3) Jacob constantly seems fearful during the coming years. 4) Even when Jacob prays to G-d immediately prior to his encounter with Esau, he does not even once refer to the promise made to him by G-d in this dream. 5) Jacob's unaccountable delay in fulfilling his vow, even after G-d said to him, "I am the G-d to whom you have vowed at Bet El, go and keep your vow." Jacob, not yet having returned home safely, seems in no hurry to fulfil this vow. In view of all this, and in view of the statements of our sages that the gift of prophecy is bestowed only on persons who are possessed of certain qualifications, one of which is personal wealth, we must reject the view of those commentators who see in this dream revelations going beyond anything experienced by either Abraham or Isaac. It is significant that Jacob is described as dreaming, and that even after awakening from his "sleep,” the ladder is not called "a vision." Other people who had visions during their sleep, are usually described as waking from a "dream," not from "sleep." Compare Pharaoh in Genesis 41,8 or Solomon in Kings I 3,15. Based on Maimonides in Moreh Nevuchim Part two, Chapter forty-five, we are entitled to assume that in our case we do not deal with a prophetic vision. On the other hand, Jacob's own statement that "G-d is in this place," seems to indicate that Jacob at least considered the possibility that what he had dreamed was a vision. Perhaps Jacob's doubt about the significance of what he had dreamed stemmed from the fact that he had been inadequately prepared to become the recipient of prophetic insights. Abraham, who had gone to sacrifice Isaac, an irreversible act should he have misunderstood what he believed to be Divine instructions, was obviously certain that the source of that command was not a figment of his imagination. We can understand the conditional nature of Jacob's vow then as stemming from this very uncertainty about whether in fact he had been granted prophetic insight. The monument that he erects is built on the premise that he may have been granted a vision. He vows that if all the conditions in that message will be fulfilled, he will view this as confirmation that he had indeed been the recipient of a communication from heaven. Only after the events in Shechem (Genesis Chapter 34), when G-d tells him to go up to Bet El, does Jacob become convinced that the dream of the ladder had indeed been a revelation. In retrospect then, that dream looms larger than ever. During all the years when he had difficulties with Laban and Esau, he had been far from certain that he had been granted a revelation at that time already. When finally, in Chapter thirty-five, Jacob refers to G-d as elokim, instead of as hereafter eyl shaddai, this indicates that he had now come to the resolution of his former doubts about the matter.
“May the Lord answer you on a day of trouble” (Psalms 20:2) – the Rabbis said: To what is the matter comparable? To a king’s son who took to evil ways. He had three tutors. The first said: ‘Let us make for him chains [that weigh] one hundred litra.’ The second said: ‘He will not be able to withstand chains of one hundred litra. Instead, make for him chains [weighing] twelve litra.’ The third came and said: ‘How will he be able to withstand chains of twelve litra? Make for him chains [weighing] one litra.’ So, Moses said: Let chains of one hundred litra be made for them, as it is stated: “Many evils and troubles will find them” (Deuteronomy 31:17). David said: Let chains of twelve litra be made for them, as it is stated: “May the Lord answer you on a day of trouble” – just as the day is twelve hours. When Jeremiah arose, he said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, they do not have the strength to withstand what David said: “May the Lord answer you on a day of trouble.” Instead, make for them chains of one litra,’ as it is stated: “It is a time of trouble for Jacob, but from it he will be saved” (Jeremiah 30:7). Another matter: “May the Lord answer you on a day of trouble” (Psalms 20:2) – Reish Lakish said: To what is the matter comparable? To a woman who was sitting on the birthing stool and she was in distress as she was about to give birth. They said: ‘May He who answered your mother answer you.’ So, David said to Israel: ‘May He who answered Jacob answer you. What prayer did Jacob offer? “I will craft there an altar to God who answers me on the day of my trouble” (Genesis 35:3). You too, “may the Lord answer you at a time of trouble; may the name of the God of Jacob fortify you”’ (Psalms 20:2). Moses said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, when You see Your children in distress and there is no one to ask for mercy for them, answer them immediately.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Moses, as you live, whenever they call Me I will answer them,’ as it is stated: “As is the Lord our God in all of our calling to Him.”
R. Jose said: He immediately began to take [counsel with] the tribes who would go up with him. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 35:3): LET US ARISE AND GO UP. They said to him: Where to? He said to them: To the place where my Creator told me (in vs. 1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL…. R. Aha said: Jerusalem is only built by virtue of the tribes. It is so stated (in Ps. 122:3): JERUSALEM IS BUILT UP AS A CITY WHICH HAS BEEN KNIT TOGETHER. What is written after this (in vs. 4)? FOR THERE HAVE THE TRIBES GONE UP….
Observe what is written: Be in pain, and labor to bring forth, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail; for now thou shalt go forth out of the city and shalt dwell in the field (Micah 4:10). The ketiv (traditional spelling) is “I shall dwell” (rather than the Masoretic “thou shalt dwell” as in the preceding quotation) to indicate that though I shall exile you from its midst, my Shekhinah will not depart from the city. The field mentioned here alludes only to Zion, as it is said: Zion unto a field will be plowed (ibid. 3:12). The Holy One, blessed be He, declared: You shall pray unto me in the direction of the Holy City, and I will hearken from heaven and heal your land. Therefore Jacob said to his sons: Let us arise, and go up to Beth-El. What shall we do there? they asked. And he answered: The Holy One, blessed be He, has commanded me to arise, go up to Beth-El and dwell there.
Another interpretation: "The Lord will answer you on a day of trouble." A father and son were traveling when the son became tired and asked his father, "Where is the country?" The father replied, "My son, if you see a cemetery in front of you, know that the country is close to you." So the Lord said to Israel, "If you see that troubles are covering you at that time, you will be redeemed," as it is said, "The Lord will answer you on a day of trouble; He will shelter you with the shelter of Jacob. The God of Abraham and the God of Isaac are not mentioned here, only the God of Jacob. Why did Resh Lakish say, "It is like a pregnant woman who has difficulty giving birth. They said to her, "We do not know what to say to you, but whoever answered your mother in her difficult time will answer you in your difficult time." So it is written about Jacob, "To the Almighty who answered me on the day of my distress." David said, "Just as the Lord answered Jacob your father in his time of trouble, He will answer you in your time of trouble." "May the Lord answer you on a day of trouble; may the name of the God of Jacob protect you."
Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Any place in the Bible from where the heretics attempt to prove their heresy, i.e., that there is more than one god, the response to their claim is alongside them, i.e., in the immediate vicinity of the verses they cite. The verse states that God said: “Let us make man in our image” (Genesis 1:26), employing the plural, but it then states: “And God created man in His image” (Genesis 1:27), employing the singular. The verse states that God said: “Come, let us go down and there confound their language” (Genesis 11:7), but it also states: “And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower” (Genesis 11:5). The verse states in the plural: “There God was revealed [niglu] to him when he fled from the face of his brother” (Genesis 35:7), but it also states in the singular: “To God Who answers [haoneh] me in the day of my distress” (Genesis 35:3).
Let us arise and go up to Beis Eil. There I will make an altar to the Almighty, Who answered me [accepted my prayer] in the day of my distress, and Who was with me [whose Word was my support] along the way I traveled.
And we will arise and go up to Bethel, and I will make there an altar unto Eloha, who heard my prayer in the day when I was afflicted, and whose Word was my helper in the way that I went.
| וַיִּתְּנ֣וּ אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֗ב אֵ֣ת כׇּל־אֱלֹהֵ֤י הַנֵּכָר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּיָדָ֔ם וְאֶת־הַנְּזָמִ֖ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּאׇזְנֵיהֶ֑ם וַיִּטְמֹ֤ן אֹתָם֙ יַעֲקֹ֔ב תַּ֥חַת הָאֵלָ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר עִם־שְׁכֶֽם׃ | 4 E | They gave to Jacob all the alien gods that they had, and the rings that were in their ears, and Jacob buried them under the terebinth that was near Shechem. |
His rectification is also through the concept of hands, as in (Genesis 35:4), “They gave Yaakov all the idolatrous artifacts that were in their hands.”
אשר באזניהם, “which were in the ears of those idols.”
ויטמון אותם יעקב תחת האלה אשר עם שכם, “Yaakov hid them (the alien deities and jewelry) beneath the oak tree near Sh’chem.” According to B’reshit Rabbah 81,3, the deities were images or three-dimensional replicas of pigeons which were found later on Mount Gerizim where people worshipped them. [Seeing that that mountain is near Sh’chem, it sounds very plausible. Ed.]
ויטמון אותם יעקב, “Yaakov buried them, etc.” The Biblical requirement of disposing of idolatrous objects prescribes not burial but scattering to the winds or throwing such items into the sea. Moses did so when he scattered the dust of the golden calf as we know from Exodus 32,20 “he ground it until it was quite fine particles (of dust) and then he sprinkled it on the face of the water.” The fact that Yaakov contented himself with a lesser degree of destruction of these one time idols proves that actually they were no longer forbidden from a Biblical point of view. Another way of explaining this episode is that even assuming that these artifacts had still retained their status as idolatrous and therefore forbidden objects, the fact that he could not destroy them by throwing them into the Dead Sea, made Yaakov do the next best thing, i.e. to bury them. He was also unable to burn these artifacts so that he would not be unduly delayed giving the people around Shechem a chance to organize themselves against him. Under the circumstances, he did the best he could in order to dispose of them and buried them.
ויטמן, he did not leave them above ground so as not to become the indirect cause of someone retrieving the items and using them in an idolatrous fashion.
אשר עם שכם, near Shechem; we have a similar construction involving the preposition עם in 25,11 וישב יצחק עם באר לחי רואי, “Yitzchok settled near the place named Beer Lachay Ro-i.
AND JACOB HID THEM. An idol and the things that pertain to it are not in the category of objects that require burial and for which burial suffices, but instead they are to be crumbled up and scattered to the wind or thrown into the sea. (Abodah Zarah 43b. And if so, why did Jacob bury the idols when they should have been destroyed?) It appears to me that the sons of Jacob did not take the idols and the things that pertain to them from Shechem until they had been nullified and had thus become permissible to them, for a heathen can nullify an idol against its worshipper’s will, (Ibid., 52b.) thus making it permissible to them. Jacob, however, for the sake of the purity of holy things, commanded that they remove it so that they should be fit to worship G-d and sacrifice before Him, just as He had commanded them concerning immersion and the changing of garments. (Verse 2 here.) Burial was thus sufficient for the idols, and therefore he hid them under the terebinth in a location which will neither be tilled nor sown.
האלה THE TEREBINTH — a kind of tree that bears no fruit.
עם שכם means by Shechem.
In welchem Zusammenhange die Ringe mit der Abgötterei standen, ist dunkel. Daß auch das goldene Kalb, sowie der von Gideon gebildete Ephod aus solchen Ringen gemacht worden, hellt diese Beziehung nur wenig auf. Es können vielleicht zufällig auch die in Schechem erbeuteten Ringe götzentümliche Embleme gehabt haben. Bemerkenswert ist das chald. קדשיא für das hebr. נזמים.
ויטמון אותם יעקב, he buried them instead of destroying them. Seeing that they no longer had the halachic status of being idolatrous artifacts they did not need to be destroyed
A kind of non-fruit bearing tree. I.e., it does not produce fruits. סרק means רֵק (empty) of fruit. Yaakov did not want the delay of bringing the idols to the Dead Sea, [the normal way to dispose of such objects,] because he was hurrying to fulfill his vow. So he innovated [a quicker method] and buried them in the ground. And he buried them under a non-fruit bearing tree, [where people do not go,] so no one will notice later that the ground had been dug up. (Nachalas Yaakov)
They indeed gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that were in their possession, and even the rings that were in their ears, hich were not actually objects of idol worship but some of which were decorated with such articles. Alternatively, this is referring to the rings that were in the ears of the idols. 17 And Jacob interred them beneath the terebinth tree that is near Shekhem.
ויטמן אותם, “he buried them there.” The reason that he did not burn these idols [which would have eradicated them, Ed.] was to demonstrate to the Canaanite population that they had violated the covenant G’d made with Noach after the deluge not to practice idolatry. Nachmanides writes that the entourage of Yaakov had not taken as loot or for any other reason, any idolatrous images, nor any chattels that had been used in idolatry so that these would have had to be destroyed utterly. They had not taken anything from Shechem until these items had first completely lost their erstwhile function as objects prohibited because of their having been used in the context of idolatry. When an idolater destroys his deities even under the influence of superior force, i.e. unwillingly, the fact that he destroyed it is sufficient to deprive them of any halachic restriction on account of their former use. What Yaakov did was to enable these chattels that had once served idols to qualify for sacred use on the altar. In order to achieve such status they first had to be interred. Only after these preparations had been made, could he and his family proceed to Beyt El.
“Jacob buried them under the terebinth” [35:4]. Jacob buried the foreign gods under a linden tree. He did not want to wait to throw them into the sea, since he was far from the sea. (Bahya, Genesis, 35:4.)
“Jacob said to his household, and to all who were with him: Remove the foreign gods that are in your midst, and purify yourselves, and change your garments” (Genesis 35:2). “Jacob said to his household” – Rabbi Kruspedai said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: We are not expert in the minutiae of idol worship, like Jacob our patriarch, as we learned: One who finds vessels, and upon them, a figure of the sun, a figure of the moon, or a figure of a dragon, he casts them into the Dead Sea. (Mishna Avoda Zara 3:3. The mishna prohibits only items adorned with specific pictures, whereas Jacob insisted that the members of his household change their garments, meaning dispose of any garments with any pictures whatsoever, fearing that they were also made for the sake of idolatry. ) Rabbi Yoḥanan said: All garments are included in the category of idols. (Rabbi Yoḥanan derives from the actions of Jacob that garments with any images are prohibited due to idolatry, contrary to the statement of the mishna. ) “They gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that were in their possession, and the rings that were in their ears, and Jacob interred them beneath the terebinth that is near Shekhem” (Genesis 35:4). “They gave to Jacob” – Rabbi Yishmael ben Rabbi Yosei ascended to pray in Jerusalem. He passed Mount Gerizim and saw a Samaritan there. [The Samaritan] said to him: ‘Where are you going?’ He said to him: ‘I am ascending to pray in Jerusalem.’ He said to him: ‘Is it not preferable for you to pray on this blessed mountain, (See Deuteronomy 11:29.) and not on those ruins?’ (Is it not better to pray on Mount Gerizim, which was considered sacred to the Samaritans, rather than in Jerusalem? ) He said to him: ‘I will tell you to what you are comparable – to a dog that is eager for a carcass. So, because you know that idols are interred under [the mountain], as it is written: “Jacob interred,” that is why you are eager for it.’ They said [to each other]: ‘This one seeks to take them.’ (The Samaritans believed that Rabbi Yishmael ben Rabbi Yosei wanted to steal the idols that were interred underneath the mountain. ) . They reached a consensus to kill him, and he arose and fled at night.
“Reuben, you are my firstborn” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] would say [an interpretation] of this as praise and [an interpretation] as criticism. You are firstborn, and Esau is firstborn. “Esau went to the field to hunt game [to bring]” (Genesis 27:5) – if he found, fine; if not, “to bring” from what he stole or took by force. But you, “Reuben went during the days of wheat harvest [and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah]” (Genesis 30:14). (Reuven took mandrakes that were ownerless and not from what belonged to others (see Bereshit Rabba 72:2), unlike Esau.) “My strength, and the first of my potency” – these are the vanguard in the battle. “Greater honor and greater power” – “their faces were like the faces of lions” (I Chronicles 12:9). (This is written regarding the Gadites, but since the Gadites and Reubenites both formed the vanguard in the conquest of Canaan, it is true of the Reubenites as well (Matnot Kehuna). ) He would say [an interpretation] about this as criticism – “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are firstborn and I am firstborn. (Jacob bought the birthright from Esau.) I, at the age of eighty-four years old, had never seen a drop of seminal emission, (That is, until Jacob married Leah and fathered Reuben. The midrash assumes that Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah. ) but you: “[Reuben] went and lay with Bilha” (Genesis 35:22). “My strength, and the first of my potency” – the first of my toil and the first of my travail. (He was the one with whom Jacob first experienced the travail of raising children.) “Greater honor and greater power” – the birthright was yours, the priesthood was yours, the kingship was yours, but now that you sinned, the birthright was given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingship to Judah. Rabbi Aḥa said: The birthright was not yours. Is it not so that Jacob went to Laban only for Rachel? All the furrows that I plowed in your mother; was it not in Rachel that they should have been plowed? (This is a euphemism for marital relations. Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah, when he thought she was Rachel, and therefore by right the firstborn should have been from Rachel (Nezer HaKodesh). ) Now, the birthright has returned to its owner. "Impetuous as water, you shall not excel; because you mounted your father's bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:4). “Impetuous as water, you shall not excel” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer said: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in harlotry [zanita]. (The Hebrew term for impetuous, paḥaz, is an acronym for paḥazta, ḥatata, zanita.) Rabbi Yehoshua said: You rebelled [parakta ol], you desecrated [ḥilalta] my couch, your evil inclination stirred [za] within you. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: You trampled [pasata] the law, you forfeited [ḥavta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar] vis-à-vis your gifts. They said: Even now, we still need the Moda’i. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i came and explained: You shuddered [zata], you trembled [ḥaradta], the sin flew [paraḥ] from upon your head. (Reuben shuddered and trembled with remorse for his sin, and therefore was forgiven (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: You acted like those impetuous ones who break their shins in the water. (They leap before they look.) “As water” – the Rabbis say: You sinned through water, (Water in the sense of liquid, a reference to semen.) let the one who was drawn from water come and draw you near: “May Reuben live and not die” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This verse was stated by Moses, who was so called because he was drawn from the water (see Exodus 2:10). ) “As water” – just as water is released from place to place, so, you have been released. (Just as water flows, your sin has flowed away from you, i.e., you have been relieved of liability. Alternatively, the implication is: Your privileges have been taken from you (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: One does not make a ritual bath of wine or of oil, but rather of water; so, you made yourself a ritual bath of water and you purified yourself in it. (Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i is of the opinion that Reuben sinned only in thought but not in deed, as he did not carry out his sinful thoughts. Therefore, his thoughts of sincere repentance restored him to a state of purity, as though he had immersed in a ritual bath (Etz Yosef). ) “You shall not excel [totar]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said this: Nothing was relinquished [vitarta] for you. (You have not been absolved from punishment. This is derived from the fact that totar and vitarta are derived from the same root in Hebrew. ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: There will be nothing remaining [vitaron] for you from your sin. “Because you mounted [alita]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: Because you mounted in its plain sense. (They interpret the phrase “because you mounted your father’s bed” in the plain sense as indicating that Reuben literally sinned with Bilha. ) Rabbi Elazar said: Because you mounted [alita] (He interprets alita to mean “you elevated [he’eleita],” meaning that Reuben brought about benefit regarding his father’s bed. This occurred in the incident of the mandrakes, which led to the birth of Issachar.) – where? In the case of the mandrakes. “Your father’s bed [mishkevei avikha]” – Rabbi Berekhya said: It is not written here: Your father’s bed [mishkav] , but rather, “your father’s beds [mishkevei]” (The term mishkevei, generally translated “bed,” is actually a plural term, such that a literal translation would be “beds.” ) – the bed of Bilha and the bed of Zilpa. (Accordingly, not only did Reuben literally sin, but he did so with Zilpa as well as with Bilha. ) Rabbi Abbahu, and some say Rabbi Yaakov, in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: We learned: One who is suspect in some matter neither judges in its regard nor testifies in its regard. (Mishna Bekhorot 4:10. ) Is it possible that he is destined to be one of the six tribes that were standing on Mount Eval and saying: “Cursed is one who lies with his father’s wife” (Deuteronomy 27:20), and he performed this very act? Rather, he was defending his mother’s honor. All the days that Rachel was alive, her bed was situated alongside the bed of Jacob our patriarch. When Rachel died, Jacob our patriarch took Bilha’s bed and placed it alongside his bed. [Reuben] said: Is it not enough that my mother was jealous during her sister’s lifetime, that she must be so even after her death? He rose and rearranged the beds. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon disagrees with this and [says that] Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi [said] in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: This is analogous to one who was suspected of selling teruma as non-sacred produce. (Teruma, which could be eaten only by priests and the members of their households, and only in a state of ritual purity, would command a much cheaper price than non-sacred produce. ) They investigated him and inspected, but did not find any substance to these claims, and they appointed him in charge of setting prices in the marketplace. “Then you desecrated” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: “Then you desecrated” – in its plain sense. “Ascended” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: You ascended from your sin. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i said: You ascended from your gifts. (Numerous commentaries suggest that the text should read that according to Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, “you ascended from your gifts,” meaning that due to his sin, Reuben lost out on the priestly gifts, and Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says, “you ascended from your sin,” meaning that Reuben repented and achieved atonement for his sin. ) The Rabbis say: I am neither distancing you nor drawing you near. Instead I am leaving you in loose abeyance until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “And Moses ascended to God” (Exodus 19:3), comes, and does with you what he perceives to be correct. When Moses came, he began to draw him near: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). The Rabbis say: The same was true of the congregation of Koraḥ, . (See the end of section 2. )
What is written above on the matter (in Gen. 33:18)? NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE. < When > he had come from Paddan-Aram under conditions that the Holy One had set with him, he did not lessen him in any respect. What did Jacob do? He began opening bazaars. (On this word, see above, 8:19, and the note there.) The Holy One said to him: Have you forgotten what you vowed to me? And did you not say this (in Gen. 28:20): IF GOD IS WITH ME, so that I do not commit idolatry, (ibid., cont.:) AND PROTECTS ME, from bloodshed, (ibid., cont.:) ON THE WAY, from unchastity, as stated (in Prov. 30:20): SUCH IS THE WAY OF AN ADULTERESS: SHE EATS, WIPES HER MOUTH, AND SAYS: I HAVE DONE NO WRONG. The Holy One did protect him, for it so states (in Gen. 28:15): AND I WILL PROTECT YOU WHEREVER YOU GO. Jacob said (in Gen. 28:22): [AND] OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME, I WILL SURELY SET ASIDE A TITHE FOR YOU. As soon as he came to the land of Israel, he forgot this vow. The Holy One said: By your life, through the very things which you said you would observe, through them you shall come to grief. Where is it shown in regard to idolatry? Where it is stated (in Gen. 35:4): THEN THEY GAVE UNTO JACOB ALL THE ALIEN GODS THAT THEY HAD…. Where is it shown in regard to bloodshed? Where it is stated (in Gen. 34:25): THAT TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD … [AND KILLED EVERY MALE]. Where is it shown in regard to unchastity? From Dinah, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 34:2-3): THEN SHECHEM BEN HAMOR THE HIVITE, THE PRINCE OF THE LAND, SAW HER. < … > AND HIS SOUL CLUNG TO JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH. R. Abbahu said: We have learned things from putrid secretion (i.e., mere mortals): (“Putrid secretion” can denote semen or, as here, the mere mortals like Pharaoh, who were produced by it.) (Gen. 41:44:) PHARAOH SAID TO JOSEPH: I AM PHARAOH. (Gen. R. 90:2.) I have said that you shall be king. The Holy One said to Israel concerning each and every commandment which they do: I AM THE LORD (e.g., in Lev. 19:3, 4, 10, 12, 14, 16, etc.). I am the one who is going to repay each and everyone with his reward. Now, just as in the case of flesh and blood, when it said: I AM PHARAOH, it raised him to great dignity; so much the more so with me when I say something. And just as you said (in Gen. 41:40): ONLY WITH RESPECT TO THE THRONE SHALL I BE GREATER THAN YOU, < so > has the Holy One said to Israel (in Deut. 28:13): AND YOU ONLY SHALL BE AT THE TOP. Just as an "only" from flesh and blood (i.e., from Pharaoh) magnified Joseph, so much the more so in the case of an "only" from the Holy One.
“From the herd or from the flock” – blessed is the Omnipresent who reckoned Himself with the first righteous ones. Adam sacrificed a bull upon the altar, as it is stated: “It will please the Lord more than a bull” (Psalms 69:32). (This verse is understood to refer to an offering by Adam, as above, Vayikra Rabba 2:7. ) Noah fulfilled what is written in the Torah, as it is stated: “Noah built an altar to the Lord” (Genesis 8:20). Abraham fulfilled the entire Torah, as it is stated: “Because Abraham heeded [My voice, and observed…My Torah]” (Genesis 26:5), as he prepared an offering and sacrificed a ram. Isaac fulfilled what is written in the Torah and cast himself before his father like a lamb to slaughter. Jacob fulfilled what is written in the Torah, as it is stated: “They gave to Jacob all the foreign gods [that were in their possession…and Jacob buried them]” (Genesis 35:4). Judah fulfilled what is written in the Torah, as it is stated: “Consort with your brother's wife, [and consummate levirate marriage with her]” (Genesis 38:8). Joseph fulfilled what is written in the Torah: “Honor your father…you shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear [false witness], you shall not covet” (Exodus 20:12–13). They did so before the Torah was given to them, and they performed it at their own initiative. That is why the Holy One blessed be He loved them with an absolute love and paralleled their name to His great name. In their regard it says: “Happy are those whose path is flawless, [who follow the Torah of the Lord]” (Psalms 119:1), and it says: “The Rock, His actions are flawless” (Deuteronomy 32:4), and it says: “God’s way is flawless” (Psalms 18:31).
The difference between one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow [hamuddar hana’a meḥaveiro] and one for whom benefit from his food is forbidden by vow concerns only setting foot on the other person’s property and borrowing from that person utensils that one does not use in preparation of food but for other purposes. Those two benefits are forbidden to the former but permitted to the latter. Therefore, with regard to one for whom benefit from another’s food is forbidden by vow, that person may not lend him utensils used in the preparation of food, e.g., a sieve, or a strainer, or a millstone, or an oven. However, he may lend him a garment, or a finger ring, or a cloak, or nose rings, as these are not used in the preparation of food. However, he may not lend them to one for whom benefit from him is forbidden by vow. And with regard to any item that one does not use in the preparation of food, in a place where one rents items of that kind, that item is forbidden. Meaning, one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow is prohibited from borrowing this type of item from the one who vowed and imposed the prohibition. This is because one can use the money saved by borrowing the item rather than renting it to purchase food.
ein Gewand und Nasenringe. נזם, das in der Bibel sowohl Nasenring (Gen. 24, 47) als Ohrring (Gen. 35, 4) bedeutet, soll wohl hier, wo es dem טבעת gegenübergestellt wird, Nasenring bezeichnen. Im jerus. Talmud findet sich die bessere Lesart: חלוק וטלית נזמים וטבעות, und so zitirt auch der bab. Talmud unsre Mischna.
עם באר לחי ראי, as if the Torah had written בבאר, “at the well.” We have a similar construction in Deuteronomy 8,5 וידעת עם לבבך, “you shall know in your heart.” Or, compare Genesis 35,4 תחת האלה אשר עם שכם, “under the terebinth in Shechem.” Or, compare Samuel II 19,38 עם קבר אבו ואמי “by the graves of my father and mother.”
Under the doorpost. This is translated according to Targum Yonasan, תְּחוֹת אַלְתָא. הָאַלָה refers to the door post of the entrance, as it is said, (I. Melachim 6:31.) “the doorposts were a fifth, and (Yechezkeil 40:10.) the doorposts had one measure.” Other say that [הָאַלָה means ‘the oak tree’] and it refers to the oak near Shechem which is written regarding Yaakov, (See Bereishis 35:4. As Yaakov was preparing to return to his father, Yitzchok, in the Holy Land, he instructed that all idols and earrings were to be given to him and he buried them under the oak tree near Shechem.) “And Yaakov hid them beneath the oak.”
[23] We read as follows: “And they gave Jacob the strange gods, which were in their hands, and the ear-rings which were in their ears, and Jacob hid them under the terebinth that was in Shechem” (Gen. 35:4). These are bad men’s gods. And Jacob is not said to receive them, but to hide and destroy them. This is in every point perfectly accurate. For the man of sterling worth will take nothing to make him rich in the products of evil, but will hide them secretly and do away with them.
Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose went to the wellknown Neapolis (The former Sichem, today Nablus.) . The Samaritans came to him. He told them, I am seeing you bowing down not to this mountain but to the idols under it, as it is written, he hid them under the terebinth near Sichem (Gen. 35:4.) . He heard their voices saying, let us get up early and gather those thorns. He understood that they intended to kill him; he got up early and left.
They gave Yaakov all the foreign gods [false gods of the nations] that were in their hands, and [also] the rings in their ears. Yaakov buried them under the oak [tree] which was near Shechem.
And they delivered into Jakob's hand all the idols of the people which were in their hands which they had taken from the temple of Shekem, and the jewels that had been in the ears of the inhabitants of the city of Shekem, in which was portrayed the likeness of their images; and Jakob hid them under the terebinth that was near to the city of Shekem.
| וַיִּסָּ֑עוּ וַיְהִ֣י ׀ חִתַּ֣ת אֱלֹהִ֗ים עַל־הֶֽעָרִים֙ אֲשֶׁר֙ סְבִיב֣וֹתֵיהֶ֔ם וְלֹ֣א רָֽדְפ֔וּ אַחֲרֵ֖י בְּנֵ֥י יַעֲקֹֽב׃ | 5 E | As they set out, a terror from God fell on the cities round about, so that they did not pursue the sons of Jacob. |
A TERROR OF. The tav of chittat (terror of) receives a dagesh to compensate for the missing root letter, the tav. (The root of chittat is chet, tav, tav, but it is spelled with one tav. The dagesh compensates for the missing letter.)
ויסעו, ויהי חתת אלוקים על הערים, They departed; the fear of the Lord was on the cities in their region. Perhaps the Torah informs us here of the surprising fact that although the departure of Jacob's family from Shechem must have been perceived by the local inhabitants as a flight, they were so overcome with the fear of the Lord that they did not pursue them. Alternatively: although by the time the local inhabitants became aware of it, Jacob's family had long gone and thereby escaped their determination to attack them, they were so afraid of the Lord that they decided not to give chase.
חתת means terror.
They began their journey. As long as they were behind the walls of Shechem they were safe, but now they were in need of the “terror of Elokim”.
They traveled; and despite Jacob’s fear that the cities surrounding Shekhem might try to avenge the deaths of the people of Shekhem, nevertheless, the dread of God, an inexplicable sensation of alarm, was upon the cities that were surrounding them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob. There were also sound logical reasons for the hesitation of the neighboring cities: They did not know the size of Jacob’s camp, and when they heard that two of his sons had destroyed Shekhem, the residents were afraid of them. Presumably, the residents were not aware of the entire background of the event. Furthermore, it may be assumed that the relationships between different cities were weak, as their residents were not from the same nation. Consequently, many of these local inhabitants were certainly indifferent to the affair, and chose to refrain from getting involved in a matter that was not their concern.
“A terror from God fell on the cities round about” [35:5]. A fear was upon the cities round about and they did not pursue Jacob. Toldot Yizhak writes. The cities round about said that what happened to Shechem was justified because they circumcised themselves and became Israelites and threw away our god. That is why this happened to them; our god punished them. Therefore, we will not pursue Jacob. This is the meaning of the verse “A terror from God fell on the cities.” The destruction and shame of their foreign gods was on all the cities around Jacob. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 35:5.)
[2] Another explanation According to our father Jacob, he exclaimed and said, "Greatly have I been afflicted from my youth, let Israel now say" (Psalms 129:1). The Holy One, blessed be He, responded and said, "But in every trouble that entered upon you, was I not with you and saved you? I redeemed you from death in famine (Job 5:20), when Jacob saw that there was grain in Egypt and said, 'Why do you just keep looking at each other?' (Genesis 42:1), and in war from the hand of the sword (Job 5:20), when Esau came with four hundred men, "You will hide from the sword of the tongue" (Job 5:21). When did Jacob hear the words of Laban's sons, etc.? (Genesis 31:1), and "Do not be afraid of sudden terror, nor of trouble from the wicked when it comes" (Proverbs 3:25). When did the people of Shechem come and depart and a terror from God fell upon them? (Genesis 35:5), "You shall laugh at destruction and famine" (Job 5:22). When did he leave his father's house and Esau took his blessings from him? (It seems to be different opinions regarding the interpretation of the beginning of Parshat Vayetze) Nevertheless, the Holy One, blessed be He, did not abandon him, as it is written, "With my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps" (Genesis 32:11), "Do not be afraid of the beasts of the earth" (Job 5:22), for as long as he was a shepherd, not one of the animals touched the flock, as it is written, "I did not bring you animals torn by wild beasts" (Genesis 31:39). "For you have made a covenant with the stones of the field" (Job 5:23). When did he take stones from the place and set them up as a pillar? (Genesis 28:18). "And the wild beast of the field shall be at peace with thee" (Job 5:23), "And Esau ran to meet him" (Genesis 33:4), which is called a "Chayah" (wild animal), as it says, "Shout down the beast of the reeds" [(Yishmael, who is like a swine living among the reeds)] (Psalms 68:31). "And you will know that your tent is in peace" (Job 5:24), "When was it that Israel settled?" (Genesis 33:22), and what is written after that? "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (Genesis 35:22). "And you will lie down, and none shall make you afraid" (Job 11:19), "And Israel shall dwell in safety, alone" (Deuteronomy 33:28), "Many faces have been humbled before you" (Job 40:14), "And many nations shall come" (Isaiah 2:3). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob: "After all these things that I have done for you, you will call me your adversary" (Hosea 12:14). Jacob also said, "Many have been my afflictions from my youth" (Psalms 129:1), and also said, "They have not prevailed against me" (Psalms 129:2). David said to him, "For all these things, I will give you praise," as it says, "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him from them all" (Psalms 34:19).
“They traveled; the dread of God was upon the cities that were surrounding them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob” (Genesis 35:5). “They traveled; the dread of God was [upon the cities that were surrounding them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob]” – Rabbi Shmuel said: In three places, idolaters gathered to wage war with Jacob’s children, but the Holy One blessed be He did not allow them to do so, as it is written: “They traveled; the dread of God was [upon the cities]...” The second time was in the days of Yehonatan, as it is stated: “The very ground trembled, and there was a God-inspired terror” (I Samuel 14:15). Third, in the days of Joshua, they sought to pursue, (See Joshua 11:1–5. ) but the Holy One blessed be He did not allow them to do so. Where did they gather? In Ḥatzor, as it is written: “But all the cities that stood intact, Israel did not burn them; Joshua burned only Ḥatzor alone” (Joshua 11:13). Rabbi Elazar said: He burned it based on a tradition. The Holy One blessed be He said it to Moses, and Moses said it to Joshua. (According to Rabbi Elazar, the reason for the burning of Ḥatzor was not because the nations had gathered there to attack Israel, but because Joshua had been commanded to do so by Moses. ) “Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan, it is Beit El; he and all the people who were with him” (Genesis 35:6). “Jacob came to Luz” – as anyone who enters it blossoms with mitzvot and good deeds like an almond tree [luz].
“God appeared to Jacob again, upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). “God appeared to Jacob.” It is written: “Show me a sign for good, [so that those who hate me will see it and be shamed, for You, Lord, have helped me and comforted me]” (Psalms 86:17) – it is speaking of David but was fulfilled in Jacob. (The author of this statement was David. Although there is no indication that David’s request was fulfilled, Jacob did receive such a sign. ) “A sign” – on the basis of what is stated: “If he said this: The speckled will be your wages [then all the flocks bore speckled]” (Genesis 31:8). “Those who hate me will see it” (Psalms 86:17) – this is Esau and his chieftains. “Have helped me” (Psalms 86:17) – with the trouble of Shekhem, as it is written: “The dread of God was upon the cities” (Genesis 35:5). “And comforted me” (Psalms 86:17) – with the blessing of the mourners.
“God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and an assembly of nations will be from you, and kings will emerge from your loins” (Genesis 35:11). “God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply” – Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak: I used to say: Reuben was already out. Simeon was already out. Benjamin had already emerged from his loins and was still in his mother’s womb. (He used to wonder who this blessing referred to, given that Jacob’s sons were all born except for Benjamin, and Rachel was already pregnant with him, such that he had already emerged from Jacob’s loins. ) Then I said: “A nation” – this is Benjamin; “and an assembly of nations” – this is Manasseh and Ephraim, as it is written: “His descendants will be a plenitude of the nations” (Genesis 48:19). Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Ḥelbo, and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Yerovam and Yehu. The Rabbis say: Is it possible that Avner was a righteous man and he disputed that the kingdom [belonged to] the house of David? It is that he expounded a midrash, and crowned Ish Boshet. (See II Samuel 2:8–9. ) That is what is written: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Saul and Ish Boshet. What did they see that led them to draw near and ostracize in the case of the concubine in Giva? (See Judges chap. 20–21. ) It is, rather, that they read a verse and ostracized them, and read a verse and immediately welcomed them. They read a verse and ostracized them: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be like Reuben and Simeon for me” (Genesis 48:5). (They felt justified in ostracizing the tribe of Benjamin because Manasseh and Ephraim counted as two tribes, such that there would be twelve tribes even without Benjamin. ) They read a verse and welcomed them: “A nation and an assembly of nations will be from you.” (As stated above, this refers to Benjamin as well as Manasseh and Ephraim, and therefore they welcomed Benjamin back and cancelled his ostracization. )
It is written (in Ps. 50:14): SACRIFICE A THANK OFFERING TO GOD. When Jacob left his father's house, he left with nothing but his staff, as stated (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): WITH ONLY MY STAFF I CROSSED THIS JORDAN. Immediately Jacob had made a vow before the Holy One, as stated (in Gen. 28:20): THEN JACOB VOWED A VOW. What is written at the end of the passage (in vs. 22)? AND OF ALL THAT YOU GIVE ME. But, when he enriched him, as stated (in Gen. 30:43): SO THE MAN (Jacob) BECAME VERY VERY PROSPEROUS, he forgot his vow. Immediately he provoked Laban against him, as stated (in Gen. 31:23): SO HE (Laban) TOOK HIS RELATIVES WITH HIM < AND PURSUED HIM (Jacob) SEVEN DAYS' JOURNEY >. When he had escaped from Laban, Esau was incited against him. Immediately the angel appeared to him. He said to him: Are you not aware of all this trouble? Why has all the trouble come over you? Because you have been late with your vow. Jacob said to him (in Gen. 32:30 [29]) {WHAT IS} [PLEASE TELL] YOUR NAME. He said to him (ibid.): WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? Sometimes the angel is made into a spirit, as stated (in Ps. 104:4): HE HAS MADE HIS ANGELS SPIRITS. Sometimes he is made a into lightning bolt, as stated (in Job 38:35): CAN YOU SEND FORTH LIGHTNINGS SO THAT THEY GO? But as for the miracles (of transformation), he (God) acts himself. And so the angel said to Manoah (in Jud. 13:18): YOU ARE NOT TO ASK MY NAME. (Gen. 32:30 [29]:) WHY IS IT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR MY NAME? (Yalqut Shim‘oni, Jud., 69, explains that names are useless because the angel would not know into what form God might change him.) Immediately the angel blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE BLESSED HIM THERE. (Hos. 12:5 [4]:) SO HE STROVE WITH AN ANGEL AND PREVAILED. What did he say to him? Go, fulfill your vow. (Eccl. 5:4 [5]:) IT IS BETTER NOT TO VOW < THAN TO VOW AND NOT FULFILL >. What did Simeon and Levi do immediately? TWO OF JACOB'S SONS, [SIMEON AND LEVI, BROTHERS OF DINAH, EACH TOOK HIS SWORD] … < AND KILLED EVERY MALE >. < Jacob > immediately fell on his face and did not get up until < the Holy One > gave him permission (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. So also with Joshua (according to Josh. 7:6 & 10): [AND HE FELL ON HIS FACE] < .. . > THEN THE LORD SAID UNTO JOSHUA: ARISE, GO. WHY IS IT THAT YOU FALL UPON YOUR FACE? So also with David (according to I Chron. 21:16): SO DAVID AND THE ELDERS, COVERED IN SACKCLOTH, FELL UPON THEIR FACES. Then what was said to him (in II Sam. 24:18)? GO UP, ERECT AN ALTAR TO THE LORD ON THE THRESHING FLOOR OF ARAUNAH. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 35:1): ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. He immediately journeyed with his whole house; and the Holy One put his fear upon all about him, as stated (in Gen. 35:5): AND, AS THEY JOURNEYED, A TERROR FROM GOD CAME < UPON THE CITIES THAT WERE ROUND ABOUT THEM >. It is also stated (in Deut. 28:10): AND ALL THE PEOPLES OF THE EARTH SHALL SEE THAT THE NAME OF THE LORD IS PROCLAIMED OVER YOU, AND THEY SHALL BE AFRAID OF YOU.
"Midrash Vayisu": It is based on the verse "They journeyed, and the terror of God was upon the cities that were around them, and they did not pursue the sons of Jacob" (Genesis 35:5). It is also referred to as the "Book of the Wars of the Sons of Jacob" as it recounts the valor of Jacob's sons in their battle against the kings of the Amorites who gathered against them following the incident of Shechem, and Jacob and his sons' battle against Esau and his progeny. In these battles, Judah particularly stood out for his valor and courage.
Simeon and Levi were moved by a great zeal on account of the immorality, as it is said, "And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?" (Gen. 34:31). And each man took his sword and slew all the men of Shechem. When Jacob heard thereof, he became sorely afraid. For he said: Now all the people of the land will hear, and they will gather together against me || and smite me. He began to curse the wrath of his sons, as it is said, "Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce" (Gen. 49:7); and he also cursed their sword in the Greek language, for he said: "Weapons of violence are their swords" (Gen. 49:5). All the kings of the earth heard (thereof) and feared very much, saying: If two sons of Jacob have done all these great things, if they all band themselves together, they will be able to destroy the world. And the dread of the Holy One, blessed be He, fell upon them, as it is said, "And the terror of God was upon the cities,… and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob" (Gen. 35:5).
"His (Shimon's) hands did battle for him," as it is written (Bereshith 34:25) "And there took, two sons of Jacob, Shimon and Levi, etc." "And You shall be a help against his foes": as in (Ibid. 35:5) "And they journeyed, and the terror of G-d was on the cities around them, and they did not pursue the sons of Jacob."
אשר לקחתי, “which I have taken;” he meant that he would take this (accept this) in the days of Joshua when the tribes would receive their shares of the Holy Land. In those days all of this would be conquered with the sword and the bow and arrow. The use by Yaakov of the past tense here is parallel to the use of the past tense concerning the money for the purchase price of the cave of Machpelah, when Avraham had said: נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, “I have already given the money for the field, accept it from me.” (Genesis 23,13) Just as Avraham at the time was certain that Efron would finalise the negotiation, so Yaakov was certain that G-d would keep His promises concerning the Israelites receiving their ancestral land in due course. The reason why Yaakov singled out the Emorite and no other Canaanite tribe is that this was by far the strongest of the Canaanite tribes. We find proof of this in Amos 2,9: ואנכי השמדתי את האמורי מפניהם אשר כגובה ארזים גבהו וחסון הוא כאלונים, “yet I destroyed the Emorite before them, whose stature was like that of the cedars amongst the trees and who was as stout as oak trees.”Another interpretation: when Yaakov speaks of “my sword and my bow,” he quotes G-d, just as we have the line said by Moses in Deuteronomy 33,29: בה' מגן עזרך ואשר חרב גאותך, “by G-d your protecting shield, your sword is triumphant.”Rashi here understands our verse as Yaakov referring to the surrounding tribes making a joint effort to avenge the male inhabitants of Sh’chem whom Shimon and Levi had killed, as abstaining from their intention, i.e. “they did not pursue the sons of Yaakov.” (Genesis 35,5)
LET MY SOUL NOT COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL. Rabbi Aaron (Gaon of the school of Pumbedita. The great Hai Gaon was among his students.) explained the word tavo (come) in Let my soul not come (tavo) as having the meaning of set like the meaning of ba (goeth down, to set) in and the sun goeth down (ba) (Eccles. 1:5). (The word ba means to come. In Eccles. 1:5 the word ba means sets, i.e., when the sun goes down (sets) it is no longer in the sky. Similarly the word tavo, which comes from the same root, here means will set. Let my soul not set from their council means let my soul always be in their council.) He interpreted let my soul not come into their council as meaning, I do not want to be outside of their council. However, Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation inverts the meaning of the verse. (Rabbi Aaron interpreted Let my soul not come in to their council to mean let my soul not set from their council. The verse means I do not want my soul to be in their council. Thus Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation is precisely the opposite of what the verse actually says.) If Jacob praised Simeon and Levi, why did he mention weapons of violence? Furthermore, Jacob told his sons, Ye have troubled me, to make me odious unto the inhabitants of the land (Gen. 34:30). (We thus see that Jacob was angry at what his sons did to the inhabitants of Shechem and on his deathbed would not praise them for this act.) The truth of the matter is that Simeon and Levi placed Jacob and his household in great jeopardy by their actions in Shechem. Indeed, were it not for the terror of God that was upon the cities that were round about them (Gen. 35:5), they would have surrounded Jacob and his family and exterminated them all. He (Rabbi Aaron) similarly explained (That is, in a positive manner, not that Jacob castigated his sons but praised them for slaying the inhabitants of Shechem and destroying its wall. Rabbi Aaron interprets verses 6-7 as follows: Let my soul not set from their council, from their assembly let my glory not be excluded; For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they uprooted a cursed wall; For their anger was fierce, and their wrath it was cruel. Rabbi Aaron interprets verse 8 as follows: I will give them a good portion in Jacob (achallekem be-ya’akov) and may they multiply in Israel (va-afitzem bi’yisra’el) (Filwarg).) Cursed be their anger (v. 7) as meaning and in their self will they uprooted a cursed wall, (Rabbi Aaron renders ikkeru shor (they houghed oxen) as they uprooted a wall.) for their anger was fierce. The above explanations are unpalatable. (Literally, cold, i.e., unpalatable as cold food (Krinsky).) Let my soul not come into their council. (I reject them. I.E. takes Jacob’s words and gives them a new twist.) Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen (Rabbi Moses ben Samuel Gikatilla, an 11th century Bible commentator. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 and the notes thereto.) says that kevodi (my glory) is synonymous with nafshi (my soul). He notes that we find the two often used synonymously in the book of Psalms. Rabbi Moses’ interpretation is correct since our text repeats itself in different words, (The point is that the second half of the line repeats what the first half said but in different words. In the first half it uses nafshi, in the second kevodi. However, both mean one and the same.) as is the style of prophetic statements. We thus find, Ask thy father, and he will declare unto thee, Thine elders, and they will tell thee (Deut. 32:7), and (in Num. 23:8) How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? And how shall I execrate, whom the Lord hath not execrated? Thus into their council means the same as unto their assembly, come (tavoh) the same as be united (techad), and nafshi the same as kevodi. However, Rabbi Judah ben Balam the Spaniard (Bible commentator and grammarian who lived in the 10th and 11th centuries. “His commentaries (in Arabic) on most of the Bible are remarkable for their philosophical method and use of comparison with Arabic.” (Cecil Roth, Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 940).) says that Rabbi Moses erred. He maintains that kavod (glory) refers to the body because the body is the glory (kavod) of the soul in the same way that a necklace is the ornament to the neck, (The body is inferior to the soul, yet it is considered the soul’s glory in the same way that a necklace, although certainly less important than the neck, is nevertheless called the ornament of the neck (Cherez).) as we find in the verse Who satisfieth thy body (edyekh) with good things (Ps. 103:5). (The Hebrew edyekh ordinarily means your ornament. J.P.S. translates it as thine old age. Rabbi Judah Balam interprets edyekh as referring to the body. However, I.E. in Psalms interprets edyekh as referring to the soul.) Rabbi Judah offers as a proof text, (That kavod refers to the body.) Yea, let him lay my glory (kevodi) in the dust. Selah. (Ps. 7:6). (Which proves that glory cannot refer to the soul for it is impossible to lay the soul in the dust.) However, I say that Rabbi Judah errs, for we find Scripture saying, So that my glory (kevodi) may sing praise to Thee (Ps. 30:13), (I.E. interprets this verse in his commentaries on Psalms as follows: So that all that have a soul (kavod) may sing praise to thee. We thus see that kavod refers to the soul. Rabbi Judah might retort that Ps. 30:13 should be interpreted: so that my body may sing praise to thee, or all that have a human form (kavod) may sing praise to thee.) and Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory (kevodi) rejoiceth; My flesh (i.e., my body) also dwelleth in safety (Ps. 16:9). (Kavod must refer to the soul for otherwise body is mentioned twice in our verse. I.E. in Psalms interprets my heart as referring to man’s intelligence, my glory (kevodi) to man’s soul, and my flesh to the body.) As to the proof which Rabbi Judah offered from Yea, let him lay my glory in the dust, it is figurative. What the verse means is that my soul will be lowered as low as possible, i.e., to the dust. Positive proof that my interpretation is correct comes from My soul (nafshi) cleaveth unto the dust (Ps. 119:25). (This verse certainly must be taken figuratively. Similarly, Ps. 119:25.)
ויעבר אברם..עד מקום שכם, until the outskirts of Shechem. Perhaps the locations mentioned in the Torah are the ones that any traveler who came from Charan to the land of Canaan encounters in the order in which they appear in our paragraph. Avram may have briefly lived in these locations until G’d told him to move on and criss cross the land in 13,17. According to a Midrash quoted by Rashi, Avram saw a prophetic vision of the rape of Dinah in that town, and how the sons of Yaakov would avenge that deed. He therefore stopped there and offered a prayer on behalf of the family of Yaakov, asking G’d to save them from the pursuit and hatred of the Emorites who would try and avenge their compatriots. We know that this prayer was answered from Genesis 35,5 ויהי חתת אלוקים על הערים וגו', “the fear of G’d was on these cities, etc.” [according to Eliyahu Mizrachi, the words עד מקום שכם instead of עד שכם, are hard to justify otherwise. Ed.]
They began their journey. The terror of Elohim was upon the [people who were in the] cities that were around them, and they did not pursue the sons of Yaakov.
And they journeyed from thence, offering praise and prayer before the Lord. And there was a tremor from before the Lord upon the people of the cities round about them, and they pursued not after the sons of Jakob.
| וַיָּבֹ֨א יַעֲקֹ֜ב ל֗וּזָה אֲשֶׁר֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן הִ֖וא בֵּֽית־אֵ֑ל ה֖וּא וְכׇל־הָעָ֥ם אֲשֶׁר־עִמּֽוֹ׃ | 6 E | Thus Jacob came to Luz—that is, Bethel—in the land of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him. |
לוזה אשר בארץ כנען, “towards Luz which is in the land of Canaan.” There was another town called Luz, elsewhere.
הוא וכל העם אשר עמו, “he and all the people who were with him.” It is recorded in a Midrash called מלחמות השם, (and quoted by Nachmanides) that the neighbouring towns of Shechem did indeed gather together and fought three battles against he sons of Yaakov. Had it not been for their father Yaakov who personally girded himself with his sword and other weapons, they would indeed all have been in mortal danger. Our sages refer to this when they interpret the words of Yaakov on his deathbed when he described himself as personally having taken the town of Shechem from the Emorite with his sword and bow (Genesis 48,22). It is the custom of the Bible to furnish us with only the barest details of such encounters, seeing that the kind of miracle which G’d employed was a “hidden miracle,” i.e. not a miracle in which known laws of nature have been visibly changed. Another example of the Bible being sparse with information about such encounters is what happened to Avraham in Ur Casdim i.e. when Nimrod threw him into a furnace and he escaped unharmed. The wars fought by the sons of Esau against the people of Chorite (36,21) are similarly not mentioned here. The Torah contents itself by referring to the “hidden” miracle by simply writing that Yaakov and all those with him arrived at their next destination, i.e. that not a single casualty was sustained by Yaakov’s entourage during the attacks upon them by the Emorites.
לוזה אשר בארץ כנען, this teaches that there was a second place or town called “Luz.”
הוא וכל העם, the Torah wants to inform us that Yaakov had not suffered a single casualty among his servants, even, as a negative fallout of the killing of all the males in Shechem, not even on the way. This was all due to the intense fear of retribution by the G’d of Yaakov which had gripped the Canaanites of the region. They did not even dare pursue the family, [which might have been perceived as retreating, seeing that they had not made an attempt to take over the city, Ed.]
Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan, it is Beit El, he and all the people who were with him.
“They traveled; the dread of God was upon the cities that were surrounding them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob” (Genesis 35:5). “They traveled; the dread of God was [upon the cities that were surrounding them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob]” – Rabbi Shmuel said: In three places, idolaters gathered to wage war with Jacob’s children, but the Holy One blessed be He did not allow them to do so, as it is written: “They traveled; the dread of God was [upon the cities]...” The second time was in the days of Yehonatan, as it is stated: “The very ground trembled, and there was a God-inspired terror” (I Samuel 14:15). Third, in the days of Joshua, they sought to pursue, (See Joshua 11:1–5. ) but the Holy One blessed be He did not allow them to do so. Where did they gather? In Ḥatzor, as it is written: “But all the cities that stood intact, Israel did not burn them; Joshua burned only Ḥatzor alone” (Joshua 11:13). Rabbi Elazar said: He burned it based on a tradition. The Holy One blessed be He said it to Moses, and Moses said it to Joshua. (According to Rabbi Elazar, the reason for the burning of Ḥatzor was not because the nations had gathered there to attack Israel, but because Joshua had been commanded to do so by Moses. ) “Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan, it is Beit El; he and all the people who were with him” (Genesis 35:6). “Jacob came to Luz” – as anyone who enters it blossoms with mitzvot and good deeds like an almond tree [luz].
Seeing that it is impossible for a human being while part of a body to divest himself totally of bodily needs and concerns, we can appreciate what our sages said that contrary to the name Avraham which replaced the name Avram, the name Yisrael did not replace the name Yaakov. It reflected the fact that this Yaakov had attained an additional dimension in his personality development (compare Berachot 13). The name Yaakov henceforth became subordinate to that of Yisrael. The use of these names teaches amongst other matters that if someone makes his spiritual dimension subordinate to his physical, terrestrial concerns this “kills” him, leads to his death sooner or later. This is what David had in mind when he said in Psalms 22,30: “all those who in full vigor shall eat and prostrate themselves, all those at death’s door whose spirit lag, shall bend the knee before Him.” David refers to people who make a point of first tasting all the pleasures of terrestrial life before prostrating themselves before G’d as having their priorities reversed. As a result, such people experience death in a very real sense of the word. In the verse we just quoted the word יכרעו, “they will bend the knee” does not refer to something similar to השתחוה, “prostrating” oneself (before G’d). Rather, it is similar to Psalms 20,9. In that psalm it is used as meaning falling down and not rising up again. This is the punishment for having had one’s priorities mixed up. When the people mentioned in Psalm 22 finally decide to “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s,” i.e. to also make an obeisance to G’d as an afterthought, it is too late. They had not lifted a finger to secure their share in eternity while there was time. Upon closer examination you will find that when the Torah employs the name Yaakov to describe our patriarch it refers to his terrestrial concerns, concerns which are indispensable for any human being, whereas when it switches by calling him Yisrael it refers to his spiritual concerns, matters which are largely abstract. This is what the prophet (Isaiah 43,1) had in mind when he said: ”who created you O Yaakov, who formed you O Yisrael?” In connection with the name Yaakov, the prophet only mentioned the word בריאה, a primitive kind of creation, whereas in connection with spiritual parts of man the prophet speaks of a more sophisticated product, one that has undergone יצירה, an advanced stage of formation. You will note that at the revelation of the Torah at Mount Sinai (Exodus 19,3) G’d says to Moses: “so shall you say to the house of Yaakov and relate to the children of Yisrael.” The name Yaakov referred to the women, the word Yisrael to the men. [Perhaps the fact that Adam had described Eve as “bones of my bones and flesh of my flesh,” but not as “spirit of my spirit” (Genesis 2,23), is the reason that woman symbolizes primarily the physical part of the human being. Ed.] Isaiah 43, 22 had something similar in mind when he wrote: “But you have not worshipped Me, O Yaakov, that you should be weary of me O Israel.” He meant that while you Yaakov were concerned with your terrestrial matters you did not really worship Me (even if you paid lip-service). As to worshipping Me as “Yisrael,” you indicated that it was too wearisome for you. When our Parshah commences by referring to Yaakov’s existence on earth by calling him Yaakov (twice in 47,28), this is in keeping with what we have explained. In 47,29 however, when the Torah commences to speak of “death” of the body, it switches to using the name “Yisrael” seeing that the death of a righteous person is but the necessary preamble to his taking his place in eternal life in the celestial spheres. Whenever preparations for death are described, including the very mention of the bed on which Yaakov lay sick, the Torah describes him as Yisrael. As soon as the Torah finishes describing his preparations for the life in the hereafter by blessing Joseph and his brothers, it reverts to the use of the name Yaakov. The Torah never describes Yaakov as having died. Only Yisrael is described as having died. The embalmers are described as embalming Yisrael (50,1). As soon as Yaakov had made the physical preparations for death, i.e. “he gathered in his feet to the bed,” the Torah calls him Yisrael again. As of that moment he had entered eternal life. When we find in 49,1 that the Torah refers to Yaakov suddenly again as Yaakov, the reason is that at that moment G’d withheld from him the visions of the redemption and what precedes it which he had intended to reveal to his sons. In other words, at that moment he had become primarily physical, his spiritual dimension having temporarily become subordinate. There is another instance where we could question why the Torah suddenly reverts to the use of the name Yaakov. This is in 48,3 where he explains to Joseph where and when he had his first communication from G’d, i.e. at Luz. The reason that the Torah calls him Yaakov at that point in our chapter is because he referred to a time in his life prior to his having the name Yisrael added to his regular name. in other words, we detect the following pattern. When the Torah indicates that Yaakov had not yet established mutual communication with G’d he is called Yaakov. When, even after he had established such communication, this channel of communication had been interrupted, he is also called Yaakov instead of Yisrael.
וכל העולים אתו, “and all those who had been going up with him.” This verse contains an allusion to the fierce fighting which preceded Yaakov’s burial in the cave of Machpelah. This is why it was necessary for the Torah to report that all of Joseph’s family returned to Egypt in peace. Not a single person who had engaged in honoring Yaakov by traveling to Canaan to bury him came to any harm. When the brothers had fought against Shechem and had subsequently been engaged in a battle with the Emorites they also did not sustain any casualties. To make this point, the Torah had written (Genesis 35,6) “Yaakov came to Luz which is in the land of Canaan,...he and all those with him.” The addition of these words at the end of the verse were also meant to hint that the family had not sustained any casualties.
AND THE SONS OF JACOB ANSWERED SHECHEM AND HAMOR HIS FATHER WITH SUBTLETY. Now Hamor and Shechem spoke to her father and her brothers, (Verse 11 here.) but the patriarch did not answer them at all as his sons spoke in his place on this matter out of respect for him for since the affair was a source of shame to them, they did not want him to speak about it at all. There is a question which may be raised here. It would appear that they answered with the concurrence of her father and his advice for they were in his presence, and it was he who understood the answer which they spoke with subtlety, and, if so, why was he angry afterwards? (Further, Verse 30. See also Ramban further, 49:5.) Moreover, it is inconceivable that Jacob would have consented to give his daughter in marriage to a Canaanite who had defiled her. Now surely all the brothers gave that answer with subtlety, while Simeon and Levi alone executed the deed, and the father cursed only their wrath. (Genesis 49:7.) [But if all the brothers shared responsibility for the answer and the plan, why did Jacob single out only Simeon and Levi for chastisement?] The answer is that the craftiness lay in their saying that every male of theirs be circumcised, (Verse 15 here.) as they thought that the people of the city will not consent to it. Even if perchance they will listen to their prince and they will all become circumcised, they will come on the third day, when they were in pain, (Verse 25 here.) and will take their daughter (“Daughter.” in Tur: “sister.”) from the house of Shechem. Now this was the advice of all the brothers and with the permission of their father, but Simeon and Levi wanted to take revenge of them and so they killed all the men of the city. It is possible that Jacob’s anger in cursing their wrath (Genesis 49:7.) was because they killed the men of the city who had committed no sin against him; they should have killed Shechem alone. It is this which Scripture says, And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father with subtlety, and spoke, because he had defiled Dinah their sister, for they all agreed to speak to him craftily because of the base deed which he had done to them. Now many people ask: “But how did the righteous sons of Jacob commit this deed, spilling innocent blood?” The Rabbi (Moshe ben Maimon) answered in his Book of Judges, (Hilchoth Melachim, IX, 14, with slight textual changes. The Book of Judges is the last of the fourteen books which comprise Maimonides’ great life work: The Mishneh Torah, or Yad Hachazakah.) saying that “sons of Noah” (Or “a Noachide,” a term denoting the human race. See Seder Bereshith, Note 222.) are commanded concerning Laws, and thus they are required to appoint judges in each and every district to give judgment concerning their six commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) which are obligatory upon all mankind. “And a Noachide who transgresses one of them is subject to the death-penalty by the sword. If he sees a person transgressing one of these seven (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) laws and does not bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the same death-penalty. It was on account of this that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem committed an act of robbery and they saw and knew of it, but they did not bring him to trial.” But these words do not appear to me to be correct for if so, our father Jacob should have been the first to obtain the merit of causing their death, and if he was afraid of them, why was he angry at his sons and why did he curse their wrath a long time after that and punish them by dividing them and scattering them in Israel? (Genesis 49:7.) Were they not meritorious, fulfilling a commandment and trusting in G-d Who saved them? In my opinion, the meaning of “Laws” which the Rabbis have counted among their seven Noachidic commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) is not just that they are to appoint judges in each and every district, but He commanded them concerning the laws of theft, overcharge, wronging, and a hired man’s wages; the laws of guardians of property, forceful violation of a woman, seduction, principles of damage and wounding a fellowman; laws of creditors and debtors, and laws of buying and selling, and their like, similar in scope to the laws with which Israel was charged, and involving the death-penalty for stealing, wronging or violating or seducing the daughter of his fellowman, or kindling his stack, or wounding him, and their like. And it is also included in this commandment that they appoint judges for each and every city, just as Israel was commanded to do, (Deuteronomy 16:18.) but if they failed to do so they are free of the death-penalty since this is a positive precept of theirs [and failing to fulfill a positive precept does not incur the death-penalty]. The Rabbis have only said: (Sanhedrin 57a.) “For violation of their admonishments there is the death-penalty,” and only a prohibition against doing something is called an “admonishment.” And such is the purport of the Gemara in Tractate Sanhedrin. (58b. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 192.) And in the Jerusalem Talmud (Not found in our editions. See my Hebrew commentary, ibid.) they have said: “With respect to Noachide laws, a judge who perverts justice is to be slain. If he took a bribe he is to be slain. With respect to Jewish laws, [if after having heard both parties] you know perfectly well what the proper legal decision should be, you are not permitted to withdraw from the case without rendering a decision, and if you know that it is not perfectly clear to you, you may withdraw from the case. But with respect to their laws, even though you know the law perfectly well you may withdraw from it.” From this it would appear that a non-Jewish judge may say to the litigants, “I am not beholden to you,” for it is only in Israel that there is an additional admonishment — “Lo thaguru’ (ye shall not be afraid) of the face of any man, (Deuteronomy 1:17.) meaning, “You shall not gather in, [i.e., restrain], your words before any man” (Sanhedrin 6b. This explanation is based upon the common root of the words thaguru and ogeir (gathering) as in the expression, gathering in summer, (Proverbs 10:5).) — and surely he is not to be slain for failing to make himself chief, overseer, or ruler (Proverbs 6:7. ) in order to judge superiors. [Ramban thus disagrees with Rambam, who writes that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty by not having brought Shechem to justice.] Moreover, why does the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] have to seek to establish their guilt? Were not the people of Shechem and all seven nations (Deuteronomy 7:1.) idol worshippers, perpetrators of unchaste acts, and practitioners of all things that are abominable to G-d? In many places Scripture loudly proclaims concerning them: Upon the high mountains, and upon their hills, and under every leafy tree, etc.; (Ibid., 12:2.) Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations, etc.? (Ibid., 18:9.) For all these abominations have the men of the land done, etc. (Leviticus 18:27.) However, it was not the responsibility of Jacob and his sons to bring them to justice. But the matter of Shechem was that the people of Shechem were wicked [by virtue of their violation of the seven Noachide laws] (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) and had thereby forfeited their lives. Therefore Jacob’s sons wanted to take vengeance of them with a vengeful sword, and so they killed the king and all the men of his city who were his subjects, obeying his commands. The covenant represented by the circumcision of the inhabitants of Shechem had no validity in the eyes of Jacob’s sons for it was done to curry favor with their master [and did not represent a genuine conversion]. But Jacob told them here that they had placed him in danger, as it is said, You have troubled me, to make me odious, (Verse 30 here.) and there, (Genesis 49:7.) [i.e., at the time he blessed the other children], he cursed the wrath of Simeon and Levi for they had done violence to the men of the city whom they had told in his presence, And we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. (Verse 16 here.) They would have chosen to believe in G-d and trust their word, and perhaps they might have indeed returned to G-d and thus Simeon and Levi killed them without cause for the people had done them no evil at all. It is this which Jacob said, Weapons of violence are their kinship. (Genesis, 49:5.) And if we are to believe in the book, ‘The Wars of the Sons of Jacob,’ (This is the Midrash Vayisu. See Eisenstein, Otzar Midrashim, p. 157, and L. Ginzberg’s, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. I, pp. 404-411.) their father’s fear was due to the fact that the neighbors of Shechem gathered together and waged three major wars against them, and were it not for their father who also donned his weapons and warred against them, they would have been in danger, as is related in that book. Our Rabbis have mentioned something of this conflict in their commentary on the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow. (Further, 48:22.) They said, (As quoted here, the comment appears in Rashi, ibid. See also Bereshith Rabbah 80:9.) “All the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them, and Jacob donned his weapons to war against them,” just as Rashi writes there. (Further, 48:22.) Scripture, however, is brief about this because it was a hidden miracle, (See Ramban above, 17:1. ) for the sons of Jacob were valiant men, and it appeared as if their own arm saved them. (Psalms 44:4.) Scripture is similarly brief about the matter of Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees, (See Ramban above, 11:58.) and it did not at all mention Esau’s wars with the Horites. Instead, Scripture mentions here that there was the terror of G-d upon the cities that were round them, (Further, 35:5.) and they did not all assemble to pursue after the sons of Jacob (Further, 35:5.) for they would have fallen upon them as the sand which is on the sea-shore in multitude. (I Samuel 13:5.) And this is the meaning of the terror of G-d, (Further, 35:5.) for the terror and dread (See Exodus 15:16.) of the military prowess they had seen fell upon them. Therefore Scripture says, And Jacob came to Luz… he and all the people that were with him, (Further, 35:6.) in order to inform us that not one man among them or their servants was lost in warfare. (See Numbers 31:49.)
AND I BURIED HER THERE. In Rashi’s commentary it is written, “And I did not transport her for burial even to Bethlehem to bring her into the Land.” Now I do not know the meaning thereof. Was Rachel buried outside of the Land? Forbid it! She died within the Land, and she was buried there, just as it says here in the parshah: Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan. (In the verse before us.) And there in the narrative of her death it is still more clearly written, And Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan — the same is Beth-el, (Above, 35:6.) and it is further stated, And they journeyed from Beth-el and there was still some way to come to Ephrath, (Ibid., Verse 16.) and Rachel died on the way between Beth-el and Bethlehem Ephratha in the Land of Israel.
Yaakov came to Luz, which was in the land of Canaan—that is, to Beis Eil—he and all the people that were with him.
And Jakob came to Luz in the land of Kenaan, which is Bethel, he and all the people who were with him.
| וַיִּ֤בֶן שָׁם֙ מִזְבֵּ֔חַ וַיִּקְרָא֙ לַמָּק֔וֹם אֵ֖ל בֵּֽית־אֵ֑ל כִּ֣י שָׁ֗ם נִגְל֤וּ אֵלָיו֙ הָֽאֱלֹהִ֔ים בְּבׇרְח֖וֹ מִפְּנֵ֥י אָחִֽיו׃ | 7 E | There he built an altar and named the site El-bethel, (El-bethel “The God of Bethel.”) for it was there that God had been revealed to him when he was fleeing from his brother. |
האלו־הים, the angels (according to Ibn Ezra) scriptural proof: Genesis 32,2: ויפגעו בו מלאכי אלוהים, “angels of G-d met him there.” Also: Genesis 28,12: והנה מלאכי אלו הים, “and lo here there were angels of G-d.” (in his dream)
[BECAUSE THERE GOD WAS REVEALED TO HIM.] Elohim (God) refers to angels. (Revealed (niglu) is in the plural. If elohim meant God then revealed would be in the singular (Cherez).) Compare, And behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it (Gen. 28:12). (Elohim in our verse refers to the same angels whom Jacob saw in Beth-el (Gen. 28:12).)
“The God of Bethel.”
ויקראו למקום א־ל בית אל, He named the place El Bet El. Although Jacob had already named this place Bet El when he fled from Esau, he repeated naming the place El Bet El; he meant that G'd specifically associated His name with that site. The reason he thought so was that G'd had revealed Himself to him there. The reason he returned to this place was that G'd had meanwhile fulfilled the promise He made to Jacob at the time of his flight from Esau. The site had therefore assumed an even higher degree of sanctity in Jacob's eyes.
ויקרא למקום אל בית אל, “he called the name of that place ‘El Bet- El.’” According to the plain meaning of the text, the line means: “after G’d had appeared to him, he named the site: ‘the house of G’d.” I have already explained a kabbalistic approach to this verse when I discussed the meaning of Genesis 31,13.
ויבן שם מזבח, this means that he built the altar in the house he had built there at the site of the original monument of which he had said in 28,22 “this will become a house of G’d.” We explained this on that verse. It does not matter that the house itself was not mentioned here separately.
ויקרא למקום א-ל בית א-ל. He had already called it Bet El on a previous occasion, Now he only expanded the name. Compare our commentary on 33,20.
כי שם נגלו אליו האלוקים, a reference to the angels ascending and descending the ladder whom he had seen in his dream. Alternatively, the meaning of the word ה-אלוקים is a reference to G’d, Himself, not an intermediary. The reason why he used the plural mode נגלו instead of נגלה when the subject is only G’d Himself, is that this is a form of great respect and honour for the subject [known as pluralis majestatis when a king refers to himself in the plural. Ed.] compare Psalms 149,2 ישמח ישראל בעושיו, “Let Israel rejoice in its Maker.” A similar construction is found in Job 35,10 איה אלו-ה עושי?, “Where is the Lord, My Maker?” There are more such examples in Scripture.
ויקרא למקום, which was outside Luz, where he had erected a monument 34 years earlier when he was on his way from his home El Bet El.
Originally, he had called the town known as Luz merely Bet El. Now he named the site where he had had the dream with the ladder El Bet El. This site was outside the town previously known as Luz. He added the word El, seeing that during all the intervening years G’d had stood by him.
אל בית אל EL-BETH-EL — the Holy One, blessed be He, is in Beth-El; i.e. His Divine Presence has revealed itself in Bethel. Sometimes the prefix ב “in” is omitted from a word: e.g., (2 Samuel 9:4) “Behold, he is (בית) in the house of Muchir, the son of Ammiel”, which is the same as בבית in the house of Machir; (24:13) בית אביך is the same as בבית אביך ,‘in the house of thy father”.
נגלו אליו האלהים GOD WAS REVEALED UNTO Him — In many passages terms denoting Divine Power and Lordship are used in the plural e. g., (39:20) “Joseph’s master (אֲדֹנֵי)” (construct plural), and (Exodus 22:14) “If its owner (בעליו) be with it”, where it does not say בַּעֲלוֹ (the singular form). Similarly, forms of אלהים denoting Judge or Authority are expressed in the plural, but you will find none other of the Divine Names in the plural.
Er hatte früher die Stätte Bethel genannt, weil ihm dort die Wahrheit offenbart worden, daß Gott von dem Menschen auf Erden ein Haus gebaut haben wolle, in welchem Er segnend und leitend seine Stätte finde. Jetzt, da er mit einem solchen "Hause" an die Stätte zurückkehrt, vereinigt er damit den Gedanken, wie in der Gewährung der geistigen und materiellen Kraft zur Erbauung eines solchen "Gotteshauses" selbst sich die allmächtig waltende Gottheit offenbart, wie darum die reinste und höchste Menschentat im tiefsten Grunde zur Gottestat wird, ein jedes wahrhafte "Gotteshaus" nicht nur seiner Bestimmung, sondern auch seiner Entstehung nach ein Haus Gottes ist, und nannte die Stätte daher: "Gott des Gotteshauses" wie ja einst David denselben Gedanken aussprach: ממך הכל ומידך נתנו לך Chron. I. 29, 14.
כי שם נגלו וגו׳ denn dort war ihm einst, als flüchtigem, völlig mittellosem Wanderer der Gottesbeistand für eine solche Zukunft zugesagt worden, und diese Verheißung hatte sich nun so voll und mächtig erfüllt. Der Plural in Attributen und Prädikaten zu אלקים ist keineswegs ein sehr gewöhnlicher. Vergleichen wir die Stellen: אשר לו קרובים אליו (Dewarim 4, 7) ואם רע בעיניכם לעבוד את ד׳ וגו׳ וגו׳ לא תוכלו לעבוד את ד׳ כי א׳ קדושים הוא (Josua 24, 15-19) ומי כעמך כישראל וגו׳ אשר הלכו א׳ לפדות לו וגו׳ (Sam. II. 7, 23) selbst das א׳ חיים Sam. I. 17, 26 und 36; Jirmija 10. 11; 23, 35: so scheint in allen diesen Stellen der Plural aus der Pluralität des Gottheitbegriffes der nichtjüdischen Welt entstanden zu sein, auf welche alle diese Stellen hinblicken, und, im Gegensatz zu diesem, die Nähe, Heiligkeit, Wundermacht, lebendige Daseinswirklichkeit des einen einzigen Gottes Israels hervorheben zu sollen, der in seiner Alleinheit das wirklich ist, was die polytheistische Welt von ihren vielen vermeintlich träumt. So dürfte vielleicht auch hier der Plural aus dem Gegensatz zu dem אלהי נכר erwachsen, deren Embleme er soeben aus dem Kreise der Seinen und derer, die sich ihnen angeschlossen, — waren doch Frauen und Kinder von Schechem, wie es (oben 34, 29) scheint, bei ihnen — fortgeschafft hatte. Ihnen machte er es an dieser Stätte klar, wie das, was die übrige Welt in ihren Göttern als "betrogene Betrüger" vergebens sucht, er in Wahrheit in dem אל בית אל gefunden, der ihm eben hier offenbar geworden.
ויקרא למקום, to this inn for wayfarers where he had spent the night on his way from home some 34 years ago when the Torah had referred to it as ויפגע במקום (28,11)
א-ל בית א-ל, “the sanctuary of Bet El.”
God is in Beis Eil... [Rashi knows] that אל [means “God,”, and] is not a preposition [meaning “to”], because its vowel is a צירה. Also, its tropp is a טפחא, indicates that it is disconnected [from the following word].
He erected there an altar, and he called the place of the altar 18 El Beit El, the God of Beit El. El is the name by which God identified Himself to Jacob in Haran. 19 Jacob called the place by this name because it was there that God was revealed to him when he fled from his brother.
Rabbi Tanḥuma began: “One man out of one thousand I have found, but a woman among all these I did not find” (Ecclesiastes 7:28). (The Yefe Toar explains that this comes to explain how it is possible to say that there was something improper in Leah's behavior, as mentioned by Reish Lakish above in paragraph 1.) Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Levi began: “You neglect all my counsel” (Proverbs 1:25) – that is what is written: “The Lord God built [vayiven] the side” (Genesis 2:22). Vayiven – he observed from where to create her… (See Bereshit Rabba 18:2 for the entire statement of Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Levi. God created the woman such that she should be modest, but nevertheless not all are modest.) Reish Lakish cites it from here: “He erected an altar there” (Genesis 35:7). (See Bereshit Rabba 79:8 where Reish Lakish said that Jacob gave an improper name to the altar, and what happened to Dina was a punishment.) “Shekhem, son of Ḥamor the Ḥivite, prince of the land, saw her, and he took her, and lay with her, and violated her” (Genesis 34:2). Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: This is analogous to one who had a litra of meat in his possession. When he revealed it, a bird swooped down and snatched it. So, “Dina, daughter of Leah…went out.” Immediately, “Shekhem, son of Ḥamor…saw her.” Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: She exposed her forearm. (When it says that Shekhem saw her, it was only her forearm, and no other concealed part of her body.) “And lay with her, and violated her.” “And lay with her” – in the typical manner; “and violated her” – in an atypical manner.
אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים, “this can only be (the location of) the House of G-d.” Rashi endeavours to find the source for the statement by the sages that G-d had said that it is intolerable that a righteous person of the calibre of Yaakov who needed a place to spend the night, should be unable to find more than a stone to lay his head on. Also why would Yaakov call the place that had been known as Luz “Yerusalem,” i.e. the house of G-d? Furthermore why afterwards does he refer to “Beyt El,” a place much further north? Clearly there appears to be some contradiction here! Our sages themselves seem to have had second thoughts when they said that Yaakov renamed called Luz as Beyt ElBeing aware of these difficulties, Rashi says; “therefore I say that Mount Moriah had been moved and Yaakov had arrived there, i.e. as far as Beyt El, (all on the same day)[If any reader finds all this as strange, I remind him that if G-d enabled Eliezer, Avraham’s servant, to cover a similar distance with his 10 camels when he went to look for a wife for his master in the course of one day, then Yaakov’s experience can certainly not be considered as so unbelievable. Ed.] There is also the problem that Yaakov instead of walking from B’eer Sheva to Charan would be travelling from west to East, as testified to by Isaiah 9,11 ארם מקדם ופלשתים מאחור, “Aram to the East and the land of the Philistines at the back.” (to the west) Moreover, we (our author) had previously explained that Aram and Charan are one and the same. (compare verse 10). According to what we have read here Yaakov was traveling from the south to the north according to what Rashi explained earlier. We have to say that Yaakov travelled the same route that his grandfather Avraham had traveled when coming from Charan, southward after having left both Ur Casdim and Charan on his way to the land of Canaan. He had proceeded southward in stages all the way to B’eer Sheva. Both he and Yitzchok had taken up residence in towns on this route from time to time as we have read in previous portions of the Torah. The route was well known and they were familiar with it. This is the reason why Yaakov also used this route. As to Rashi quoting Yaakov as having said that possibly he had failed to stop at a place where his father and grandfather had offered prayers to G-d, this must have referred not to Mount Moriah, for he had prayed there repeatedly as stated by our sages in Bereshit Rabbah at the end of chapter 78,16, where we are told that no one can properly appreciate how many libations Yaakov had offered at Mount Moriah, but to Beyt El, for Avraham had prayed there and built an altar as recorded in Genesis 12,78. Our sages in Sanhedrin 44 are on record that if Avraham had not prayed between Beyt El and Ai, the Jewish people would long ago have perished completely (Joshua 7,25 when they were defeated there during the first encounter They were saved only due to the merit acquired by the prayers Avraham had offered in that region.) The reason that this location is referred to as Beyt El is on account of the prayers offered there in the future, for in Yaakov’s time it was still known as Luz. Yitzchok had also offered prayers at that altar which his father Avraham had built. Even though we do not possess a written record of it, it is quite plausible to assume that he used this altar on numerous occasions in order to offer prayers. Yaakov, on the other hand, had not had an opportunity to offer prayers at that location up until now. This is also why he said: “is it possible that I simply passed by this place without stopping to offer up a prayer?” He therefore decided to retrace his steps after coming to Charan, and to go back as far as Beyt El to offer a prayer there. In response to Yaakov’s determination to do so, G-d folded the earth beneath him to expedite matters. What this meant in practice was that the town known as Luz was transported to the vicinity of Charan, saving him many days of walking. G-d’s motivation was that the prayer of a righteous person such as Yaakov should preferably be said in a Temple or other sacred site. As a result, the mountain of Moriah was immediately uprooted and removed as far as Charan. After having prayed there Yaakov continued on his way. When G-d saw that, He said: seeing that this righteous person has taken so much trouble to come to My residence, how can I allow him not to have shelter for the night? This is why He arranged for the sun to set prematurely so that Yaakov would spend the night there. During that night he dreamt the dream reported in detail in our chapter where it became clear to him that the place he had slept was destined to become a Temple in the future. Realising that this was the meaning of the dream, he called the site “house of G-d,” renaming the town of Luz to be known as Beyt El. (House of G-d). This is the meaning of the line: “he called that site Beyt El, the site being that which had previously been known as the town of Luz. The stone which had served as Yaakov’s “pillow,” which had come from Mount Moriah, remained at that site. Yaakov anointed it with oil as a symbol of its future significance. As soon as he had done this, he proceeded on his trek to Charan. It would be wrong to understand the verse as meaning that Yaakov arose in the morning in the town of Charan. This is clear from the Torah telling us in 19,1 that Yaakov then set out in the direction of the people residing in the land of the Orientals. When he met the shepherds huddled around the well he asked them where their home was and they told him that their home was Charan. When Yaakov, 20 years later, was on the way from Lavan to the land of Canaan, he passed this location and he named the site Beyt El and erected a monument at the site. (Genesis 35,7, and 15)[This is a unique exegesis, as, normally, Yaakov is understood as having had to return to that site after having already settled in the land of Canaan and having overlooked his promise to erect a Temple at that site so that G-d had to remind him. (compare chapter 33,18 30) Ed.]
In the stories of Jacob, however, the Torah always uses “Lord,” for he was more complete than was Isaac. Thus, unlike Isaac, who had not been as | complete as Abraham, (36. Kaspi says that in the following verses, which refer to Isaac, the memory and merits of Abraham are invoked in order to increase the well-being of Isaac. This indicates that Abraham was the greater of the two.) it is not said of Jacob, “because that Abraham hearkened to my voice,” (37. Gen. 26:5.) or “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” (38. Gen. 26:24.) The exception (where “God” appears in the stories of Jacob) is “the house of God,” (39. Gen. 28:17.) and that is on account of its being followed by “and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob said that because he recognized that the place was conducive to prophecy and perception because of the celestial cause that predominated there, as Ibn Ezra noted. (40. Ibn Ezra says on this verse: “This is the house of God—in which a person can pray in time of need, for his prayer will be heard on account of its being a special place.”) He continued to say, “If God will be with me …” (41. Gen. 28:20.) (using ’Elokim) in accordance with the opinion of our Torah that the world of Separate Intelligences is the first cause. (42. As explained above, ’Elokim refers to the upper two worlds, which are here referred to by Kaspi as ha-sekhel ha-nifrad (“the separate intellect”), which as an entity influences the events of the sublunar world below them.) The proof of this is provided by the opening verse of the Torah, “In the beginning God created …” as I have explained. (43. See above chap. II, n. 1.) When Jacob’s wives speak, and when Jacob speaks to them, they mention “God,” (44. Gen. 31:5, 9, 11, 16.) for that is appropriate for them, as we have already mentioned. This is especially the case as they are the daughters of (the pagan) Laban, as is proved by Rachel when she coveted the teraphim. (45. Gen. 31:19.) When on occasion they do mention “Lord,” (46. Gen. 29:32–33, 30:24.) it is only because they learnt this from Jacob. Notice the precision regarding Laban when the Torah says, “and God came to Laban,” (47. Gen. 31:24.) similar to what was written of Abimelech, (48. Gen. 20:3.) in accordance with his confused belief in the power of the Heavenly Sphere and that of the imagination. Laban said to Jacob, “the God of your father spoke unto me yesternight saying …,” (49. Gen. 31:29.) for how could the god of Laban assist Jacob when (Jacob) did not believe in him. Similarly he said, “the Lord watch between me and thee,” (50. Gen. 31:49.) in accordance with Jacob’s belief. Furthermore Laban made Jacob swear by the Lord, for Jacob feared Him, and not God. In summarizing in conclusion, Laban said, “The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor … judge betwixt us …” (51. Gen. 31:53.) whereas “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.” (52. Ibid.) Jacob uses “God” when saying “and the angels of God met him,” (53. Gen. 32:2.) and “this is God’s camp,” (54. Ibid.) as well as “I have seen God face to face” (55. Gen. 32:28.) and “for thou hast striven with God,” (56. Gen. 32:20.) for all of them are in a prophetic use of the imagination. (57. He means that they take place in a prophetic vision, which with the exception of Moses, necessarily involves the imaginative faculty.) It is similar with “And God said unto Jacob,” (58. Gen. 35:1.) | and “there God was revealed unto him,” (59. Gen. 35:7.) as well as “and God appeared unto Jacob again” (60. Gen. 35:9.) and “where God spoke with him.” (61. Gen. 35:15.)
A kabbalistic approach sees in this blessing an allusion to all ten emanations. The wordsאשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו ה-אלו-הים embody the attributes חסד וגבורה, the outstanding qualities of Avraham and Yitzchak seeing that it is such an unusual way of phrasing the blessing. We would have expected Yaakov to say ה-אלו-הים אשר הלכו לפניו אברהם ויצחק. The fact that Yaakov added the words אבותי are a reference to the names of the attributes of G’d which had been revealed to Yaakov. A few words later he adds: ה-אלו-הים הרועה אותי; the word רועה is derived from ריע, companion. Yaakov referred to the attribute of G’d which had become manifest to him throughout the vicissitudes of his trouble-filled life. His שלום וריעות, “peace and serenity,” had been achieved only by means of that attribute of G’d. Psalms 80,2 alludes to this when the psalmist says: רועה ישראל האזינה, נוהג כצאן יוסף, “Give ear, O shepherd of Israel who leads Joseph like a flock!” He concludes his blessing with the words המלאך הגואל ...בקרב הארץ, “the angel who redeems me...may they proliferate like the fish within the land.” The word בקרב, is analogous to כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is present within him (Exodus 23,21).” Had Yaakov begun his prayer with the words המלאך הגואל, this would have sounded heretical, as if he had prayed to the angel. Seeing that he commenced his prayer with the words ה-אלו-הים, there cannot be a suspicion that he addressed the angel as the one who should fulfill his prayer. A careful analysis of the wording used by Yaakov in verses 15-17 will demonstrate that this blessing is essentially the same as the one he extended to Joseph in verses 22-26. In the latter blessing Yaakov spoke of מידי אביר יעקב, “from the hands of the mighty One of Yaakov,” as being the source which רעה אבן ישראל, “shepherded the stone of Yisrael.” The words ידי are a reference to the two hands supporting the throne of Solomon, the attributes גדולה and גבורה respectively; these attributes were earlier referred to by the words אברהם ויצחק; the expression אביר יעקב which refers to תפארת ישראל, the attribute which combines the attributes of Avraham and Yitzchak respectively, is called אביר יעקב, in verse 24. Proof that the Torah speaks of a unique attribute of Yaakov is the fact that you do not find the expression אביר אברהם or אביר יצחק anywhere in the Torah. In our prayers we call upon this attribute when we say עננו אביר יעקב “answer us O mighty One of Yaakov” in the Selichot during the days preceding Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. This attribute occurs only in connection with either יעקב or ישראל. In verse 24 it appears in both forms as אביר יעקב and as רועה אבן ישראל The overall meaning of verse 24 is that the source of Yaakov’s spiritual strength also known as תפארת ישראל is אבן ישראל, another name for כנסת ישראל, the “spiritual concept of the people of Israel.”
I AM THE G-D OF BETH-EL. Jacob related to his wives all that G-d’s angel had told him in the dream, all this serving to persuade them to go with him. However, what he told did not consist of one dream. The statement, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the he-goats (Verse 12 here.) was made to him when he served Laban for his flock, at the time the flock conceived (Verse 10 here.) in one of the first years. (One of the first of the six years he served for the sheep. See further, 31:41.) The statement, I am the G-d of Beth-el was made to him after that, at the time of the journey, for after He said to him, Now arise, get thee out from this land, (In Verse 13 here.) he no longer remained in Haran to further tend Laban’s flocks so that the he-goats would mount the flocks and the flocks would give birth to speckled and spotted. But on the morrow of the dream, he sent for Rachel and Leah and told them his dream, and they left Haran. I am ‘ha’e-il’ (the G-d) of Beth-el. The meaning thereof is, as Rashi explained it, that the letter hei in ha’e-il is redundant and is the same as if it were written: “I am e-il Beth-el (the G-d of Beth-el).” Similarly, To ‘ha’aretz’ (the land) of Canaan; (Numbers 34:2.) [the hei is redundant and is the same as if it were written: “to eretz Canaan (the land of Canaan).”] Grammarians (Ibn Ezra and R’dak.) adjusted it by saying that it is as if it were written, “I am the G-d, who is the G-d of Beth-el.” Similarly, And the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, (Above, 2:9.) [which is as if it said: “and the tree of the knowledge, namely the knowledge of good and evil”]; the cords of gold, (Numbers 39:17.) [which is as if it said, “the cords, which are cords of gold]. And the angel here speaks in the name of He Who sent him, [therefore, he speaks in the first person and says, “I am, etc.”] ….
את שבעת המזבחות — “Seven altars I have set in order” is not written here, but “THE SEVEN ALTARS”. He said to Him: The ancestors of these people together built before Thee seven altars, but I alone have built altars equal to all of them. — Abraham built four: (Genesis 12:7) “And he built there an altar to the Lord who had appeared to him”; (Genesis 12:8) “And he removed thence unto the mount… [and he built there an altar]; (Genesis 13:18) “And Abraham moved his tent … [and built there an altar]”; and one he built on Mount Moriah (Genesis 22:9). Isaac built one: (Genesis 26:25) “And he built there an altar”. Jacob built two, one at Shechem and one at Bethel (Genesis 33:20 and Genesis 35:7);
Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Any place in the Bible from where the heretics attempt to prove their heresy, i.e., that there is more than one god, the response to their claim is alongside them, i.e., in the immediate vicinity of the verses they cite. The verse states that God said: “Let us make man in our image” (Genesis 1:26), employing the plural, but it then states: “And God created man in His image” (Genesis 1:27), employing the singular. The verse states that God said: “Come, let us go down and there confound their language” (Genesis 11:7), but it also states: “And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower” (Genesis 11:5). The verse states in the plural: “There God was revealed [niglu] to him when he fled from the face of his brother” (Genesis 35:7), but it also states in the singular: “To God Who answers [haoneh] me in the day of my distress” (Genesis 35:3).
There he built an altar, and he called the place Eil Beis Eil, for there Elohim was revealed to him when he was fleeing from his brother.
And he builded there an altar, and named that place, To God, who made His Shekinah to dwell in Bethel, because there had been revealed to him the angels of the Lord, in his flight from before Esau his brother.
| וַתָּ֤מׇת דְּבֹרָה֙ מֵינֶ֣קֶת רִבְקָ֔ה וַתִּקָּבֵ֛ר מִתַּ֥חַת לְבֵֽית־אֵ֖ל תַּ֣חַת הָֽאַלּ֑וֹן וַיִּקְרָ֥א שְׁמ֖וֹ אַלּ֥וֹן בָּכֽוּת׃ | 8 E | Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and was buried under the oak below Bethel; so it was named Allon-bacuth. (Allon-bacuth Understood as “the oak of the weeping.”) |
ותמת דבורה, “Deborah died;” Rashi explains why the Torah suddenly inserts this statement and how it is relevant. We never knew that she was part of Yaakov’s entourage. After all, Yaakov himself had said that when he crossed the river Jordan the first time he had been accompanied only by his walking stick (Compare Genesis 32,11) Rivkah had told Yaakov (Genesis 27,4445) that she would let him know when it was safe to return, when Esau’s wrath had cooled off. She had dispatched Deborah to Padan Arom to inform Yaakov of this. Yaakov had not been willing to return already. Deborah remained with him in the house of Lavan and passed away on the journey on the way back to the land of Canaan. When she had been mentioned the first time (Genesis 24,59) she had only been described as Rivkah’s nursemaid; now the Torah supplied her name.
ותמת דבורה, Deborah, Rivkah’s nursemaid died (near there) the reason why we are told about this at this point may be on account of the prophetess Deborah sitting and holding court near this tree, by the grave of Deborah (Judges, 4.5.)
Understood as “the oak of the weeping.”
ותמת דבורה מינקת רבקה, “Devorah, Rivkah’s nursemaid died.” This verse has been inserted between the report of two appearances by G’d which Yaakov enjoyed. This fact serves to prove the words of our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 81,5 on this verse who see in it a hint to Yaakov that his mother Rivkah had died. This justified the fact that Yaakov named the oak beneath which Devorah was buried “the oak of weeping.” This is the opinion of Nachmanides. He writes that it would not have been appropriate for the Torah to describe Yaakov as grieving thus merely about the death of his mother’s nursemaid, a woman who must have been very old, that the site would be called after her for all future time. Yaakov grieved over the fact that his mother who had promised to send him word when it was safe to return and face Esau was no longer able to do what she had intended to do and that therefore there would not be a reunion between him and Rivkah. According to Nachmanides, the Devorah mentioned here was one who had never accompanied Rivkah when she left her brother’s house to marry Yitzchak. Her death in Yaakov’s presence triggered his awareness that his mother must have died. G’d’s next appearance to Yaakov was intended to console him over this loss of his mother. Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 82,4, explain that the words “G’d blessed him” in our verse represent the blessing given to mourners. We find a similar blessing being bestowed by G’d on Avraham in Genesis 25,11. The Talmud in Sotah 14 reports something similar concerning Genesis 25,11 where G’d is reported as blessing Yitzchak. This occurred immediately after the death of Avraham, Yitzchak’s father. G’d’s blessing is understood as a blessing bestowed on mourners. We find support for this interpretation of the words “G’d blessed Yaakov” in verse 27 in our chapter where the Torah reports Yaakov as returning “to his father Yitzchak in Mamre the city of Arba.” We all knew of the city of Arba and Mamre, so why tell us where Yitzchak lived at that time? The implication of the verse is that Rivkah had died. Had she been alive, surely the Torah would have described Yaakov as returning to both his parents, i.e. Yitzchak and Rivkah, especially so since it had been Rivkah who had promised to call Yaakov back to come home as soon as she thought it was safe for him to do so. Seeing she had died, the Torah did not consider it appropriate, i.e. as in her honor, to mention this fact outright. The Torah concealed the time of her death. Nachmanides quotes a Midrash (Tanchuma Ki Tetze 4) where the matter is explained. Although G’d promised Avraham that he would die of a ripe old age, he died at 175 years of age, 5 years younger than his son Yitzchak. The reason was in order to save him the mental anguish of seeing his grandson Esau become corrupt. In the case of Yitzchak, the latter was blind and could not see what his son Esau was up to. According to this Midrash, both Avraham, Yitzchak, and Rivkah ended their lives experiencing a degree of shame. Rivkah’s funeral lacked the presence of her loving son Yaakov, and presumably the presence of her son Esau who hated her. When she died, people cursed the passing of a woman whose breasts had nursed an evil person such as Esau. For these and other reasons G’d decided to console Yaakov by blessing him at this time. The plural form בכות, “weeping,” is accounted for because as soon as Yaakov was about to weep for the death of Devorah, he received word that his mother had died. His weeping was for the passing of both these women.
ותמת דבורה, according to Rashi, Rivkah had sent word to Yaakov by means of Devorah in accordance with her promise at the time that as soon as Esau’s anger would subside she would recall him from his exile. (27,45) When Devorah delivered the message at Bet El she died forthwith.
תחת האלון, beneath the oak. This category of tree also appears in Hoseah 4,13 and in Ezekiel 27,6. According to Onkelos the word is the same as אלוני ממרא with the vowel tzeyreh, i.e. it describes a certain valley or a grove of trees. In Bereshit Rabbah 81,5 Rabbi Shemuel bar Nachman understands the meaning of the word alon as derived from the Greek, where it means “double, additional,” The Torah hints that before the mourning for Deborah was over, news reached Yaakov that his mother Rivkah had died.
AND DEBORAH REBEKAH’s NURSE DIED. I do not know why this verse has been placed between the verse, And he called the place El-beth-el (Verse 7 here.) and the following verse, And G-d appeared to Jacob again. (Verse 9 here.) Scripture thus interrupts one subject which occurred at one time and in one place for when Jacob came to Luz, that is Beth-el, (Verse 6 here.) he built an altar there and he called the place El-beth-el, (Verse 7 here.) and G-d appeared to him there and He blessed him. (Verse 9 here.) Why then was this verse concerning Deborah’s death placed in the midst of one subject? A feasible answer is that which our Rabbis have said, (Bereshith Rabbah 81:8.) namely that the verse alludes to the death of Rebekah, and therefore Jacob called the name of that place, Alon-bachut (the oak of weeping), for the weeping and anguish could not have been such for the passing of the old nurse that the place would have been named on account of it. Instead, Jacob wept and mourned for his righteous mother who had loved him and sent him to Paddan-aram and who was not privileged to see him when he returned. Therefore G-d appeared to him and blessed him, in order to comfort him, just as He had done to his father Isaac following the death of Abraham. (Above, 25:11.) With reference to both of them the Sages have said (Sotah 14 a; Bereshith Rabbah 82:4.) that He gave them the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners. Proof for this is that which is said below, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, (Verse 27 here.) for had Rebekah been there, Scripture would have mentioned “unto his father and unto his mother” for it was she who sent him. to Paddan-aram and caused him all the good, for Isaac commanded him to go there at her advice. Now Rashi commented: “Because the time of her death was kept secret in order that people might not curse her — the mother who gave birth to Esau — Scripture also does not make mention of her death.” This is a Midrash of the Sages. (Tanchuma Ki Theitzei 4.) But neither does Scripture mention the death of Leah! Instead, we must say that the intent of the Sages was to explain why Scripture mentions Rebekah’s death by allusion, connecting the matter with her nurse. Since Scripture did refer to it, they wondered why the matter was hidden and not revealed. And the justification for the curse stated by Rashi is not clear since Scripture mentioned Esau at the death of Isaac, And Esau and Jacob his sons buried him. (Verse 29 here.) It is, however, possible to say that Rebekah’s death lacked honor, for Jacob was not there, and Esau hated her and would not attend; Isaac’s eyes were too dim to see, (Above, 27:1.) and he did not leave his house. Therefore, Scripture did not want to mention that she was buried by the Hittites. I found a similar explanation in Eileh Hadvarim Rabbah, (I found this not in Midrash Rabbah but in Tanchuma Ki Theitzei, 4.) in the section of Ki Theitzei Lamilchamah, (Deuteronomy 21:10.) where the Sages say: “You find that when Rebekah died, people said, ‘Who shall go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac is confined to the house and his eyes are dim. Jacob is gone to Paddan-aram. If wicked Esau shall go before her, people will say, “Cursed be the breast that gave suck to this one.’” What did they do? They took out her bier at night. Rabbi Yosei bar Chaninah said, ‘Due to the fact that they took out her bier at night the Scriptures mentioned her death only indirectly. It is this which Scripture says, And he called its name Alon-bachut, two weepings, [one for Deborah and one for Rebekah]. Thus Scripture says, And G-d appeared unto Jacob… and blessed him. (Verse 9 here.) What blessing did He give him? He gave him the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners.’” Thus far the Midrash. Now because Esau was the only one present at her burial, they feared the curse, and they did not view the burial as an honor to her, this being the significance of the Scriptural hint. Deborah was in Jacob’s company because after accompanying Rebekah to the land of Canaan, she had returned to her country, and now she was coming with Jacob in order to see her mistress. It may be that she was engaged in raising Jacob’s children out of respect for Rebekah and due to her love for her, and thus she resided with him. Now it is possible that she is not “the nurse” of whom it is said, And they sent away Rebekah their sister, and her nurse, (Above 24: 59.) but that she was another nurse who remained in the house of Laban and Bethuel, and now Jacob brought her with him to support her in her old age out of respect to his mother, for it was the custom among the notables to have many nurses. It is improbable that the old woman would be the messenger whom his mother had dispatched to Jacob [to have him return to the Land of Israel], as Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan would have it. (Mentioned by Rashi in this verse. A preacher in the city of Narbonne, Provence, France, who lived in the second half of the eleventh century, Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan, compiled a collection of Agadic material on the book of Genesis. The book itself, which had a great influence upon Rashi and other writers, has been lost except for the quotations made by other scholars.)
אלון בכות, this is mentioned only because all the locations at which Yaakov stopped on his return from Lavan and which were mentioned in the Torah were mentioned because of something that happened there. They were: Pnuel, Sukkot, El Elo-hey Yisrael, Shalem, the city of Shechem. Luz(ah), El Bet El, Alon Bachut, the second Bet El, Bet Lechem (Efrat), Migdal Eder.
ותמת דבורה AND DEBORAH DIED — How came Deborah to be in Jacob’s house? But the explanation is: because Rebékah had promised Jacob (Gen. 27:45) “then I will send and fetch thee from thence”, she sent Deborah to him to Padan-aram to tell him to leave that place, and she died on the return journey I learnt this from a comment of R. Moses Ha-darshan.
מתחת לבית אל BELOW BETHEL — The city was situated on a mountain and she was buried at the foot of the mountain.
תחת האלון UNDER THE OAK — The Targum renders it by “on the lower part of the plain” because there was some level ground above on the slope of the hill and her grave was beneath this. The plain of Bethel bore the name of Allon (cf. Rashi on Genesis 14:6). An Agada (Genesis Rabbah 81:5) states that he there received news of another mourning for he was informed that his mother had died. — In Greek allon means “another”. — Because the time of her death was kept secret in order that people might not curse the mother who gave birth to Esau, Scripture also does not make open mention of her death (Midrash Tanchuma, Ki Teitzei 4).
Wieso diese, jedenfalls hochbetagte Frau, sich in Jakobs Begleitung befunden, ist nicht angegeben. Ob sie, wie einige vermuten, von Rebekka mit einer Botschaft an Jakob gesandt, oder ihm aus Labans Hause gefolgt war, um das einstige Kind ihrer Pflege noch einmal wieder zu schauen, wie רמב"ן vermutet, lässt sich eben nur vermuten. Der Name des ihr Grab überschattenden Baumes zeigt jedenfalls die Pietät Jakobs für seine Mutter, die er selbst in ihrer betagten Amme also geehrt, daß er deren Verlust schmerzlich beweinte.
אלון בכות. Mourning results in the withdrawal of the Divine Presence as we know from Shabbat 30. Until Yaakov had passed this tree after mourning Deborah the Divine Presence did not return and accompany him. [He was deprived of such a Presence during all the 22 years that he was mourning for his son Joseph, thinking him dead. Ed.].
The plain of Beis Eil was called Allon. Rashi is saying that Allon does not mean “plain.” Rather, Allon is the name of the plain, as Rashi explains in Parshas Lech Lecha, on איל פארן (14:6). See there.
He was told that his mother had died. [Rashi knows this] because she did not die earlier, for she sent Devorah to Yaakov, indicating that she had not yet died. However, when Yaakov comes to his father’s house it is written only (v. 27), “Yaakov came to Yitzchok his father,” omitting, “To Rivkah his mother.” Yet, Yaakov came because Rivkah had sent Devorah to him! This implies that Rivkah had [just] died. And since Yaakov now received tidings of a second mourning, as it is written אלון בכות, which means “another mourning,” perforce he was informed of his mother’s death.
It is for the following reason that the date of her death was kept secret so that... I.e., Yitzchak was confined to his home due to blindness. And Yaakov was in [transit from] Padan Aram. The only one still with Rivkah was Eisov. Thus the day of her death was kept secret, so that Eisov should not be involved with her burial, for this would cause people to curse the womb from which he came. Some ask: Why would people curse her after her death more than during her life? The answer is: Before her death, people did not see Eisov since he was with his father-in-law in Seir, for that is where Yaakov sent his gift to Eisov. But now, if he would be the only one to come and bury her, people would curse her. Maharshal answers: Her death was kept secret so people would think she was still alive, and they would not be permitted to curse her due to, “You shall not curse a deaf person” (Vayikra 19:14). But this applies only to a live person, [and to the non-deaf as well. See Rashi there].
The Torah relates incidentally that Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse, died. Deborah was clearly very old at the time, as many years had passed since she had accompanied Rebecca from Haran to the land of Canaan. As Rebecca’s lifelong associate, she had a higher status in the family than that of the other maidservants and was therefore accorded respect and treated with great affection. And she was buried below the hill upon which Beit El was located, beneath the oak tree that stood there; and he called its name Alon Bakhut, Tree of Weeping, as a sign of mourning for her.
ותמת דבורה, “Deborah died, etc.” Nachmanides writes that he does not know why this piece of information was included by the Torah at this point between Yaakov naming the site of the altar Beyt El, and the blessing G’d gave Yaakov when he added the name Yisrael to his previous name. Possibly, the reason was, as our sages suggest, that the news of Deborah’s death was meant to tell Yaakov that his mother Rivkah had died, and that this explains why Yaakov called the site of Deborah’s interment אלון בכות,”the oak of mourning.” Yaakov wept tears for his mother’s death when burying Deborah. He was especially saddened by the fact that he had not been granted a reunion with her after all these years. As soon as he had stopped mourning for his mother, G’d appeared to him and complimented him. (verse 9) Rashi claims that the reason why the precise date of Rivkah’s death has not been revealed was to prevent people to use that date to curse the womb that had produced a person as depraved as Esau, although the date when Leah died has also not been revealed by the Torah. The reason why the sages did not attribute any special reason to the omission by the Torah of the date on which Leah died, was that only the fact that the Torah made a point of mentioning when a servant of Rivkah died, without also at least telling us when her mistress died, calls for further investigation. Nonetheless this is not a good enough reason. The Torah did not omit reporting the death of Yitzchok who had sired Esau, but even reports that Esau partook in his father’s funeral. (Genesis 35,29) It is possible that the Torah omitted a direct report of Rivkah’s death and burial as it was not surrounded by honour, seeing that her son Yaakov did not attend the funeral and her son Esau hated her, and her husband Yitzchok who was practically blind, could not perform the rites, probably was even unable to leave his house. The Torah did not want to report that the Hittite neighbours of Rivkah had to bury her. This would have drawn attention to the lack of honour bestowed on her during her funeral.
“Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse, died” [35:8]. Rashi asks a question here. How does Deborah come to the house of Jacob? The explanation is that Rebecca sent Deborah to Jacob in Laban’s house to call him back. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:8.) Deborah died on the way with Jacob and Jacob buried Deborah. At that burial, Jacob was told that his mother had also died. However, the verse does not want to explicitly write that Rebecca died. Rebecca had been put into her grave and nobody knew when she had died, in the expectation that she should not be cursed that she had an evil son, Esau the evildoer. So writes the Midrash that when Rebecca died, the people said, who would accompany Rebecca to the cemetery? Abraham is dead and Isaac is blind. Jacob has gone to Padan Aram, and if Esau will accompany her, people will curse that she had an evil son. Therefore, they carried Rebecca to the cemetery at night. That is also why the verse does not say when Rebecca died. That is why it is written, “Allon-bachuth” [35:8]. This means, two reasons for crying. One is that he cried because his mother died and the other reason he cried is because his mother was not buried with honor. (Bahya, Genesis, 35:8.) One asks a question. What would it help that she was buried at night, in the expectation that she should not be cursed, when people would think the same thing when she was alive? The explanation is the verse that says, “you shall not curse the deaf” [Leviticus, 19:14]. This means, one should not curse a deaf person, one who does not hear. However, the verse “you shall not curse the deaf” was not said about a dead person. That is to say, they could well curse a dead person, and therefore they did not want to say that Rebecca had died.
If we interpret the above to mean that Israel will be physically unable to break the covenant of its forefathers, the fact that throughout the ages large segments of our people have always defied the rules of the Torah, is mystifying. Also, if we cannot contravene the laws of the Torah physically, what about the concept of free will upon which the entire system of reward and punishment is built? Again, if G'd feels compelled to threaten retaliation for nonobservance of His laws, there evidently cannot be a question of physical inability to transgress these laws! Furthermore, if G'd had the power to make us live up to the covenant, threats of chastisement seem pointless. From all the above, we feel that it is clear that the matter of the oath needs to be understood somewhat differently from the manner most commentators have presented it. We must also subscribe to the notion that the eternal existence of the Jewish people as well as their special status amongst the nations is not tied to the observance or non observance of the covenant, but rather that it is anchored in the very nature of this people, which will not change even when defying the covenant. Although the impulse for self-destruction is abnormal, unnatural, G'd has seen fit to legislate against the commission of suicide, assuming that such legislation might dissuade a few people bent on self-destruction. The rare phenomenon of wilful self-destruction does not undermine the will of the vast majority to remain alive. Similarly, the estrangement of the nation from its G'd cannot be brought about by the desertion of a few, since the bond tying it to its G'd is far too deeply rooted in history. The following parable will illustrate the whole subject more clearly. A certain highly intelligent and courageous young man who successfully confronted his less highly principled peers, became the object of his peers' hatred. They did everything to make the young man's life unbearable until the young man sought refuge at the King's Court. There he was placed under Royal protection. The young man thereupon concentrated his abilities and energies on performing a series of duties for the king, until the latter decided to grant him a special status in recognition of his selfless devotion. The king entered into an agreement with the young man whereby his special status would also extend to his descendants, on the understanding that such descendants would keep faith with the king, and would continue to perform the duties assigned to them. The young man was overjoyed by this generous offer, and accepted with alacrity. For several generations the descendants of the young man prospered and kept their part of their ancestor's bargain. The fifth generation, having become extremely wealthy, decided that the services rendered to the king had become too onerous, and refused to carry out the terms of the agreement their forefather had entered into. Their complaint was directed at their forefather, whom they accused of having committed them to a life of servitude to the king. They therefore claimed the right of self determination, and the freedom to decide for themselves whom they would recognise as their Master. The king was quite agreeable, pointing out however, that since the family's obligations were being terminated, so was his own undertaking to grant this family special protection against its natural enemies, and to ensure its continued affluence. As soon as all the former enemies heard about the changed relationship of that family and the king, they resumed harassing the family with devastating results. No one in their right mind would accuse the king of having punished that family. Everyone understands that whatever evil befell that family from that time on had been their own doing, that they had only themselves to blame. Applied to the Jewish people, the comparison is quite simple. Jacob, choicest of our ancestors, had incurred the wrath of Esau, the jealousy of Laban, the enmity of the Canaanites around Shechem, and had led a life of frequent upheavals, daily skirmishes until he took refuge under the wings of the shechinah. (Genesis 35,8) "The Lord who has answered me on the day of my distress." Because his way of life had found favour in the eyes of G'd, He assured Jacob of protection against his enemies, and this support continued throughout the generations, (see beginning of Parshat Vayetze) The promise was spelled out in detail at Mount Sinai, (Exodus 19,5) when the condition "now you must hearken to My voice and observe My covenant etc" was made a prerequisite for this continued protection and special status of the Jewish people. These conditions were further emphasized in Deuteronomy 26,15-19, when the reciprocal relationship between Israel and G'd is repeated in clear and unmistakable language. If subsequent generations would repudiate the deal made by their ancestors by worshipping idols and other acts of disloyalty to their erstwhile king, then the ill fate that would befall them could not be described as punishment by that king. On the contrary, they would be considered the architects of their own misfortune, especially, since G'd is on record as withdrawing the special status this people had enjoyed heretofore. The crucial aspect of the eternal nature of the covenant is, that just as mass suicide committed by a whole people simultaneously is unthinkable, so the alienation of the entire Jewish people from its Torah and its G'd simultaneously, is equally beyond the realm of possibility. When the Talmud in Shabbat 88, discusses the coercion used by G'd in order to get the Jewish people to accept the Torah at Sinai on pain of immediate burial under the Mountain, Rabbi Acha bar Yaakov raises the issue of the validity of acceptance under duress. This issue is raised concerning the people standing at the foot of the mountain. How much more would this question apply to later generations who had not even been present on that occasion! Those later generation who had not experienced liberation from bondage in Egypt, had far less reason to accept the Torah out of a sense of gratitude for their deliverance! The argument in the Talmud is turned aside by a reference to the Jewish people accepting Torah completely voluntarily at the time of their deliverance from the threat of extinction by Haman. That acceptance is deemed binding for all future generations. That so-called voluntary acceptance was induced by the realisation that if G'd were to forsake them, their very existence would come to an end, as had been demonstrated by their experience with Haman. The latter had almost succeeded in wiping out a nation that had considered itself both secure and emancipated. When the wording of the covenant in Parshat Nitzavim stresses that the covenant did not only apply to the generation of the Exodus, but to all subsequent generations, the reference to the generation of the Exodus teaches that even that generation did not have to accept Torah out of a sense of gratitude, but rather because Torah had become a natural habitat for the Jewish people, just as water is for fish or blood for the body. "She is a tree of life to those who support her." (Proverbs 3,18) Just as G'd had promised never to bring another deluge, since conditions would not be allowed to recur which would call for such mass extinction, so conditions allowing a total rupture between Israel and its G'd would also not be allowed to recur. This is what the oath in our Parshah wishes to convey. Jeremiah 31,16, quoted earlier, describes a situation which is possible in theory, since all physical phenomena have measurable finite dimensions. Since the effort in actually taking those measurements is mind boggling, so is the idea of G'd despising the entire Jewish people. Isaiah 54, 9-10, may be understood in a similar vein.
“Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse, died, and she was buried below Beit El, beneath the oak, and he called its name Alon Bakhut” (Genesis 35:8). “God appeared to Jacob again, already upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). “Deborah, Rebecca's nurse, died…and he called its name Alon Bakhut” – Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: In the Greek language, alon means other. While he [Jacob] was still observing the mourning for Deborah, the report that his mother had died came to him. That is what is written: “God appeared to Jacob…and He blessed him.” With which blessing did he bless him? Rav Aḥa said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: He blessed him with the blessing of the mourners.
It is written: “The Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). We have found that the Holy One blessed be He performs acts of kindness: He adorns brides, blesses grooms, visits the ill, buries the dead, and comforts the mourners. He adorns brides, as it is written: “The Lord God built [the rib that he took from the man into a woman, and He brought her to the man]” (Genesis 2:22). Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He built her, adorned her, and showed her to him [Adam]. Rabbi Abbahu said: Perhaps you will say that He showed her to him from behind a carob tree or from behind a sycamore tree; rather, He adorned her with twenty-four types of jewelry and then He showed her to him, as it is stated: “And He brought her to the man” (Genesis 2:22). (Although she was made from his rib, and would naturally have been right next to him, the verse states that God brought her to him. This implies that He took her to another location to adorn her and then brought her to Adam (Midrash HaMevo’ar).) He blesses grooms, as it is stated: “God blessed them” (Genesis 1:28). He visits the ill, as it is stated: “The Lord appeared to him in the plains of Mamre” (Genesis 18:1). He buries the dead, as it is written: “He buried him in the valley” (Deuteronomy 34:6). He comforts the mourners, as it is written: “He called its name Alon Bakhut” (Genesis 35:8). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: What is Alon Bakhut? While he was observing the mourning for Deborah, his nursemaid, tidings reached him that his mother Rebecca had died, and he wept two weepings [bekhiyot]; that is why it is stated [that Jacob called that place] Alon Bakhut. And [the verse] states regarding Jacob: “[And God appeared to Jacob again…] and blessed [him]” (Genesis 35:9) – He blessed him with the blessing of the mourners.
[(Gen. 24:1:) NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD.] This text is related (to Ps. 25:10): ALL THE PATHS OF THE LORD ARE STEADFAST LOVE AND TRUTH. The beginning of Torah is steadfast love, its middle is steadfast love, and its end is steadfast love. (See above, 4:1 & 4; Eccl. R. 7:2:2.) Its beginning is steadfast love in that he has rendered steadfast love to bridegrooms and brides. He rendered steadfast love to Adam and Eve, as stated (in Gen. 2:22): THEN GOD BUILT THE RIB < WHICH HE HAD TAKEN FROM THE MAN INTO A WOMAN >. R. Abbahu said: In Arabia they call the plaited coiffure a "building." (Cf. Ber. 61a; Shab. 95a; Erub. 18a; Nid. 45b; ARN, A, 4; Gen. R. 18:1; M. Pss. 25:11.) The Holy One adorned Eve and brought her to Adam. (Cf. Gen. R. 8:13.) Do you suppose that he brought her to him under an olive tree? Or under a fig tree? Our masters have said: The Holy One made thirteen bridal canopies for Adam and Eve, as stated (in Ezek. 28:13): YOU WERE IN EDEN, THE GARDEN OF GOD; < EVERY PRECIOUS STONE WAS YOUR COVERING: CARNELIAN, CHRYSOLITE, AMETHYST, BERYL, LAPIS LAZULI, JASPER, SAPPHIRE, TURQUOISE, EMERALD, AND GOLD >. And the least of them is gold; for so it is written: EMERALD, AND GOLD (i.e., with gold in last place). Thus < there were > thirteen bridal canopies which were made for Adam and Eve. (Since Ezek. lists only nine stones plus gold, according to BB 75a there were only ten canopies; or perhaps eleven, with EVERY PRECIOUS STONE representing the extra one. Lev. R. 20:2 explains the tradition of thirteen by having EVERY PRECIOUS STONE represent three canopies. Similarly Gen. R. 18:2; Eccl. R. 8:1:2; PRK 4:4; PR 14:10.) R. Levi said in the name of R. Hama bar Hanina: The Holy One adorned Eve with twenty-four ornaments. And not only that, but he took her by the hand and brought her to Adam. R. Abbin Berabbi the Levite said: Blessed is a provincial who has seen this: the king taking < his bride > by the hand and bringing her to the house for him. (Gen. R. 18:3.) Thus it is stated (in Gen. 2:22, cont.): AND BROUGHT HER TO ADAM. Ergo (in Ps. 25:10): ALL THE PATHS OF THE LORD ARE STEADFAST LOVE AND TRUTH. Thus the beginning of Torah is steadfast love. Its middle also is steadfast love. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Gen. 35:8): THEN REBEKAH'S NURSE, DEBORAH, DIED. When she had died, what is written (ibid.)? AND ITS NAME (i.e., the name of her burial place) WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK, for Jacob was sitting there and weeping over her. The Holy One said: Jacob is sitting and grieving. He appeared to him visibly, as stated (in vs. 9): NOW THE LORD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN… < AND BLESSED HIM >. (Eccl. R. 7:2:3; see Gen. R. 8:13; 82:1.) And its end is steadfast love, < as seen in the case > of Moses; for, when he passed away, he buried him. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 34:6): AND < THE LORD > BURIED HIM IN THE VALLEY IN THE LAND OF MOAB. Ergo (in Ps. 25:10): ALL THE PATHS OF THE LORD ARE STEADFAST LOVE AND TRUTH. (Cf. M. Pss. 25:11, which derives from the verse that the Holy One adorns brides (Gen. 2:22), visits the sick (Gen. 18:1), and buries the dead (Deut. 34:6).) Abraham persisted in clinging to a measure of steadfast love. The Holy One said to him: This measure was mine and you have taken it. By your life, I am making you < old > like me. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Dan. 7:9): AS I LOOKED, THRONES WERE SET IN PLACE, AND THE ANCIENT OF DAYS TOOK HIS SEAT. HIS GARMENT WAS AS WHITE AS SNOW, < AND THE HAIR OF HIS HEAD WAS LIKE PURE WOOL >. (See Gen. R. 58:9.) What is written elsewhere on the matter (in Gen. 23:19)? THEN AFTERWARDS ABRAHAM BURIED HIS WIFE SARAH. (In doing so, Abraham showed his steadfast love.) He persisted in clinging to her. The Holy One said to him. You deserve a crown. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD (i.e., with a crown of white hair).
(Deut. 25:17:) REMEMBER WHAT AMALEK (Esau's grandson) DID TO YOU. This verse is related (to Ps. 109:14): MAY THE INIQUITY OF HIS FATHERS BE REMEMBERED BEFORE THE LORD…. Were the fathers of Esau wicked? (Tanh., Deut. 6:4; PRK 3:1; cf. 12:4; PR 12:4. In note 16 on PR 12:4, W. G. Braude, Pesikta Rabbati (“Yale Judaica Series”; New Haven; Yale, 1968) p. 221, n. 16, suggests that the verse was understood as referring to Esau, because vs. 17 in the psalm identifies him as one who DID NOT FIND PLEASURE IN A BLESSING.) And were they not righteous? His grandfather was Abraham. His father was Isaac. Yet are you saying (in Ps. 109:14): MAY THE INIQUITY OF HIS FATHERS BE REMEMBERED! simply a sin that he sinned against his fathers. (The Hebrew of Ps. 109:14 can also be understood in this sense.) And how did he sin against his fathers? (Above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 6:3; Gen. R. 63:12.) You find that Isaac got his vitality from Abraham; yet he lived a hundred and eighty years, while Abraham (The “only” is found in the parallel account of Tanh., Deut. 6:4.) lived a hundred and seventy-five years. (The Tanh. parallel adds here: “Why so? Because he did not foresee Esau’s shame.”) Rabbi Levi said: During the five years that were withheld from Abraham's life, Esau committed two serious transgressions. He violated a betrothed maiden, and he took a life. The one is what is written about (in Gen. 25:29): THEN ESAU CAME FROM THE FIELD, AND HE WAS EXHAUSTED. Now FIELD can only be a reference to a BETROTHED MAIDEN [of whom it is stated (in Deut. 22:25): IF IN THE FIELD THE MAN FINDS A MAIDEN WHO IS BETROTHED, ] Moreover, EXHAUSTED can only be a reference to a murderer, of whom it is stated (in Jer. 4:31): WOE TO ME, NOW! FOR MY LIFE IS EXHAUSTED BEFORE THOSE WHO KILL. Rabbi Zakkay [the Elder] said: He also stole, as stated (in Obad. 5): IF THIEVES HAVE COME TO YOU. (The Midrash, of course, is identifying the Edom of Obadiah with Esau.) The Holy One said: I had already promised my beloved Abraham (in Gen. 15:15): YOU SHALL GO UNTO YOUR ANCESTORS IN PEACE; YOU SHALL BE BURIED . But now he would see his grandson, when he was robbing with violence, practicing seduction, and shedding blood. At that time he was a good grandfather; it was better for him as a righteous man to be gathered (to his ancestors) in peace, as stated in Ps. 63:4 [3]): FOR STEADFAST LOVE IS BETTER THAN LIFE. And what sin did he commit against his father? He caused his eyes to become dim during his lifetime. Hence they have said: Whoever produces a wicked son or a wicked disciple causes his eyes to grow dim during his lifetime. A wicked son came from Isaac, as written (in (Gen. 27:1): AND HIS EYES WERE TOO DIM TO SEE. [Why? Because he produced Esau the Wicked.] In regard to a wicked disciple, from Ahijah the Shilonite, as stated (in I Kings 14:4): NOW AHIJAH {THE SHILONITE} COULD NOT SEE, BECAUSE HIS EYES WERE DIM FROM OLD AGE. Why? Because he produced a wicked disciple in Jeroboam. [(Ps. 109:14:) AND LET NOT THE SIN OF HIS MOTHER BE BLOTTED OUT.] But how had he sinned against his mother? R. Judah, R. Nehemiah, and masters . R. Judah says: When he left his mother's belly, he severed her uterus (Metrin: Gk.: metra; cf. Lat.: matrix.) {i.e., placenta}, with the result that she would not bear . This is what is written (in Amos 1:11): BECAUSE HE (i.e., Edom, which is Esau) PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND DESTROYED HIS WOMB. (I.e., the womb from which he had been born. The Masoretic text here reads WOMB in the plural. As such, an idiomatic reading of the text would be rendered: BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND REPRESSED ALL PITY.) Moreover, R. Berekhyah says: You should not say in reference to when he had left . (Gen. R. 63:6.) Rather, as he was leaving his mother's uterus, his zerta' (The Aramaic word means “fist” or “hand,” as the bracketed explanation correctly translates. The reason for this rather unusual word here is to play on the word zoru from Ps. 58:4, which he is about to cite.) {i.e., fist} was stretched out against him (i.e., against his brother Jacob). What is the reasoning? (Ps. 58:4 [3]:) THE WICKED GO ASTRAY (zoru) FROM THE WOMB. R. Nehemiah says: He was the cause of her not producing twelve tribes, since Rav Huna has said: Rebekah was worthy of producing twelve tribes, as stated (in Gen. 25:23): AND THE LORD SAID TO HER: TWO NATIONS ARE [IN YOUR WOMB. (See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 12:16.) Here] are two. (Ibid., cont.:) AND TWO PEOPLES. Here are four. (Ibid., cont.:) AND ONE PEOPLE SHALL BE STRONGER THAN THE OTHER. Here are six. (Ibid., cont.:) AND THE ELDER SHALL SERVE THE YOUNGER. Here are eight. (vs. 24:) AND BEHOLD THERE WERE TWINS IN HER WOMB. Here are ten. (vs. 25:) THE FIRST CAME OUT RUDDY. [Here are eleven.] (vs. 26:) AND AFTERWARD HIS BROTHER CAME OUT. Here are twelve. There are also some who apply a passage to her (from vs. 22): AND SHE SAID: IF SO, WHY AM I HERE (ZH)? By gematria (Gk.: geometria.) Z (=7) + H (=5) twelve. But masters have said: He was the cause of her bier not going forth publicly . You find that when Rebekah died, they were saying: Who will go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac's eyes are dim, and he is sitting at home. Jacob has gone to Paddan-aram. Should Esau the Wicked go before her? Then people would say : (Much of this paragraph is in Aramaic.) Cursed be her breasts for suckling this man {i.e., : cursed be the breasts that have suckled one like this man}. What did they do? They brought out her bier at night. R. Jose bar Hanina said: Because they brought out her bier at night, the text only explained about her obliquely. Thus it is written (in Gen. 35:8): THEN REBEKAH'S NURSE, DEBORAH, DIED [AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK (Allon-bacuth)]. What is the meaning of Allon-bacuth? Two weepings. (Bacuth, of course, means “weeping,” and allon can be understood as a Greek adjective in the neuter that means “other” or “another.” Thus the name can be read as “another weeping” and imply a second weeping. So PRK 3:1; Gen. R. 81:5; cf. Eccl. R. 7:2:3.) While Jacob was seated in observance of mourning for {his} [her] nurse, the news about his mother came to him. This is related (to Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN […,] AND BLESSED HIM. With what blessing did he bless him? He blessed him with the blessing mourners. (The blessing informed Jacob that his mother was dead.) The Holy One said: Did his father pay him (i.e. Esau) back with evil? Did his mother pay him back with evil? Did his brother pay him back with evil? Did his grand[father] pay him back with evil? Did you pay him back with evil? So should I pay him back with evil? When you mention his name below, I shall blot out his name above. (Ps. 109:15:) LET THEM (the iniquity against his fathers and the sin against his mother) ALWAYS BE BEFORE THE LORD. Whatever he has done, he has done against me. Thus it is stated (ibid., cont.): AND MAY HE HAVE THEIR MEMORY CUT OFF FROM THE EARTH. [Ergo] (in Deut. 25:17): REMEMBER WHAT AMALEK (Esau's grandson) DID TO YOU.
Another interpretation (of Cant. 5:16): HIS PALATE (i.e., what he says) IS MOST SWEET: If a king of flesh and blood has a friend, he loves him. So, if that friend becomes ill, (Heb.: HLH, a word that can also be pointed to mean “sweeten.”) he sends away to inquire after his health. Then, if he loves him even more, he goes to visit him. < But > if he went out into lodgings, (Gk.: xenia.) is it thinkable that the king would go out with him? However, < it was > the Supreme King of Kings, the Holy One, < who > loved Jacob, as stated (in Mal. 1:2): YET I HAVE LOVED JACOB. When Deborah (Instead of DEBORAH (Rebekah’s nurse) Yalqut Shim‘oni, Cant., 991, reads, “Rebekah” here.) died (in Gen. 35:8), < the Holy One > came to visit him; and, when he went out into lodgings, he was with him. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:15): AND SEE, I AM WITH YOU. When he returned, he was with him, as stated (in Gen. 31:3): THEN GOD SAID UNTO JACOB: < RETURN UNTO THE LAND OF YOUR ANCESTORS WHERE YOU WERE BORN >, AND I WILL BE WITH YOU.
(Gen. 35:9:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN…. This text is related (to Eccl. 7:2): IT IS BETTER TO GO UNTO A HOUSE OF MOURNING < THAN UNTO A HOUSE OF FEASTING >…. R. Simeon bar Abba said: There are two ways to be charitable, to be charitable with a bride and with the dead. If both of these < opportunities > should present themselves to you, you would not know which of them to seize first. Solomon came and explained (in Eccl. 7:2): IT IS BETTER TO GO INTO THE HOUSE OF MOURNING < THAN UNTO A HOUSE OF FEASTING >…. We have found that, when people have gone to the house of feasting, their names were not specified; but, when people have gone to the house of mourning, they have been excluded from Gehinnom, their names have been specified, and they have prophesied through the Holy Spirit. (Eccl.R. 7:2:4.) So who were those who entered the house of feasting? It is written (in Gen. 21:8): SO THE CHILD (Isaac) GREW AND WAS WEANED, AND ABRAHAM MADE A GREAT FEAST. What is the meaning of GREAT? It teaches that Shem, Eber, and Abimelech were there; but their names were not specified. (Cf. Gen. R. 53:10.) However, the names of those who went to the house of mourning {Job and his friends} were excluded from Gehinnom and the Holy Spirit rested upon them, i.e., upon Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite. And the Holy Spirit rested upon them, in that it is stated (in Job 4:1): THEN ANSWERED ELIPHAZ THE TEMANITE. Now he would only have answered in the language of prophecy. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 19:19): MOSES SPOKE, AND GOD ANSWERED HIM IN THUNDER. (See also ySot. 7:2 (21c).) Ergo: IT IS BETTER TO GO INTO THE HOUSE OF MOURNING < THAN INTO A HOUSE OF FEASTING >…. And who was the first to show his face [as a mourner]. See, the Holy One says < when >. When? When Deborah died, as stated (in Gen. 35:8): THEN < REBEKAH'S NURSE > DEBORAH DIED < AND WAS BURIED UNDER THE OAK BELOW BETHEL; AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK >. And it is written (in vs. 9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN … < AND BLESSED HIM >. (According to below, 8:26; Eccl. 7:2:3, the Holy One blessed him with a benediction for mourners.)
[(Gen. 35:9, 11:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN < .. > AND GOD SAID TO HIM:] < I AM GOD ALMIGHTY >. This text is related (to Deut. 28:6): BLESSED SHALL YOU BE IN YOUR COMING; < AND BLESSED SHALL YOU BE IN YOUR GOING AWAY >. When Jacob went away from his father's house, he went away with a blessing, as stated (in Gen. 28:3): MAY GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS YOU. Also, when he came from Paddan-Aram, he came with a blessing, as stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN < … > AND BLESSED HIM. How did he bless him? R. Levi said: He blessed him with a benediction for mourners. What is written above on the matter (in Gen. 35:8)? THEN < REBEKAH'S NURSE > DEBORAH DIED < AND WAS BURIED UNDER THE OAK BELOW BETHEL; AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK >. R. Samuel bar Nahman said: While Jacob was observing the mourning for his nurse, news < about the death > of his mother came, as stated (ibid.): AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK (Allon Bakhut). R. Samuel bar Nahman said: The language is Hellenistic. What is the meaning of Allon < in Greek >? "Another." (I.e., another occasion for weeping, namely the occasion of the death of Rebekah. So Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 35:8; Gen. R. 81:8; PRK 3:1.) The Holy One said: How long will this righteous one remain in grief? R. Jonathan bar Il'ay said: The Holy One said: It is right that I show him a friendly face, as stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN….
(Deut. 25:17:) “Remember what Amalek (Esau's grandson) did to you.” This verse is related (to Ps.109:14), “May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the Lord […].” Were the fathers of Esau wicked? (PRK 3:1; cf. 12:4; PR 12:4. In note 16 on PR 12:4, W. G. Braude, Pesikta Rabbati (“Yale Judaica Series”; New Haven; Yale, 1968) p. 221, n. 16, suggests that the verse was understood as referring to Esau, because vs. 17 in the psalm identifies him as one who DID NOT FIND PLEASURE IN A BLESSING.) And were they not righteous? His grandfather was Abraham. His father was Isaac. Yet are you saying (in Ps. 109:14), “May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered?” [The verse is] simply [referring to] a sin that he sinned against his fathers. (The Hebrew of Ps. 109:14 can also be understood in this sense.) And how? (Above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 6:3; Gen. R. 63:12.) You find that Isaac got his vitality from Abraham; yet he lived a hundred and eighty years, while Abraham only lived a hundred and seventy-five years. Why so? So he would not see Esau’s shame. Abraham had [Isaac] when he was a hundred years [old]. (Gen. 25:26-27:) “And Isaac was sixty years old when they were born. And the lads grew.” Both of them went to the elementary school, and both of them were equal until the age of fifteen. R. Levi said, “To what were they comparable? To a myrtle and a thorny plant. As long as they are small, no one [can] distinguish one from the other. After they have grown up, the one gives off its pleasant smell, but the other brings forth its thorns. Thus, so long as Esau and Jacob were small, no one distinguished between them. After they were grown up (in Gen. 25:26, cont.), ’Esau became a skillful hunter, a man of the outdoors; but Jacob was a mild man who stayed in camp.’” And Esau would go out and rob and extort, and people would maledict him. And during the five years [that were withheld from Abraham's life], Esau committed two serious transgressions: He violated a betrothed maiden, and he took a life. The one is what is written about (in Gen. 25:29), “then Esau came from the field, and he was exhausted.” Now field can only be a reference to a betrothed maiden [of whom it is stated (in Deut. 22:25), “If in the field the man finds [a maiden who is betrothed, and the man seizes her and lies with her…].” Moreover, exhausted can only be a reference to a murderer, of whom it is stated (in Jer. 4:31), “woe to me, now; for my life is exhausted before those who kill.” Rabbi Zakkay said, “He also stole, as stated (in Obad. 1:5), ‘If thieves have come to you.’” (The Midrash, of course, is identifying the Edom of Obadiah with Esau.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “I had already promised my beloved Abraham (in Gen. 15:15), ‘And you shall go unto your ancestors in peace; [you shall be buried at a good old age].’ But now he would see his grandson go to bad culture and hear what people say about his grandson; [that he was] transgressing sexual prohibitions and shedding blood. He would [then] wonder and say, ‘Are these the stipulations that the Holy One, blessed be He, being fulfilled with me?’ And he would voice a complaint, ‘And this is not “a good old age.”’ What should I do for him?” [So] He gathered him from the world. It is better for the righteous man to be gathered (to his ancestors) in peace, as stated in Ps. 63:4), “For Your steadfast love is better than life.” Behold, he [thus] sinned against his grandfather. He sinned against his father, as he caused his eyes to become dim during his lifetime. Hence they have said, “Whoever produces a wicked son or a wicked disciple causes his [own] eyes to grow dim during his lifetime.” From where [in Scripture] do you learn [this]? A wicked son, from Isaac, as stated (in (Gen. 27:1), “And it came to pass that when Isaac was old [and his eyes were too dim to see].” [In regard to] a wicked disciple, [we learn] from Ahijah, as it is written (in I Kings 14:4), “now Ahijah could not see, because his eyes were dim from old age.” Why? Because he produced a wicked disciple in Jeroboam. [(Ps. 109:14:) “And let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.”] But how had he sinned against his mother? R. Judah, R. Nehemiah, and [our] masters [differ]. R. Judah says, “When he left his mother's belly, he severed her uterus, (Metrin: Gk.: metra; cf. Lat.: matrix.) with the result that she would not bear [any more children]. This is what is written (in Amos 1:11), ‘because he (i.e., Edom, which is Esau) pursued his brother with the sword and repressed his pity (rachamiv),’ as it is written, ‘his uterus (rechemo).’” (I.e., the womb from which he had been born. The Masoretic text here reads WOMB in the plural. As such, an idiomatic reading of the text would be rendered: BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND REPRESSED HIS PITY.) Moreover, R. Berekhyah says, “You should not say [this] in reference to when he had left [his mother's uterus]. (Gen. R. 63:6.) Rather, as he was leaving his mother's uterus, his zerta' (The Aramaic word means “fist” or “hand,” as the bracketed explanation correctly translates. The reason for this rather unusual word here is to play on the word zoru from Ps. 58:4, which he is about to cite.) [i.e., fist] was stretched out against him (i.e., against his brother Jacob).” What is the reasoning? (Ps. 58:4:) “The wicked go astray (zoru) from the womb.” R. Nehemiah says, “He was the cause of her not producing twelve tribes.” As Rav Huna has said, “Rebekah was worthy of producing twelve tribes, as stated (in Gen. 25:23), ‘And the Lord said to her, “Two nations are [in your womb].” (See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 12:16.) Here are two. (Ibid., cont.:) “and two peoples.” Here are four. (Ibid., cont.:) “And one people shall be stronger than the other.” Here are six. (Ibid., cont.:) “And the elder shall serve the younger.”’ Here are eight. (Vs. 24:) ‘And behold there were twins in her womb.’ Here are ten. (Vs. 25:) ‘The first came out ruddy.’ That is eleven. (Vs. 26:) ‘And afterward his brother came out.’ Here are twelve.” And there are some who bring this [idea] from here (vs. 22); “and she said, ‘If so, why am I here (zh)?’” By gematria (Gk.: geometria.) z (=7) + h (=5) [for a total of] twelve. But [our] masters have said, “He caused her bier to not go forth publicly [to her funeral]. You find that when Rebekah died, they were saying, ‘Who will go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac's eyes are dim, and he is sitting at home. Jacob has gone to Paddan-Aram. Should Esau the wicked go before her? Then people would say [in Aramaic], (Much of this paragraph is in Aramaic.) “Cursed be her breasts for suckling this man.”’ What did they do? They brought out her bier at night, so that Esau not go out in front of her, and all say, ‘Cursed are the breasts suckled this evil man.’” R. Jose bar R. Hanina said, “Because they brought out her bier at night, the text only explained about her obliquely. Thus it is written (in Gen. 35:8), ‘Then Rebekah's nurse, Deborah, died [and she was buried under the oak below Bethel] and its name was called Weeping Oak (Allon-Bacuth)],’ as they wept two weepings (bekhiot).” (Bacuth, of course, means “weeping,” and allon can be understood as a Greek adjective in the neuter that means “other” or “another.” Thus the name can be read as “another weeping” and imply a second weeping. So PRK 3:1; Gen. R. 81:5; cf. Eccl. R. 7:2:3.) While Jacob was seated in observance [of mourning] for her nurse, the news about his mother came to him, as stated (to Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob again […,] and blessed him.” With what blessing did He bless him? He blessed him with the blessing of [consolation given to] mourners. (The blessing informed Jacob that his mother was dead.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Did his father pay him (i.e. Esau) back with evil? Did his mother pay him back with evil? Did his brother pay him back with evil? Did his grandfather pay him back with evil? Did you pay him back with evil? I shall pay him back with evil, as his children destroyed My house. You and I shall rise against him, as stated (Obad. 1:1), “Rise, and we shall rise up against her for war.” Israel said to him, “Master of the world, we cannot [overcome] him.” [So] the Holy One, blessed be He, says to them, “You mention his name below, and I shall blot out his name above, as stated (Ps. 109:15) ‘Let them (the iniquity against his fathers and the sin against his mother) always be before (neged) the Lord.’ Whatever he has done, he has done against (neged) Me.” [Therefore] (ibid., cont.), “and may He have their memory cut off from the earth.” Ergo (in Deut. 25:17), “Remember what Amalek (Esau's grandson) did to you.”
Our forefather Jacob was 63 when he was blessed. Ishmael died at that time as is written, "Esau saw that Isaac had blessed...Jacob listened to his father...Esau saw [the Canaanite women] were bad [in the eyes of Isaac]...Esau went to Ishmael..."(Genesis 28:9). There seems no need for the verse to state "sister of Nebaioth." What do we learn from the fact that it says "sister of Nebaioth"? We learn that Ishmael died and Nebaioth [Ishmael's firstborn therefore] married off his sister to Esau. Jacob our forefather hid [from Esau] 14 years in the land of Israel and served Eber. Eber died two years after Jacob went to Aram-Naharaim. [Jacob] left and went to Aram-Naharaim and he was found by the well when he was 77 years old and he was in Laban's house for 20 years: 7 before he married any matriarchs, 7 from when he married in the Matriarchs and 6 years after the 11 tribes and Dinah were born. It comes out that all the tribes were born in seven years besides Benjamin. Each and every one each 7 months. He left Aram-Naharaim and came to Succoth and stayed there 18 months as is written "And Jacob went to Succoth" (Genesis 33:17). He left Succoth and went to Bet El and made 6 new encampments close to the place.
and Jacob was ninety-nine years of age when he went up to Beth-el. And Jacob with his sons and all the people that were with him dwelt in Beth-el in Luz, and he built there an altar to the Lord who appeared unto him; and Jacob and his sons tarried in Beth-el for six months. At that time Deborah daughter of Uz, the nurse of Rebekah who had been with Jacob, died and Jacob buried her beneath Beth-el under an oak which was there. And Rebekah daughter of Bethuel, Jacob’s mother, died at that time in Hebron, in Kirjath-arba, and she was buried in the cave of Machpelah which Abraham had bought from the children of Heth. And the days of Rebekah were one hundred and thirty-three years. And when Jacob heard that his mother Rebekah had died he wept greatly for his mother, and he made a great mourning for her, and for Deborah her nurse, beneath the oak; and he called the name of that place Allon-bachoth, the oak of weeping. And Laban the Aramite died in those days, for the Lord punished him for transgressing the covenant which was established between him and Jacob. And Jacob was one hundred years old when the Lord appeared unto him and blessed him, and he called his name Israel. And Rachel, Jacob’s wife, conceived in those days. And Jacob journeyed at that time with all belonging to him from Beth-el, to his father's house in Hebron. And while they were on the road, only a short distance before coming to Ephrath, Rachel bare a son, and having hard labor she died. And Jacob buried her on the road to Ephrath, in Bethlehem, and he set there a pillar which is upon her grave even to this day. And the days of Rachel were forty-five years when she died. And Jacob called the name of the son that Rachel bare unto him, Benjamin, for in the land “on the right hand” he was born unto him. And after Rachel’s death Jacob transferred his tent into the tent of Bilhah her maid-servant. And Reuben became jealous in behalf of Leah his mother, and he entered Bilhah’s and forcibly removed thence the bed of his father. At that time Reuben was deprived of the portion of the first-born, the kingdom, and the priesthood, for having profaned his father's bed; and the right of the first-born was given unto Joseph, and the kingdom to Judah, and the priesthood to Levi, because Reuben had profaned the bed of his father.
If we follow Rashi -who understands the words אלון בכות in 35,8, immediately before the report of G–d changing Jacob's name and blessing him, as a veiled hint that Rebeccah had died- it seems strange that Jacob would experience a Divine vision at a time when he was in mourning for his mother. We have a tradition that one does not experience prophetic visions except when in a state of joy (Midrash Hagadol Vayigash 45, 27).
The sin of not honoring his mother was greater than the sin of not honoring his father, since people would curse the belly of a woman such as Rebeccah who had produced an Esau. Nachmanides already pointed out that the Torah does mention the death of Deborah, Rebeccah's nursemaid, whereas it does not mention the death of Rebeccah herself; this was to prevent people from cursing the mother who had given birth to an Esau. Nachmanides believes that to report Rebeccah's death might have been in bad taste, seeing that her favorite son could not attend her funeral whereas her other son Esau hated her. Rebeccah's husband Isaac was blind at the time of her death and could not perform the last rites on her. It would have been insulting to Rebeccah's memory to have the Torah mention that she had to be buried by the local Hittites. Nachmanides claims to have found something along these lines in Devarim Rabbah on Parshat Ki Tetze. Rebeccah was buried at night in order to save her embarrassment because her next of kin did not bury her. This is why Jacob named the tree אלון בכות, (plural instead of בכיה, which would have suggested weeping only for the death of Deborah). [I have not found this Midrash where it is supposed to be. Rabbi Chavell attributes this statement to a Tanchuma. Ed.] In view of these commentaries, we must understand the vision Jacob had at that time as a visit by G–d to Jacob in his capacity as a mourner; G–d simply visited him to console him over the loss of his mother Rebeccah. Knowledge of the fact that Esau was the only one who attended Rebeccah's funeral would cause people to consider Rebeccah as a source of curses. The Torah's main purpose was certainly not to confer honour on Deborah. This is what the allusions in our verse are all about. Thus far Nachmanides. [Actually there is more in Nachmanides. Ed.]We thus find that though G–d's blessing of Jacob-Israel in 35,11 includes a very important prophecy, and accords Israel a hitherto unattainable level of spiritual achievement; conversely it also alludes to a penalty that he will incur as a result of the circumstances surrounding the death of his mother.
And the life of Sarah It is not the [usual] way to record the deaths of women, even righteous ones, unless it is by means of a deed. For behold we find only Sarah, Rachel, and Devorah -- Rivka's wetnurse -- and Miriam on the withdrawal of the well. Sarah's death is mentioned since she makes known to us how the grave was acquired with riches (and this is one of the tests [of Avraham]). Devorah's death is mentioned to make known how the name of the place is called Alon-Bachut. Rachel's death is mentioned to teach why she is not buried in Ma'arat haMachpela. And why is it that their years are not numbered, except for Sarah? Since she is the most important of them all.
ותמת שרה, “Sarah died;” it is most unusual for the Torah to report the fact that a woman died. (Miriam, Moses’ sister’s death are exceptions, Numbers 20,1 as are Rachel’s premature death in Genesis 35,18, and Deborah, Rivkah’s nursemaid in Genesis 35,8.) When such a death is reported it is not only a compliment to the virtuous lives these women had lived, but is always associated with a remarkable event. Sarah’s death is associated with the enormous amount of money paid by her husband for acquiring the land for burying her. Rachel’s premature death is reported so that we should know where she has been buried. Deborah’s death is reported so that we should know why the place where this occurred became known subsequently as אלון בכות, “oak of mourning.” [Also in order to draw our attention to the fact that her mistress, Rivkah’s death has not been reported. Ed.] Miriam’s death was the reason that the well that had accompanied the Israelites throughout their long march in the desert ceased flowing.
ואת מנקתה, “and her nursemaid.” She was used to her as she was still so young. The reason that the Torah mentions this is that otherwise we would not have understood why her death, while Yaakov was on the way back to the land of Canaan, had been mentioned [on that occasion with her name. (Genesis 35,8) Ed.])
Thus, in the case of Jacob, I admit that the entire narrative of “and Jacob sent messengers” (4. Gen. 32:4 ff.) occurred as something seen in a dream. Nonetheless, in my opinion Jacob carried this out when he awoke, as happened in many such cases. (5. Maimonides, in the Guide II:42, asserts that the entire section occurred in a vision, including the preparations for the meeting with Esau (vv. 14-24) and the wrestling with the angel (vv. 25-32). Kaspi, both here and in the Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 22), asserts that the intermediary passage, where Jacob prepared to meet Esau, did occur outside of the prophetic vision.) As for the wrestling with the angel, (6. Gen. 32:25-32.) this never occurred other than in a dream. The touching of the hollow of his thigh (and the passage following) until “the sinew of the thigh vein” (7. Gen. 32:26, 33. This comment is intended to answer the following problem: If indeed the wrestling with the angel was but a mental occurrence, how and why did Jacob limp in the morning (v. 32)?) was intended as an allusion to evil events that would befall Jacob in respect of women, for nasheh (“thigh vein”) is equivocal, (8. The Hebrew term could also be taken as the root for ’ishah (“woman”); consequently, the maiming of that limb would be an oblique allusion to being maimed on account of woman. Accordingly, Jacob was maimed in the thigh during the course of the vision, through some divine instrument.) similar to ḥovlim and the like. (9. Cf. Guide II:43, which refers to ḥovlim and other instances of metathesis. On Kaspi’s use of metathesis, see above Chapter 2.) Accordingly he experienced the events of Dinah, (10. He is referring to the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) Rachel, (11. He is referring to the tragic death of Rachel in Gen. 35:16 ff.) and Rebeccah’s handmaid. (12. Gen. 35:8. All three instances caused Jacob much grief.)
‘EIL PARAN.’ It is translated in the Targum as “Plain of Paran.” But I say that the word eil does not signify a plain. Rather, the lowland of Paran was called Eil, that of Mamre was named Eilonei, that of the Jordan was called Kikar, and that of Shittim was Abel. All these are translated in the Targum as meishra (plain), but each really had its own particular name. Thus the language of Rashi. But if it were so, (That Eil, Eilonei and Kikar are the proper names of these places.) Onkelos would have mentioned them in his Targum by their name — i.e., “Eila of Paran,” “Eilonei of Mamre,” — as is his custom with names. Besides, who told him (“Him” refers both to Rashi and Onkelos.) whether these many places were all plains or high mountains [if Eil, Eilonei and Kikar were but proper names of these places]? Again, Mamre is the name of a person — as it is written, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner, and they were confederate with Abram (Verse 13 here.) — and that place was his, just as it says, ‘Eilonei’ Mamre the Amorite, (Ibid. Ramban’s intent is to argue that since Mamre is the name of an individual, the word Eilonei could not be a proper name since two names cannot be in the constructive state.) as I have explained. (Above, 12:6.) Rather, Eil paran means a place of terebinths, as it is said, For they shall be ashamed ‘me’eilim’ (of the terebinths) which ye have desired; (Isaiah 1:29.) eilonei is a place of oaks, as it is said, As a terebinth, ‘veka’alon’ (and as an oak) (Ibid., 6:13.) Of the ‘alonim’ (oaks) of Bashan. (Ezekiel 27:6.) It was customary among them that these terebinths and oaks be planted in the plains before the cities which serve them as “an open land.” And so did Onkelos translate alon bachuth (Genesis 35:8. And Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried below Beth-el under the ‘alon’ and he called its name ‘Alon Bachuth.’) as “the plain of Bechuta.” There the word alon is surely not a proper noun of the location (As opposed to Rashi who says that the name of the place was Alon.) but only the name of the species of tree planted there, as is made explicit [in the same verse: and she was buried] …under the ‘alon.’ (Genesis 35:8. And Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried below Beth-el under the ‘alon’ and he called its name ‘Alon Bachuth.’) Onkelos’ intent, however, is to convey the sense of the expression and not to merely translate the words. Now the Targum Yerushalmi says with respect to both eil Paran and eilonei Mamre that they mean the plain of Paran and Mamre as Onkelos said, but in the case of alon bachuth, (Genesis 35:8. And Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried below Beth-el under the ‘alon’ and he called its name ‘Alon Bachuth.’) he [Targum Yerushalmi] says it is the nut-tree of Bachut for he considers alon bachuth to be the name of a tree and not a place. (As opposed to Rashi who says that the name of the place was Alon.) Onkelos, however, thought that alon bachuth is the name of a place, so called because there were many oak trees there, just as Eilonei Mamre [is the name of a place]. It is for that reason that Scripture there uses the word ha’alon. (And she was buried below Beth-el under ‘ha’alon’ (the oak). See Note 129 above. Ramban’s intent is to say that since the word alon appears there with the definite article, (namely, ha-alon), it could not be a proper noun since the definite article is never attached to a proper noun. Hence in the end of the verse, which reads, And he called its name ‘alon bachuth,’ the word alon is also not a name designating a particular tree but a descriptive noun referring to a place containing many oaks. Hence Onkelos translates alon Bachuth as “the plain of Bechuta.” According to Targum Yerushalmi, who takes alon bachuth to be the name of a particular kind of tree, the verse should have read, “And she was buried below Beth-el under alon,” not ha-alon.) Thus according to Onkelos they are all (Eil Paran, Eilonei Mamre and alon bachuth. Hence in all these cases Onkelos translated “the plain of Paran… Mamre… Bechuta” as meaning a plain containing oak trees. Onkelos does this in keeping with his general method of conveying the intent of the verse rather than its strict translation since eil, eilonei and alon, strictly speaking, mean particular kinds of trees. Onkelos however felt free to say “the plain of Paran… Mamre… Bachuth” for his intent is but to convey the general meaning. Ramban continues to point that out in kikar hayarden, (13:11), where Onkelos said, “the plain of the Jordan,” that is indeed the exact translation of the word kikar.) descriptive nouns. But kikar hayarden (Above, 13:10.) is indeed the actual word for a plain, for kikar in the Sacred Language is the name for the place where the natural streams of rivers overflow. It is for this reason that the messenger who came to rescue Lot said, Stay not in all ‘hakikar’ (the plain; escape to the mountain. (Further, 19:17.) Of similar usage are the expressions, Kar nirchav (wide pasture); (Isaiah 30:23.) ‘Karim’ (the meadows) are clothed with flocks; the valleys also are covered over with corn. (Psalms 65:14.) Sometimes Scripture doubles the first letter of the word kar (meadow), making it kikar, and at other times Scripture discards the double form, as in, bath ayin (the apple of the eye). (Ibid., 17:8. The double letter form of the word would be babath ayin, with a double beth.) There are many other such cases. Swift couriers are also called by this name kar, as in ‘lakari velaratzim;’ (II Kings 11:4. It is usually translated: of the Carites and of the guard. According to Ramban its meaning is: of the couriers and the dispatchers.) The captains over hundreds and ‘hakari.’ (Ibid., Verse 19. Here too the usual translation is: the Carites. According to Ramban it means: the couriers.) The word bakirkaroth (Isaiah 66:20.) is also of the same root. It is the name for speedy camels such as “the flying camel” mentioned in the Talmud. (Makkoth 5a.) The word mecharkar, (II Samuel 6:14. And David ‘mecharkar’ (danced) before the Eternal with all his strength.) containing the double use of kar, is a derivative of this word. Abel Hashittim, (Numbers 33:49.) and also Abel Mecholah, (Judges 7:22.) they (Onkelos and Jonathan) translated to mean the plain of Shittim and Mecholah. It is [called Abel, which in Hebrew means “mourning”], because it is a desolate place, without plantings or structures for the word abel is, to them, an expression of destruction and waste, as in the verses: ‘Vaya’avel’ (And He made to mourn) the rampart and the wall; (Lamentations 2:8.) The new wine ‘aval’ (faileth), the vine fadeth. (Isaiah 24:7.)
and the sin against his mother that he destroyed her womb, and that he caused the day of her burial to be concealed from the people, lest they curse her for Esau emerged from her womb, as it is said (Gen. 35:8): “Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse, died...the Plain of Weeping.” In Greek, another is called “allon,” for Jacob had another mourning along with that of Deborah, for his mother died and they concealed her death.
“Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse, died” [35:8]. Rashi asks a question here. How does Deborah come to the house of Jacob? The explanation is that Rebecca sent Deborah to Jacob in Laban’s house to call him back. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:8.)
Devorah, Rivkah’s nurse, died, and she was buried below Beis Eil, under Allon [on the lower plain]. He named it Allon of Weeping [Plain of the Weeping].
And Deborah the nurse of Rivekah died, and was buried below Beth El under an oak: and he called the name of it, The Oak of Weeping.
And Deborah, the nurse of Rivekah, died, and was buried below Bethel, in the field of the plain. And there it was told Jakob concerning the death of Rivekah his mother; and he called the name of it, The other weeping.
| וַיֵּרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹב֙ ע֔וֹד בְּבֹא֖וֹ מִפַּדַּ֣ן אֲרָ֑ם וַיְבָ֖רֶךְ אֹתֽוֹ׃ | 9 P | God appeared again to Jacob on his arrival from Paddan-aram. God blessed him, |
וירא אלוקים, G’d appeared to Yaakov again; after the mourning. אל יעקב עוד, the reason why the Torah writes עוד, again, is so that we know that this was not an angel, but G’d Himself, Who had already previously appeared to Yaakov as such in 28,13. Just as He had appeared to him on his way to Padan Aram, He now appeared to him when Yaakov was returning from Padan Aram. [I wonder if the fact that on the two occasions when our author emphasises the appearance of G’d without intermediary, were chosen because both took place on the holy soil of the land of Israel, whereas in the Diaspora G’d at best reveals Himself through an intermediary. Ed.]
וברך אותו, the blessing consisted of the verses 10-13. ויאמר...כי אם ישראל, the new name is to be used additionally, as we explained already.
וירא אלוקים אל יעקב עוד, after he had moved on from Luz, called now Bet El, he named a second place Bet El, as will be explained forthwith.
עוד AGAIN — the second time at this spot: once when he set out on his journey, once when he returned.
ויברך אתו AND HE BLESSED HIM. — He gave him the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners (Genesis Rabbah 81:5; cp. Rashi on Genesis 25:11).
וירא אלוקים, after the mourning had concluded.
The Torah, in retrospect, by using this formulation, tells us that the dream Yaakov had had when in flight, on the way to Charan, had in fact not been merely a dream but a vision.
בבאו מפדן ארם. G’d only appeared to him after leaving Lavan. While he was in Lavan’s city he did not rate such visions. The fact that G’d had spoken to him by means of an intermediary, an angel even while still in Padan Aram, is not to be confused with the level of a vision described as “G’d appeared to him.”
God appeared to Jacob again, already upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him. God appeared to him in Beit El, in the same location as when he left for Haran.
“He blessed him” [35:9]. The Holy One consoled Jacob during his mourning. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:9.)
We observe at the end of the Parshah that as soon as Jacob was no longer within the immediate vicinity of the idol worshipping Laban, he is once more surrounded by angels.
And here, with the concept of surrender, the humble [person] finds himself with the the Creator - Hashem. Just as He is elevated above all of those elevated, and 'gaah' above all of those who are 'gaim', just as we said with what was written (in Tehillim, chapter 33:1), "ה' מלך גאות לבש." So too [we find humility] with Dovid haMelech (alav haShalom) (in Tehillim, chapter 18:36), "וענותך תרבני," as it is explained in Midrash Tanchuma (ילקוט שמואל רמז קסא) about this passuk. This is what it says. "With my right [hand], I support you," (Tehillim 18:36) -- this is what is written in the Torah, "מימינו אש דת למו" (Devarim 33:2). And, "Your humility is multiplied," as in, who is humble like Hashem? A person says to his friend: Come and beautify the brides, or visit the sick, or bury the dead, or give comfort to the mourners: and he says to him, "I am a 'gadol' and rich; why should I go [and do these]? However, Hashem [does each of these, as it is written in these pasukim]: ויבן את הצלע (Bereishit 22:2), וירא אליו ה' (Devarim 18:1), ויקבור אותו בגי (Devarim 34:6), וירא אלהים אל יעקב (Bereishit 25:9).
“Take the Levites” – that is what the verse said: “The Lord assesses the righteous, but He hates the wicked and the lover of villainy” (Psalms 11:5). “The Lord assesses the righteous” – the Holy One blessed be He does not elevate a person to a position of authority until he first assesses and examines him. When he passes His ordeal, He elevates him to a position of authority. Likewise, you find regarding Abraham our patriarch. The Holy One blessed be He subjected him to ten ordeals and he passed them. Then He blessed him: “The Lord blessed Abraham with everything” (Genesis 24:1). Likewise, Isaac, He subjected him to the ordeal of Avimelekh, and he passed the ordeal. Then He blessed him, as it is stated: “Isaac sowed in that land and found in that year one hundredfold, and the Lord blessed him” (Genesis 26:12). Likewise, Jacob our patriarch, He subjected him to an ordeal with all those travails; with Esau, with Rachel, with Dina, with Joseph, and how he left his father’s house: “For with my staff I crossed this Jordan” (Genesis 32:11). And He blessed him: “God appeared to Jacob again, already upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). Likewise, Joseph with the wife of Potifera; he was incarcerated for twelve years and became king because he passed his ordeals. That is, “the Lord assesses the righteous.” The tribe of Levi, too, devoted their lives for sanctification of the name of the Holy One blessed be He. When Israel was in Egypt, they rejected the Torah and circumcision, as Ezekiel rebukes them: “So said the Lord God: On the day that I chose Israel, I raised My hand to the descendants of the house of Jacob and made Myself known to them in the land of Egypt” (Ezekiel 20:5). What is ultimately written thereafter? “They defied Me and did not want to heed Me…and I said to pour My fury upon them” (Ezekiel 20:8). What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He brought darkness upon the Egyptians for three days, during which he killed all the wicked of Israel, as it says: “I will purge the rebels and the transgressors against Me from among you” (Ezekiel 20:38). Likewise it says: “The fig tree formed its unripe figs” (Song of Songs 2:13), these are the wicked who were among Israel. “And the vines, budding, emitted fragrance” (Song of Songs 2:13), the survivors who repented were accepted. “Arise, my love, my fair one, and go” (Song of Songs 2:13), as the time of the redemption has arrived. But the tribe of Levi, all of them were righteous, and all of them would perform the Torah, as it is stated: “For they observed Your saying, and Your covenant they upheld” (Deuteronomy 33:9); this is circumcision. Moreover, when Israel crafted the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate, as it is stated: “Moses stood at the gate of the camp…and all the sons of Levi gathered to him” (Exodus 32:26). When Moses said to them: “Each man, place his sword upon his thigh” (Exodus 32:27), what did they do? They placed it and showed no favor. Likewise, Moses said in his blessing: “Who said of his father and of his mother: I have not seen him” (Deuteronomy 33:9). When the Holy One blessed be He saw that they were all righteous, he subjected them to an ordeal and they passed the ordeal, as it is stated: “Whom you subjected to an ordeal at Masa” (Deuteronomy 33:8). Immediately, He said: “The Levites shall be Mine” (Numbers 8:14), to realize what is stated: “The Lord assesses the righteous” (Psalms 11:5). But the wicked, it is written in their regard: “But He hates the wicked and the lover of villainy” (Psalms 11:5). David said: “Happy is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways” (Psalms 128:1).
“The Lord said to Moses: Count every firstborn male of the children of Israel from one month old and above, and take the number of their names” (Numbers 3:40). “The Lord said to Moses: Count every firstborn male of the children of Israel…” – that is what is written: “Since you were precious in My eyes, you were honored…” (Isaiah 43:4). The Holy One blessed be He said to Jacob: Jacob, you are exceedingly precious in My eyes, as, as it were, I have affixed your visage to my Throne, and the angels laud Me in your Name and say: “Blessed is the Lord, God of Israel, from eternity to eternity” (Psalms 41:14). That is, “since you were precious in My eyes, you were honored…” Another matter: “Since you were precious in My eyes, you were honored” – the Holy One blessed be He said to Jacob: You are exceedingly precious in My eyes, as, as it were, I and My ministering angels emerged to greet you upon your departure to go to Padan Aram and upon your return. When you departed, what is written: “Jacob departed.… he encountered the place.… he dreamed, and behold, a ladder…[and behold, the angels of God].… And behold, the Lord stood over him… (Genesis 28:10–13). Rabbi Hoshaya said: Happy is one born of a woman who saw this, the King and His entourage standing over him and protecting him. From where is it derived upon his return? It is as it is stated: “Jacob went on his way, [and the angels of God encountered him]” (Genesis 32:2). Those are the angels; the Divine Presence, from where is it derived? “God appeared to Jacob again, upon his return [from Padan Aram]” (Genesis 35:9). That is, “since you were precious in My eyes, you were honored.” Another matter: “Since you were precious in My eyes…” – the Holy One blessed be He said to Jacob: You are precious in My eyes, as for all the nations of the world, I did not provide a census, but for you, I provided a census. This is analogous to a king who had many granaries and they were all foul and filled with black kernels. He was not particular about their number. He had one granary that he saw that it was fine. He said to a member of his household: ‘Those granaries are foul and filled with black kernels; therefore, do not be particular about their number. But ascertain how many kor are in this one, how many sacks, how many measures are in it.’ So, the king, this is the King of kings, the Holy One blessed be He. The granary, this is Israel: “It is like My threshing floor, the product of my granary” (Isaiah 21:10). Likewise, it says: “Israel is sacred to the Lord, the first of His crop” (Jeremiah 2:3). The member of his household, this is Moses, as it is stated: “Not so My servant Moses; in all My house he is faithful” (Numbers 12:7). The Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: ‘The idol worshippers are foul,’ as it is stated: “Peoples will be as burnings of lime, cut thorns…” (Isaiah 33:12); ‘therefore, do not be particular about their number. But Israel, they are righteous; their groups are all wheat,’ as it is stated: “Your people, they are all righteous” (Isaiah 60:21). Likewise it says: “All of you is fair, my love, and there is no blemish in you” (Song of Songs 4:7). ‘That is why you shall be particular about their number.’ So, Moses did; he counted them, how many kor are in it, as it is stated: “Take a census of the entire congregation of the children of Israel” (Numbers 1:2); how many sacks: “its host and those counted” (Numbers 2:4); how many measures, as it is stated: “Count every…male.”
“Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse, died, and she was buried below Beit El, beneath the oak, and he called its name Alon Bakhut” (Genesis 35:8). “God appeared to Jacob again, already upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). “Deborah, Rebecca's nurse, died…and he called its name Alon Bakhut” – Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: In the Greek language, alon means other. While he [Jacob] was still observing the mourning for Deborah, the report that his mother had died came to him. That is what is written: “God appeared to Jacob…and He blessed him.” With which blessing did he bless him? Rav Aḥa said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: He blessed him with the blessing of the mourners.
“God appeared to Jacob again, upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and He blessed him” (Genesis 35:9). “God appeared to Jacob.” It is written: “Show me a sign for good, [so that those who hate me will see it and be shamed, for You, Lord, have helped me and comforted me]” (Psalms 86:17) – it is speaking of David but was fulfilled in Jacob. (The author of this statement was David. Although there is no indication that David’s request was fulfilled, Jacob did receive such a sign. ) “A sign” – on the basis of what is stated: “If he said this: The speckled will be your wages [then all the flocks bore speckled]” (Genesis 31:8). “Those who hate me will see it” (Psalms 86:17) – this is Esau and his chieftains. “Have helped me” (Psalms 86:17) – with the trouble of Shekhem, as it is written: “The dread of God was upon the cities” (Genesis 35:5). “And comforted me” (Psalms 86:17) – with the blessing of the mourners.
It is written: “Who may ascend the mountain of the Lord? Who may stand…? He who has clean hands…. He will receive the blessing from the Lord…” (Psalms 24:3–5). (These phrases are all interpreted as applying to Jacob. The first, “who may ascend the mountain of the Lord?” is an allusion to the verse: “Arise, ascend to Bet El” (Genesis 35:1) (Etz Yosef; see Midrash Tehillim 24:9). ) It is written: “So said the Lord of hosts, God of Israel: They will again say…the Lord will bless you, abode of righteousness, mountain of sanctity…” (Jeremiah 31:23). (The blessing mentioned in this verse, which refers to the God of Israel, is understood as applying to Jacob, also known as Israel (Etz Yosef). ) It is written: “A man of faith will abound with blessings” (Proverbs 28:20) – this is Jacob. “And one who hastens to become rich will not be absolved” (Proverbs 28:20) – this is Esau. It is written: “The blessing of the Lord, it will enrich” (Proverbs 10:22). “And one who hastens to become rich will not become rich” is not written here, but rather, “will not be absolved” – this is the wicked Esau, who married Yehudit, Basmat, and Maḥalat in order to increase wealth; he will never be cleansed. It is written: “I will cleanse; their blood I will not cleanse” (Joel 4:21) – that is what is written: “For his pursuit of his brother with the sword; and suppressing his mercy” (Amos 1:11). “God appeared to Jacob again, upon his arrival.” Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “You shall craft for Me a stone altar…[I will come to you and I will bless you]” (Exodus 20:21) – the matters can be derived a fortiori: If one who crafts an altar to My name, I appear to him and bless him, Jacob, whose image is fixed on My throne, all the more so. “God appeared to Jacob.” Rabbi Levi began: “And a bull and a ram for a peace offering…[for today the Lord shall appear to you” (Leviticus 9:4) – the matters can be derived a fortiori: If one who sacrifices a ram to my name, I appear to him and bless him, Jacob, whose image is fixed on My throne, all the more so. “God appeared” – “Blessed are you upon your arrival, and blessed are you upon your departure” (Deuteronomy 28:6). Upon his arrival at his father-in-law’s house, he was laden with blessings: “May God Almighty bless you…” (Genesis 28:3), and upon his departure from his father-in-law’s house, he was laden with blessings: “God appeared to Jacob…[and He blessed him].” “Who confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers” (Isaiah 44:26) – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: When He “confirms the word of his servant,” do we not know that He “fulfills the counsel of His messengers”? It indicates that one angel appeared to Jacob our patriarch and said to him: ‘The Holy One blessed be He is destined to appear to you in Beit El and change your name, and I am destined to be standing there.’ That is what is written: “In Beit El He will find us and there He will speak with us” (Hosea 12:5) – “will speak with you” is not written here, but rather, “there He will speak with us.” The Holy One blessed be He appeared to him to fulfill the angel’s words; [and for] Jerusalem, in whose regard all the prophets prophesy, all the more so that He will fulfill the words of His prophets.
“God appeared…again” – Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: “Again” – as it was initially. Just as initially, it was by means of an angel, (This was when Jacob was told to return to Canaan (Genesis 31:11). ) so, too, the second [time] was by means of an angel. Rabbi Berekhya said: [God said:] ‘I will not associate My name with any person again; only with you and not with another, as it is stated: “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob” (Exodus 6:3), and there is no other with them.’ Rabbi Yudan said: “Again” – I will appear to you another time. “And He blessed him” – with what blessing did He bless him? Rabbi Asi said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: He blessed him with the blessing of the mourners. (Jacob’s mother, Rebecca, had died (see Bereshit Rabba 81:5). )
Rabbi Abahu said: The Holy One blessed be He [Himself] took the cup of blessing, (The cup of wine over which the wedding benedictions are recited.) [as it were,] and gave a blessing to them. Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: Mikhael and Gavriel were the groomsmen of Adam the first man. Rabbi Samlai said: We have found that the Holy One blessed be He blesses grooms, adorns brides, visits the ill, and buries the dead. He blesses grooms – from where is it derived? “God blessed them.” He adorns brides – from where is it derived? “The Lord God built the side” (Genesis 2:22). (See Bereshit Rabba 18:1.) He visits the ill – from where is it derived? It is as it is stated: “The Lord appeared to him in the plains of Mamre” (Genesis 18:1). (God appeared to Abraham shortly after his circumcision.) He buries the dead – from where is it derived? “He buried him (Moses.) in the valley” (Deuteronomy 34:6). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: He also consoles the mourner. That is what is written: “God appeared to Jacob again…[and He blessed him]” (Genesis 35:9). What blessing did He bless him? It was the blessing of mourners. (This took place immediately after Jacob’s mother died (see Rashi on that verse).)
It is written: “The Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). We have found that the Holy One blessed be He performs acts of kindness: He adorns brides, blesses grooms, visits the ill, buries the dead, and comforts the mourners. He adorns brides, as it is written: “The Lord God built [the rib that he took from the man into a woman, and He brought her to the man]” (Genesis 2:22). Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He built her, adorned her, and showed her to him [Adam]. Rabbi Abbahu said: Perhaps you will say that He showed her to him from behind a carob tree or from behind a sycamore tree; rather, He adorned her with twenty-four types of jewelry and then He showed her to him, as it is stated: “And He brought her to the man” (Genesis 2:22). (Although she was made from his rib, and would naturally have been right next to him, the verse states that God brought her to him. This implies that He took her to another location to adorn her and then brought her to Adam (Midrash HaMevo’ar).) He blesses grooms, as it is stated: “God blessed them” (Genesis 1:28). He visits the ill, as it is stated: “The Lord appeared to him in the plains of Mamre” (Genesis 18:1). He buries the dead, as it is written: “He buried him in the valley” (Deuteronomy 34:6). He comforts the mourners, as it is written: “He called its name Alon Bakhut” (Genesis 35:8). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: What is Alon Bakhut? While he was observing the mourning for Deborah, his nursemaid, tidings reached him that his mother Rebecca had died, and he wept two weepings [bekhiyot]; that is why it is stated [that Jacob called that place] Alon Bakhut. And [the verse] states regarding Jacob: “[And God appeared to Jacob again…] and blessed [him]” (Genesis 35:9) – He blessed him with the blessing of the mourners.
Another interpretation (of Is. 43:4): BECAUSE YOU ARE PRECIOUS. The Holy One said: Jacob, you are precious in my eyes because I and my angels were, as it were, standing over you when you set out for Paddan-Aram and when you came back. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:10-13): AND JACOB SET OUT…. WHEN HE CAME ACROSS A CERTAIN PLACE…. AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD OVER HIM…. R. Hosha'ya said: Blessed is the one born of woman who has seen the King and his household (Lat.: familia.) standing over him and ministering to him. But where is it shown in reference to his coming back? Where it is stated (in Gen. 32:2 [1]): SO JACOB WENT ON HIS WAY, AND THE ANGELS OF GOD MET HIM. So much for the angels, but where is it shown for the Divine Presence? (Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN…. It is therefore stated (in Is. 43:4): BECAUSE YOU ARE PRECIOUS IN MY EYES.
Another interpretation (of Numb. 8:6): TAKE THE LEVITES. This text is related (to Ps. 11:5): THE LORD TESTS THE RIGHTEOUS. The Holy One does not elevate a person to an office until he tests and examines him. (Tanh. Numb. 3:8; Numb. R. 15:12.) When he withstands his test, he elevates him to the office. And so you find in the case of our father Abraham, when the Holy One tested him with ten temptations, he withstood his trial. Then after that he blessed him. It is so stated (in Gen. 24:1): AND THE LORD BLESSED ABRAHAM IN ALL THINGS. So also in the case of Isaac, when he tested him in the days of Abimelech, he withstood the trial. Then after that he blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 26:12): SO ISAAC SOWED ON THAT LAND [ … FOR THE LORD HAD BLESSED HIM]. So also in the case of Jacob, when he tested him by means of all those tribulations with Esau with Dinah, with Joseph, and how he departed from the house of his father and his mother (in Gen. 32:11 [10]): FOR WITH …, he blessed him. It is so stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN, [WHEN HE CAME FROM PADDAN-ARAM, AND BLESSED HIM]. So also in the case of Joseph, he tested him with the wife of Potiphar, and he was imprisoned for twelve years. Then after that he came out and became king because he had withstood his trial. Ergo (in Ps. 11:5): THE LORD TESTS THE RIGHTEOUS. So also in the case of the tribe of Levi, they laid down their lives for the sanctification of the name of the Holy One (i.e. for martyrdom), so that the Torah would not be set aside. Now when Israel was in Egypt, they had rejected the Torah and circumcision and all of them had become worshipers of idols as Ezekiel has demonstrated where it is stated (in Ezek. 20:5): AND YOU SHALL SAY UNTO THEM: THUS SAYS THE LORD GOD, IN THE DAY THAT I CHOSE ISRAEL…. Then what is written at the end (in vs. 8)? BUT THEY REBELLED AGAINST ME AND DID NOT COME TO HEARKEN UNTO ME. [INDIVIDUALLY THEY DID NOT CAST AWAY THE ABOMINATIONS OF THEIR EYES NOR DID THEY FORSAKE THE IDOLS OF EGYPT]. What did the Holy One do? He brought darkness upon Egypt for three days, and during those he killed all the wicked ones of Israel. For this reason it says (in Ezek. 20:36, 38): AS I BROUGHT YOUR ANCESTORS TO JUDGMENT IN THE DESERT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT….] SO WILL I REMOVE FROM YOU . So also it says (in Cant. 2:13): AND THE FIG TREE SHEDS (Heb.: hanetah. Although the biblical context suggests a translation such as “puts forth” or “ripens” the context understands this rare verb in a more negative sense. See above vol. 2, p. 62 Tanh. (Buber); Exod. 3:7).) ITS GREEN FIGS…. These are the wicked who are in Israel. (Ibid. cont.:) AND THE VINES IN BLOSSOM GIVE OFF FRAGRANCE. These are the rest who have repented and been accepted. (Ibid. cont.:) ARISE, MY BELOVED, MY FAIR ONE, AND COME AWAY, for behold the time of redemption has arrived. However all those in the tribe of Levi were righteous and carried out the Torah. It is so stated (in Deut. 33:9): FOR THEY OBSERVED YOUR WORD, i.e., the Torah; AND KEPT YOUR COVENANT, i.e., circumcision. And not only that, but when Israel made the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate there as stated (in Exod. 32:26): SO MOSES STOOD UP ON THE GATE OF THE CAMP AND SAID: WHOEVER IS FOR THE LORD COME TO ME. THEN ALL THE CHILDREN OF LEVI GATHERED UNTO HIM. When Moses said (in vs. 27): EACH [PUT HIS SWORD ON HIS THIGH, they immediately did so. Moreover they did not show partiality. And so Moses blesses them, the one (according Deut. 33:9) WHO SAYS OF HIS FATHER AND MOTHER: I DO NOT CONSIDER THEM …, FOR THEY (the Levites) OBSERVED YOUR WORD AND KEPT YOUR COVENANT. When the Holy One saw that they all were righteous, that he had tested them and they had withstood their trial, as stated (of Levi in Deut. 33:8): WHOM YOU TESTED AT MASSAH, the Holy One immediately said (in Numb. 8:14): AND THE LEVITES SHALL BELONG TO ME to fulfill what is stated (in Ps. 11:5): THE LORD TESTS THE RIGHTEOUS. In the case of the wicked, however, it is written of them (ibid. cont.:) BUT HIS SOUL (i.e. the soul of the Holy One) HATES THE WICKED AND THE LOVER OF INJUSTICE. David said (in Ps. 128:1): BLESSED IS EVERYONE WHO FEARS THE LORD AND WALKS IN HIS WAYS.
(Deut. 25:17:) REMEMBER WHAT AMALEK (Esau's grandson) DID TO YOU. This verse is related (to Ps. 109:14): MAY THE INIQUITY OF HIS FATHERS BE REMEMBERED BEFORE THE LORD…. Were the fathers of Esau wicked? (Tanh., Deut. 6:4; PRK 3:1; cf. 12:4; PR 12:4. In note 16 on PR 12:4, W. G. Braude, Pesikta Rabbati (“Yale Judaica Series”; New Haven; Yale, 1968) p. 221, n. 16, suggests that the verse was understood as referring to Esau, because vs. 17 in the psalm identifies him as one who DID NOT FIND PLEASURE IN A BLESSING.) And were they not righteous? His grandfather was Abraham. His father was Isaac. Yet are you saying (in Ps. 109:14): MAY THE INIQUITY OF HIS FATHERS BE REMEMBERED! simply a sin that he sinned against his fathers. (The Hebrew of Ps. 109:14 can also be understood in this sense.) And how did he sin against his fathers? (Above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 6:3; Gen. R. 63:12.) You find that Isaac got his vitality from Abraham; yet he lived a hundred and eighty years, while Abraham (The “only” is found in the parallel account of Tanh., Deut. 6:4.) lived a hundred and seventy-five years. (The Tanh. parallel adds here: “Why so? Because he did not foresee Esau’s shame.”) Rabbi Levi said: During the five years that were withheld from Abraham's life, Esau committed two serious transgressions. He violated a betrothed maiden, and he took a life. The one is what is written about (in Gen. 25:29): THEN ESAU CAME FROM THE FIELD, AND HE WAS EXHAUSTED. Now FIELD can only be a reference to a BETROTHED MAIDEN [of whom it is stated (in Deut. 22:25): IF IN THE FIELD THE MAN FINDS A MAIDEN WHO IS BETROTHED, ] Moreover, EXHAUSTED can only be a reference to a murderer, of whom it is stated (in Jer. 4:31): WOE TO ME, NOW! FOR MY LIFE IS EXHAUSTED BEFORE THOSE WHO KILL. Rabbi Zakkay [the Elder] said: He also stole, as stated (in Obad. 5): IF THIEVES HAVE COME TO YOU. (The Midrash, of course, is identifying the Edom of Obadiah with Esau.) The Holy One said: I had already promised my beloved Abraham (in Gen. 15:15): YOU SHALL GO UNTO YOUR ANCESTORS IN PEACE; YOU SHALL BE BURIED . But now he would see his grandson, when he was robbing with violence, practicing seduction, and shedding blood. At that time he was a good grandfather; it was better for him as a righteous man to be gathered (to his ancestors) in peace, as stated in Ps. 63:4 [3]): FOR STEADFAST LOVE IS BETTER THAN LIFE. And what sin did he commit against his father? He caused his eyes to become dim during his lifetime. Hence they have said: Whoever produces a wicked son or a wicked disciple causes his eyes to grow dim during his lifetime. A wicked son came from Isaac, as written (in (Gen. 27:1): AND HIS EYES WERE TOO DIM TO SEE. [Why? Because he produced Esau the Wicked.] In regard to a wicked disciple, from Ahijah the Shilonite, as stated (in I Kings 14:4): NOW AHIJAH {THE SHILONITE} COULD NOT SEE, BECAUSE HIS EYES WERE DIM FROM OLD AGE. Why? Because he produced a wicked disciple in Jeroboam. [(Ps. 109:14:) AND LET NOT THE SIN OF HIS MOTHER BE BLOTTED OUT.] But how had he sinned against his mother? R. Judah, R. Nehemiah, and masters . R. Judah says: When he left his mother's belly, he severed her uterus (Metrin: Gk.: metra; cf. Lat.: matrix.) {i.e., placenta}, with the result that she would not bear . This is what is written (in Amos 1:11): BECAUSE HE (i.e., Edom, which is Esau) PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND DESTROYED HIS WOMB. (I.e., the womb from which he had been born. The Masoretic text here reads WOMB in the plural. As such, an idiomatic reading of the text would be rendered: BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND REPRESSED ALL PITY.) Moreover, R. Berekhyah says: You should not say in reference to when he had left . (Gen. R. 63:6.) Rather, as he was leaving his mother's uterus, his zerta' (The Aramaic word means “fist” or “hand,” as the bracketed explanation correctly translates. The reason for this rather unusual word here is to play on the word zoru from Ps. 58:4, which he is about to cite.) {i.e., fist} was stretched out against him (i.e., against his brother Jacob). What is the reasoning? (Ps. 58:4 [3]:) THE WICKED GO ASTRAY (zoru) FROM THE WOMB. R. Nehemiah says: He was the cause of her not producing twelve tribes, since Rav Huna has said: Rebekah was worthy of producing twelve tribes, as stated (in Gen. 25:23): AND THE LORD SAID TO HER: TWO NATIONS ARE [IN YOUR WOMB. (See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 12:16.) Here] are two. (Ibid., cont.:) AND TWO PEOPLES. Here are four. (Ibid., cont.:) AND ONE PEOPLE SHALL BE STRONGER THAN THE OTHER. Here are six. (Ibid., cont.:) AND THE ELDER SHALL SERVE THE YOUNGER. Here are eight. (vs. 24:) AND BEHOLD THERE WERE TWINS IN HER WOMB. Here are ten. (vs. 25:) THE FIRST CAME OUT RUDDY. [Here are eleven.] (vs. 26:) AND AFTERWARD HIS BROTHER CAME OUT. Here are twelve. There are also some who apply a passage to her (from vs. 22): AND SHE SAID: IF SO, WHY AM I HERE (ZH)? By gematria (Gk.: geometria.) Z (=7) + H (=5) twelve. But masters have said: He was the cause of her bier not going forth publicly . You find that when Rebekah died, they were saying: Who will go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac's eyes are dim, and he is sitting at home. Jacob has gone to Paddan-aram. Should Esau the Wicked go before her? Then people would say : (Much of this paragraph is in Aramaic.) Cursed be her breasts for suckling this man {i.e., : cursed be the breasts that have suckled one like this man}. What did they do? They brought out her bier at night. R. Jose bar Hanina said: Because they brought out her bier at night, the text only explained about her obliquely. Thus it is written (in Gen. 35:8): THEN REBEKAH'S NURSE, DEBORAH, DIED [AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK (Allon-bacuth)]. What is the meaning of Allon-bacuth? Two weepings. (Bacuth, of course, means “weeping,” and allon can be understood as a Greek adjective in the neuter that means “other” or “another.” Thus the name can be read as “another weeping” and imply a second weeping. So PRK 3:1; Gen. R. 81:5; cf. Eccl. R. 7:2:3.) While Jacob was seated in observance of mourning for {his} [her] nurse, the news about his mother came to him. This is related (to Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN […,] AND BLESSED HIM. With what blessing did he bless him? He blessed him with the blessing mourners. (The blessing informed Jacob that his mother was dead.) The Holy One said: Did his father pay him (i.e. Esau) back with evil? Did his mother pay him back with evil? Did his brother pay him back with evil? Did his grand[father] pay him back with evil? Did you pay him back with evil? So should I pay him back with evil? When you mention his name below, I shall blot out his name above. (Ps. 109:15:) LET THEM (the iniquity against his fathers and the sin against his mother) ALWAYS BE BEFORE THE LORD. Whatever he has done, he has done against me. Thus it is stated (ibid., cont.): AND MAY HE HAVE THEIR MEMORY CUT OFF FROM THE EARTH. [Ergo] (in Deut. 25:17): REMEMBER WHAT AMALEK (Esau's grandson) DID TO YOU.
Another interpretation (of Gen. 12:2): SO BECOME A BLESSING. (PRK, 31(suppl. 1):11; cf. M. Pss. 1:5.) The Holy One said to him: From the time that I created my world until now I have been obliged to bless my people. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 1:28): AND GOD BLESSED THEM. So I blessed Noah and his children, as stated (in Gen. 9:1): AND GOD BLESSED NOAH < AND HIS CHILDREN >. From now on you are responsible for the blessing. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 12:2): SO BECOME A BLESSING. But he did not act, except < that >, when Isaac arose, Abraham wanted to bless him. < Still >, when he foresaw that Esau and Jacob would issue from him, he did not bless him. A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To a king of flesh and blood who had an orchard. (Gen. R. 61:6.) So he gave it to a tenant so that he would tend it. Now within the orchard were a tree with the elixir of death and a tree with the elixir of life. < The two > were clinging to each other. The tenant said: What shall I do? I cannot water one and leave the other alone. Instead I shall leave them alone until the owner of the orchard comes. Then he will know what to do. Similarly Abraham said: If I bless Isaac, Jacob and Esau will issue from him. Instead I shall leave him alone until the Holy One is willing to bless him. As soon as Abraham and Isaac had passed away, the Holy One blessed Jacob by himself, as stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB… [AND BLESSED HIM].
Another interpretation: When the king loves someone, he honors him with silver, gold, and garments so as to make [him wealthy]. Then, while he is traveling by ship, the wind comes and destroys the ship. Where < now > is the king's gift? Here he had honored him and enriched him. Could he possibly have saved him from the sea? Or from robbers? (Gk.: lestai.) But the Holy One is not like that. Rather, when he gives one a gift, he protects him, as stated (in Numb. 6:24): THE LORD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU. He blessed Abraham and preserved him, as stated (in Gen. 24:1): < NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD, ADVANCED IN YEARS >, AND THE LORD HAD BLESSED ABRAHAM IN ALL THINGS. He blessed Isaac and preserved him, as stated (in Gen. 25:11): GOD BLESSED HIS SON ISAAC. He blessed Jacob and preserved him, as stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN [… AND BLESSED HIM].
(Deut. 33:1:) AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. This text is related (to Prov. 31:29): MANY DAUGHTERS HAVE DONE VALIANTLY, BUT YOU SURPASS THEM ALL. This is the blessing of Moses, (Tanh., Deut. 11:1; PRK 31:11.) in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but compared to all of them none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence. He blessed one and cursed another. (Gen. 9:27:) MAY GOD ENLARGE (YPT) JAPHETH (YPT); but he said (vs. 25:) CURSED BE CANAAN. Isaac blessed Jacob. There was strife in it, in that he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35): YOUR BROTHER CAME WITH DECEIT; and it is stated (in vs. 41): THEN ESAU HATED JACOB <…, AND ESAU SAID IN HIS HEART: LET THE DAYS OF MORNING FOR MY FATHER COME, AND I WILL KILL MY BROTHER JACOB>. Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he said to Reuben (in Gen. 49:4): UNSTABLE AS WATER; and similarly (in vs. 5): SIMEON AND LEVI . And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned] from the Holy One. When he created Adam, he blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:28): THEN GOD BLESSED THEM; [and (The other part of this bracket is several lines below.) the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7): AND THE LORD SAID: I WILL BLOT OUT THE HUMANITY WHICH I CREATED. When Noah left the ark, the Holy One saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1): THEN GOD BLESSED NOAH AND HIS CHILDREN. The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world. Then the Holy One added one blessing for him, as stated (in Gen. 12:2): FOR I WILL MAKE YOU INTO A GREAT NATION…. When Abraham came, the Holy One said: It is not a practice worthy of me, that I should be obliged to bless my creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who issue a blessing through him, I am placing my seal upon , as stated (in vs. 2, cont.): AND SO BECOME A BLESSING. (vs. 3:) I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU…. What is the meaning of I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU. The Holy One said: Take note. I am handing over the blessings to ALL WHOM YOU BLESS, and I am sealing through you. But if from then on the blessings were {spoken} [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said: If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking. A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard. (See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5; also Matthew 13:24–30.) : He gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said: If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard. (Cf. Matthew 13:24–30.) And so also did Abraham say: If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Look here. It is simply that he is leaving him alone until the Holy One comes, when he will deal with what belongs to him.] Jacob came and received five blessing: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One. (Cf. Gen. R. 94:5.) : Two from his father, according to what is stated (in Gen. 27:33): THEN ISAAC TREMBLED (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why TREMBLED? R. Eleazar ben Padat said: because he saw Gehinnom open for Esau. He wanted to say: Cursed. He repented and added a blessing when he said (ibid., end): HE ALSO SHALL BE BLESSED. Here is one blessing. A second (is in Gen. 28:1): SO ISAAC CALLED JACOB AND BLESSED HIM. [The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4): AND MAY HE GRANT YOU THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM…; the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE (the angel) BLESSED HIM THERE; and the blessings of the Holy One (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN…, AND BLESSED HIM.] When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessing that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28): ALL THESE ARE THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL, WHEN HE BLESSED THEM, EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING IS HOW HE BLESSED THEM. (The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe.) When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1): AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. < According to another interpretation, Moses made> an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel, (Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4) since it was fitting for him to bless with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars ; (On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29.) but only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10): BUT HERE YOU HAVE EVEN BLESSED THEM THESE THREE [TIMES]. The Holy One said to him: You are wicked. Your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair. Then he will bless Israel, and it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9): HE THAT HAS A BENEVOLENT EYE SHALL BE BLESSED (YBRK). Do not read YBRK SHALL BE BLESSED, but SHALL BLESS. This refers to Moses our Master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel. He also blessed them with four blessings:
(Gen. 35:9:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN…. This text is related (to Eccl. 7:2): IT IS BETTER TO GO UNTO A HOUSE OF MOURNING < THAN UNTO A HOUSE OF FEASTING >…. R. Simeon bar Abba said: There are two ways to be charitable, to be charitable with a bride and with the dead. If both of these < opportunities > should present themselves to you, you would not know which of them to seize first. Solomon came and explained (in Eccl. 7:2): IT IS BETTER TO GO INTO THE HOUSE OF MOURNING < THAN UNTO A HOUSE OF FEASTING >…. We have found that, when people have gone to the house of feasting, their names were not specified; but, when people have gone to the house of mourning, they have been excluded from Gehinnom, their names have been specified, and they have prophesied through the Holy Spirit. (Eccl.R. 7:2:4.) So who were those who entered the house of feasting? It is written (in Gen. 21:8): SO THE CHILD (Isaac) GREW AND WAS WEANED, AND ABRAHAM MADE A GREAT FEAST. What is the meaning of GREAT? It teaches that Shem, Eber, and Abimelech were there; but their names were not specified. (Cf. Gen. R. 53:10.) However, the names of those who went to the house of mourning {Job and his friends} were excluded from Gehinnom and the Holy Spirit rested upon them, i.e., upon Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite. And the Holy Spirit rested upon them, in that it is stated (in Job 4:1): THEN ANSWERED ELIPHAZ THE TEMANITE. Now he would only have answered in the language of prophecy. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 19:19): MOSES SPOKE, AND GOD ANSWERED HIM IN THUNDER. (See also ySot. 7:2 (21c).) Ergo: IT IS BETTER TO GO INTO THE HOUSE OF MOURNING < THAN INTO A HOUSE OF FEASTING >…. And who was the first to show his face [as a mourner]. See, the Holy One says < when >. When? When Deborah died, as stated (in Gen. 35:8): THEN < REBEKAH'S NURSE > DEBORAH DIED < AND WAS BURIED UNDER THE OAK BELOW BETHEL; AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK >. And it is written (in vs. 9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN … < AND BLESSED HIM >. (According to below, 8:26; Eccl. 7:2:3, the Holy One blessed him with a benediction for mourners.)
[(Gen. 35:9:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN….] < AND BLESSED HIM >. This text is related (to Job 4:12-13): NOW A WORD WAS SECRETLY BROUGHT UNTO ME, AND MY EAR RECEIVED A WHISPER OF IT, IN THOUGHTS FROM NIGHT VISIONS, WHEN DEEP SLEEP FALLS UPON PEOPLE. NOW A WORD WAS SECRETLY BROUGHT UNTO ME. [When the Holy One reveals himself unto the wicked, he reveals himself unto them by stealth at night; but] when he reveals himself unto the righteous, he reveals himself unto them in public. (Gk.: parresia.) {But when he} [R. Issachar said: When the Holy One] reveals himself unto the wicked, he reveals himself in colloquial speech, in unclean speech, (Gen. R. 52:5; Lev. R. 1:13.) in semi-utterance. Thus it is stated (in Numb. 23:4): THEN GOD ENCOUNTERED BALAAM. ENCOUNTERED < denotes > nothing but unclean speech. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 23:11 [10]): WHO IS UNCLEAN BECAUSE OF WHAT HE ENCOUNTERS AT NIGHT (i.e., a nocturnal emission). But when he reveals himself to the righteous, he reveals himself in clean speech. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 1:1): THEN < THE LORD > CALLED UNTO MOSES < AND SPOKE UNTO HIM FROM THE TENT OF MEETING >. It was therefore stated (in Job 4:12): NOW A WORD WAS SECRETLY BROUGHT UNTO ME (Eliphaz). When the Holy One reveals himself to the wicked, [he reveals himself] in the night because their deeds are dark like the night. For that reason he reveals himself to them in the night. Thus it is stated (concerning Laban in Gen. 31:24): THEN GOD CAME UNTO LABAN < THE ARAMAEAN > IN A DREAM AT NIGHT. But when he comes to the righteous, what is written (in Gen. 35:9)? NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN, < WHEN HE CAME FROM PADDANARAM >. (Since the Holy One appeared to Jacob on arrival, before he had retired for the night, the verse implies that the Holy One appeared during the daylight hours.)
[(Gen. 35:9, 11:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN]… < AND GOD SAID TO HIM: I AM GOD ALMIGHTY >. This text is related (to … Ps. 61:6 [5]): FOR YOU, O GOD, HAVE HEARKENED TO MY VOWS; < YOU HAVE GRANTED THE HERITAGE OF THOSE WHO FEAR YOUR NAME >. Isaac had a face with a visage like < that of > his father. (Gk.: prosopon. On Isaac’s face being like that of Abraham, see Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 25:19; BM 87a.) (Gen. 25:19:) THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF ISAAC BEN ABRAHAM: ABRAHAM SIRED ISAAC. What is the meaning of ABRAHAM SIRED ISAAC? That he had a face with a visage like that of his father. Ergo (in Ps. 61:6 [5]): YOU HAVE GRANTED THE HERITAGE OF THOSE WHO FEAR YOUR NAME. (According to BM 87a, Isaac’s visage miraculously became like that of Abraham and thereby demonstrated his paternity, i.e., that Isaac had a heritage.) Just as Abraham had the Holy One speak with him at the age of ninety-nine years (in Gen. 17:1), so did Jacob have the Holy One speak with him at the age of ninety-nine years. Just as Abraham had the Holy One say to him (in Gen. 17:1): I AM GOD ALMIGHTY; BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY; (These last four words are not found in the Masoretic Text.) so did JACOB have him speak with him as God Almighty. It is so stated (in Gen. 35:9, 11:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN … < AND GOD SAID TO HIM >: [I AM GOD ALMIGHTY); BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY.
[(Gen. 35:9, 11:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN < .. > AND GOD SAID TO HIM:] < I AM GOD ALMIGHTY >. This text is related (to Deut. 28:6): BLESSED SHALL YOU BE IN YOUR COMING; < AND BLESSED SHALL YOU BE IN YOUR GOING AWAY >. When Jacob went away from his father's house, he went away with a blessing, as stated (in Gen. 28:3): MAY GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS YOU. Also, when he came from Paddan-Aram, he came with a blessing, as stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN < … > AND BLESSED HIM. How did he bless him? R. Levi said: He blessed him with a benediction for mourners. What is written above on the matter (in Gen. 35:8)? THEN < REBEKAH'S NURSE > DEBORAH DIED < AND WAS BURIED UNDER THE OAK BELOW BETHEL; AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK >. R. Samuel bar Nahman said: While Jacob was observing the mourning for his nurse, news < about the death > of his mother came, as stated (ibid.): AND ITS NAME WAS CALLED WEEPING OAK (Allon Bakhut). R. Samuel bar Nahman said: The language is Hellenistic. What is the meaning of Allon < in Greek >? "Another." (I.e., another occasion for weeping, namely the occasion of the death of Rebekah. So Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 35:8; Gen. R. 81:8; PRK 3:1.) The Holy One said: How long will this righteous one remain in grief? R. Jonathan bar Il'ay said: The Holy One said: It is right that I show him a friendly face, as stated (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN….
[(Gen. 35:9:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN.] This text is related (to Job 22:28): WHEN YOU DECREE SOMETHING, IT SHALL COME TO PASS FOR YOU. < The passage > speaks about Jacob. (Ibid., cont.:) [AND LIGHT SHALL SHINE UPON YOUR WAYS. UPON] two WAYS. When he went away from his father's house, the Holy One revealed himself to him. What is written (in Gen. 28:13)? AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD OVER HIM AND SAID. Also, when he returned, what is written (in 35:9)? NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN. What is the meaning of AGAIN? R. Judah said: He said to him: Once AGAIN I am revealing myself to you. The Holy One revealed himself to him five times, which corresponds to the five blessings with which his father had blessed him; and they are as follows (according to Gen. 28:3f): (1) < MAY > GOD ALMIGHTY < BLESS YOU, (2) MAKE YOU FRUITFUL, AND (3) MULTIPLY YOU, (4) SO THAT YOU MAY BECOME A CONGREGATION OF PEOPLES >; (5) AND MAY HE GRANT YOU THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM…. Here are five blessings. And < God > revealed himself to him:
< Once > When he went away from his father's house, as stated (in Gen. 28:13): AND BEHOLD, THE LORD STOOD OVER HIM. Once with Laban (in Gen. 31:3): < THEN THE LORD SAID UNTO JACOB > : RETURN UNTO THE LAND OF YOUR ANCESTORS. Once (in Gen. 35:1): < THEN GOD SAID UNTO JACOB >: ARISE, GO UP TO BETHEL. Once (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN. And once (in Gen. 46:2,4): THEN GOD SPOKE TO ISRAEL AND SAID…. I MYSELF WILL GO DOWN WITH YOU….
Another interpretation (of Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN. What is the meaning of AGAIN? I am never AGAIN {causing my name to rest upon} [joining my name to] a human except < to be called > (as in Exod. 3:6) THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB. Once AGAIN I am revealing myself to him. (Gen. R. 82:3.)
(Gen. 35:9:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN. What is written next (in vs. 11)? AND GOD SAID TO HIM: I AM GOD ALMIGHTY; BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY. You are an omen for your children. When I came to you, I came laden with blessings. So, when I come to your children, I will come laden with blessings, as stated (in Exod. 20:21 [24]): IN EVERY PLACE WHERE I CAUSE MY NAME TO BE MENTIONED, I WILL COME UNTO YOU AND BLESS YOU. Ergo (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN, < WHEN HE CAME FROM PADDANARAM, AND BLESSED HIM >. And not to Jacob only < did he do so >, but also to our father Abraham. What is written (about Abraham in Gen. 18:1)? THEN THE LORD APPEARED UNTO HIM … < AS HE SAT >…. (Above, 4:4; Gen. R. 48:7; PRK 5:8.) The Holy One was standing, as it were, while he was sitting. He wanted to stand. The Holy One said to him: Sit down! By your life, you are an omen for your children. Just as you sit while I stand; {according to what is stated (in Ps. 82:1): GOD STANDS IN THE DIVINE CONGREGATION} so also shall your children sit in synagogues and academies while I stand, as it were, according to what is stated (in Ps. 82:1): GOD STANDS IN THE DIVINE CONGREGATION. Here also (at Paddan-Aram in Gen. 35:9) the Holy One said to Jacob: You are an omen to your children. Just as in your case, when I came to you, I came laden with blessings; < so > also in the case of your children, when I reveal myself to them, I will be laden with blessings. As soon as the Tabernacle had been built, what is written (in Numb. 7:1, 4): SO IT CAME TO PASS THAT ON THE DAY THAT MOSES HAD FINISHED SETTING UP THE TABERNACLE, < HAD ANOINTED IT AND SANCTIFIED IT…THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES >. Now, when work on it was finished, the Holy One said: I have made an agreement with them. When I reveal myself to them, I will be laden with blessings. What did the Holy One do? He blessed them and later revealed himself to them. What is written about the priestly blessing (in Numb. 6:24-26)? THE LORD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU; THE LORD MAKE HIS FACE SHINE UPON YOU AND BE GRACIOUS TO YOU; THE LORD LIFT UP HIS FACE UNTO YOU AND GRANT YOU PEACE. Then, later (in Numb. 7:1, 4): SO IT CAME TO PASS THAT ON THE DAY THAT MOSES HAD FINISHED SETTING UP THE TABERNACLE … < THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES >.
(Numb. 3:40:) “Enroll every first-born male.” This text is related (to Is. 43:4), “Because you are precious in my eyes, you are honored, and I love you….” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob, “Jacob, you are exceedingly precious in My eyes. (Numb. R. 4:1.) Why? Because I, as it were, have installed your image (Gk.: eikonion.) on My glorious throne, and in your name the angels praise Me and say (in Ps. 41:14), “Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, (Israel here is the patriarch Jacob, not the people.) from everlasting to everlastings.” Ergo (in Is. 43:4), “Because you are precious in my eyes, you are honored.” Another interpretation (of Is. 43:4), “Because you are precious….” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Jacob, you are precious in my eyes because I and my angels were, as it were, standing over you when you set out for Paddan-Aram and when you came back.” It is so stated (in Gen. 28:10-13), “And Jacob set out…. When he came across a certain place…. Then he dreamed that there was a ladder [placed on earth with its top reaching to the heavens; and behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it.] And behold, the Lord stood over him….” R. Hosha'ya said, “Blessed is the one born of woman who has seen the King and his household (Lat.: familia.) standing over him and ministering to him.” But where is it shown in reference to his coming back? Where it is stated (in Gen. 32:2), “So Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him.” So much for the angels, but where is it shown for the Divine Presence? (Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob again….” It is therefore stated (in Is. 43:4), “Because you are precious in My eyes.” Another interpretation (of Is. 43:4), “Because you are precious in My eyes, you are honored.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “You are precious in my eyes, because to all the nations I gave no numbering (minyan), but to you I did give a numbering.” To what is this comparable? It is comparable to a king of flesh and blood who had a lot of granaries, but all of them were dirty and full of darnel; so he was not meticulous about their numbering. [There was,] however, this granary [which had] beautiful wheat. He said to his household, “Those granaries that are dirty and full of darnel; I will not be meticulous about their numbering. But this granary has beautiful wheat. I therefore want to be meticulous in numbering how many kor (One kor is equivalent to somewhat under 400 liters.) there are, how many sacks there are in it, [and] how many measures there are in it.” Similarly this king is the Supreme King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He; and this granary (goren) is Israel, since it is stated (in Is. 21:10), “My threshing, and the product (literally: the child) of My threshing floor (goren).” It also says (in Jer. 2:3), “Israel is the Lord's sanctuary, the beginning of His harvest.” The child of His house is Moses, as stated (in Numb. 12:7), “he is trusted in all My house.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, The nations are [comparable to thorns], as stated (in Is. 33:12), “And the peoples shall become burnings of lime, thorns cut down that are burned in the fire.” Therefore, you shall not be meticulous about numbering them, but Israel is righteous, chosen wheat, as stated (in Is. 60:21), “And all of your people are righteous.” It also says (in Cant. 4:7), “You are beautiful all over, My beloved, and there is no blemish in you.” Therefore, be meticulous in counting Israel. Moses did so. He numbered them [to determine] how many kor there were, as stated (in Numb. 1:2), “Take a census…”; how many sacks there were, as stated (in Numb. 2:4), “Its host and those of them enrolled”; and how many measures there were, as stated (in Numb. 3:40), “enroll every first-born male.”
(Numb. 8:6:) “Take the Levites.” This text is related (to Ps. 11:5), “The Lord tests the righteous.” The Holy One, blessed be He, does not elevate a person to an office until He first tests and examines him. (Numb. R. 15:12.) When he withstands his test, He elevates him to the office. And so you find in the case of our father Abraham; when the Holy One, blessed be He, tested him with ten temptations, he withstood his trials. Then after that He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 24:1), “And the Lord blessed Abraham in all things.” So also in the case of Isaac, when He tested him with the days of Abimelech, he withstood the trial. Then after that He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 26:12), “So Isaac sowed on that land […] for the Lord had blessed him.” So also in the case of Jacob, when He tested him by means of all those tribulations with Esau, with Rachel, with Dinah, with Joseph, with Simeon, with Benjamin and [with the tribulation of] how he departed from the house of his father and his mother (in Gen. 32:11), “for with [only] my staff did I cross [this Jordan].” Then after that He blessed him. It is so stated (in Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came from Paddan-Aram, and blessed him.” So also in the case of Joseph, He tested him with all of those tribulations, with the wife of Potiphar and he was imprisoned for twelve years. Then after that he came out and became king because he had withstood his trial. Ergo (in Ps. 11:5), “The Lord tests the righteous.” So also in the case of the tribe of Levi, they laid down their lives for the sanctification of the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, (i.e. for martyrdom), so that the Torah would not be set aside. Now when Israel was in Egypt, they had rejected the Torah and circumcision and all of them had become worshipers of idols, as Ezekiel has demonstrated where it is stated (in Ezek. 20:5), “And you shall say unto them, ‘Thus says the Lord God, “In the day that I chose Israel […].”’” Then what is written at the end (in vs. 8)? “But they rebelled against Me and did not come to hearken unto Me; each man did not cast away [the abominations of their eyes nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt].” What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He brought darkness upon Egypt for three days, and during those [days] he killed all the wicked ones of Israel. For this reason it says (in Ezek. 20:36-38), “[As I brought your ancestors to judgment in the desert of the land of Egypt….] So will I remove from you those who rebel and transgress against Me.” So also it says (in Cant. 2:13), “And the fig tree sheds (Heb.: hanetah. Although the biblical context suggests a translation such as “puts forth” or “ripens” the context understands this rare verb in a more negative sense. See above vol. 2, p. 62 Tanh. (Buber); Exod. 3:7).) its green figs…,” these are the wicked who are in Israel; (ibid. cont.) “and the vines in blossom give off fragrance,” these are the rest who have repented and been accepted; (ibid. cont.) “arise, my beloved, my fair one, and come away,” for behold the time of redemption has arrived. However all those in the tribe of Levi were righteous and carried out the Torah. It is so stated (in Deut. 33:9), “For they observed Your word,” i.e., the Torah; (ibid. cont.) “and kept Your covenant,” i.e., circumcision. And not only that, but when Israel made the calf, the tribe of Levi did not participate there, as stated (in Exod. 32:26), “So Moses stood up on the gate of the camp and said, ‘Whoever is for the Lord come to me,’ and all the Children of Levi gathered unto him.” When Moses said (in vs. 27), “Each [of you] put his sword on his thigh…,” they immediately did so. Moreover they did not show partiality. And so Moses blesses them, [namely (according Deut. 33:9)], “The one who says of his father and mother, ‘I do not consider them’ and his brother….” When the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that they all were righteous, that He had tested them and they had withstood their trial – as stated (of Levi in Deut. 33:8), “[Your faithful one,] whom You tested at Massah” – the Holy One, blessed be He, immediately said (in Numb. 8:14), “And the Levites shall belong to Me,” to fulfill what is stated (in Ps. 11:5), “The Lord tests the righteous.” In the case of the wicked, however, it is written of them (ibid. cont.), “but His soul (i.e. The soul of the Holy One, blessed be He,) hates the wicked and the lover of injustice.” David said (in Ps. 128:1), “Fortunate is everyone who fears the Lord and walks in His ways.”
(Deut. 25:17:) “Remember what Amalek (Esau's grandson) did to you.” This verse is related (to Ps.109:14), “May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the Lord […].” Were the fathers of Esau wicked? (PRK 3:1; cf. 12:4; PR 12:4. In note 16 on PR 12:4, W. G. Braude, Pesikta Rabbati (“Yale Judaica Series”; New Haven; Yale, 1968) p. 221, n. 16, suggests that the verse was understood as referring to Esau, because vs. 17 in the psalm identifies him as one who DID NOT FIND PLEASURE IN A BLESSING.) And were they not righteous? His grandfather was Abraham. His father was Isaac. Yet are you saying (in Ps. 109:14), “May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered?” [The verse is] simply [referring to] a sin that he sinned against his fathers. (The Hebrew of Ps. 109:14 can also be understood in this sense.) And how? (Above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 6:3; Gen. R. 63:12.) You find that Isaac got his vitality from Abraham; yet he lived a hundred and eighty years, while Abraham only lived a hundred and seventy-five years. Why so? So he would not see Esau’s shame. Abraham had [Isaac] when he was a hundred years [old]. (Gen. 25:26-27:) “And Isaac was sixty years old when they were born. And the lads grew.” Both of them went to the elementary school, and both of them were equal until the age of fifteen. R. Levi said, “To what were they comparable? To a myrtle and a thorny plant. As long as they are small, no one [can] distinguish one from the other. After they have grown up, the one gives off its pleasant smell, but the other brings forth its thorns. Thus, so long as Esau and Jacob were small, no one distinguished between them. After they were grown up (in Gen. 25:26, cont.), ’Esau became a skillful hunter, a man of the outdoors; but Jacob was a mild man who stayed in camp.’” And Esau would go out and rob and extort, and people would maledict him. And during the five years [that were withheld from Abraham's life], Esau committed two serious transgressions: He violated a betrothed maiden, and he took a life. The one is what is written about (in Gen. 25:29), “then Esau came from the field, and he was exhausted.” Now field can only be a reference to a betrothed maiden [of whom it is stated (in Deut. 22:25), “If in the field the man finds [a maiden who is betrothed, and the man seizes her and lies with her…].” Moreover, exhausted can only be a reference to a murderer, of whom it is stated (in Jer. 4:31), “woe to me, now; for my life is exhausted before those who kill.” Rabbi Zakkay said, “He also stole, as stated (in Obad. 1:5), ‘If thieves have come to you.’” (The Midrash, of course, is identifying the Edom of Obadiah with Esau.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “I had already promised my beloved Abraham (in Gen. 15:15), ‘And you shall go unto your ancestors in peace; [you shall be buried at a good old age].’ But now he would see his grandson go to bad culture and hear what people say about his grandson; [that he was] transgressing sexual prohibitions and shedding blood. He would [then] wonder and say, ‘Are these the stipulations that the Holy One, blessed be He, being fulfilled with me?’ And he would voice a complaint, ‘And this is not “a good old age.”’ What should I do for him?” [So] He gathered him from the world. It is better for the righteous man to be gathered (to his ancestors) in peace, as stated in Ps. 63:4), “For Your steadfast love is better than life.” Behold, he [thus] sinned against his grandfather. He sinned against his father, as he caused his eyes to become dim during his lifetime. Hence they have said, “Whoever produces a wicked son or a wicked disciple causes his [own] eyes to grow dim during his lifetime.” From where [in Scripture] do you learn [this]? A wicked son, from Isaac, as stated (in (Gen. 27:1), “And it came to pass that when Isaac was old [and his eyes were too dim to see].” [In regard to] a wicked disciple, [we learn] from Ahijah, as it is written (in I Kings 14:4), “now Ahijah could not see, because his eyes were dim from old age.” Why? Because he produced a wicked disciple in Jeroboam. [(Ps. 109:14:) “And let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.”] But how had he sinned against his mother? R. Judah, R. Nehemiah, and [our] masters [differ]. R. Judah says, “When he left his mother's belly, he severed her uterus, (Metrin: Gk.: metra; cf. Lat.: matrix.) with the result that she would not bear [any more children]. This is what is written (in Amos 1:11), ‘because he (i.e., Edom, which is Esau) pursued his brother with the sword and repressed his pity (rachamiv),’ as it is written, ‘his uterus (rechemo).’” (I.e., the womb from which he had been born. The Masoretic text here reads WOMB in the plural. As such, an idiomatic reading of the text would be rendered: BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND REPRESSED HIS PITY.) Moreover, R. Berekhyah says, “You should not say [this] in reference to when he had left [his mother's uterus]. (Gen. R. 63:6.) Rather, as he was leaving his mother's uterus, his zerta' (The Aramaic word means “fist” or “hand,” as the bracketed explanation correctly translates. The reason for this rather unusual word here is to play on the word zoru from Ps. 58:4, which he is about to cite.) [i.e., fist] was stretched out against him (i.e., against his brother Jacob).” What is the reasoning? (Ps. 58:4:) “The wicked go astray (zoru) from the womb.” R. Nehemiah says, “He was the cause of her not producing twelve tribes.” As Rav Huna has said, “Rebekah was worthy of producing twelve tribes, as stated (in Gen. 25:23), ‘And the Lord said to her, “Two nations are [in your womb].” (See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 12:16.) Here are two. (Ibid., cont.:) “and two peoples.” Here are four. (Ibid., cont.:) “And one people shall be stronger than the other.” Here are six. (Ibid., cont.:) “And the elder shall serve the younger.”’ Here are eight. (Vs. 24:) ‘And behold there were twins in her womb.’ Here are ten. (Vs. 25:) ‘The first came out ruddy.’ That is eleven. (Vs. 26:) ‘And afterward his brother came out.’ Here are twelve.” And there are some who bring this [idea] from here (vs. 22); “and she said, ‘If so, why am I here (zh)?’” By gematria (Gk.: geometria.) z (=7) + h (=5) [for a total of] twelve. But [our] masters have said, “He caused her bier to not go forth publicly [to her funeral]. You find that when Rebekah died, they were saying, ‘Who will go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac's eyes are dim, and he is sitting at home. Jacob has gone to Paddan-Aram. Should Esau the wicked go before her? Then people would say [in Aramaic], (Much of this paragraph is in Aramaic.) “Cursed be her breasts for suckling this man.”’ What did they do? They brought out her bier at night, so that Esau not go out in front of her, and all say, ‘Cursed are the breasts suckled this evil man.’” R. Jose bar R. Hanina said, “Because they brought out her bier at night, the text only explained about her obliquely. Thus it is written (in Gen. 35:8), ‘Then Rebekah's nurse, Deborah, died [and she was buried under the oak below Bethel] and its name was called Weeping Oak (Allon-Bacuth)],’ as they wept two weepings (bekhiot).” (Bacuth, of course, means “weeping,” and allon can be understood as a Greek adjective in the neuter that means “other” or “another.” Thus the name can be read as “another weeping” and imply a second weeping. So PRK 3:1; Gen. R. 81:5; cf. Eccl. R. 7:2:3.) While Jacob was seated in observance [of mourning] for her nurse, the news about his mother came to him, as stated (to Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob again […,] and blessed him.” With what blessing did He bless him? He blessed him with the blessing of [consolation given to] mourners. (The blessing informed Jacob that his mother was dead.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Did his father pay him (i.e. Esau) back with evil? Did his mother pay him back with evil? Did his brother pay him back with evil? Did his grandfather pay him back with evil? Did you pay him back with evil? I shall pay him back with evil, as his children destroyed My house. You and I shall rise against him, as stated (Obad. 1:1), “Rise, and we shall rise up against her for war.” Israel said to him, “Master of the world, we cannot [overcome] him.” [So] the Holy One, blessed be He, says to them, “You mention his name below, and I shall blot out his name above, as stated (Ps. 109:15) ‘Let them (the iniquity against his fathers and the sin against his mother) always be before (neged) the Lord.’ Whatever he has done, he has done against (neged) Me.” [Therefore] (ibid., cont.), “and may He have their memory cut off from the earth.” Ergo (in Deut. 25:17), “Remember what Amalek (Esau's grandson) did to you.”
After Abraham and Isaac passed away, the Holy One, blessed be He, blessed Jacob on his own behalf, as it is said: And God appeared unto Jacob when he came from Padan-aram and blessed him (Gen. 35:9).
(Deut. 33:1:) “And this is the blessing.” This text is related (to Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.” This is the blessing of Moses, (PRK 31:11.) in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but there was none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence, as he blessed one and cursed another, as stated (Gen. 9:27,) “May God enlarge (ypt) Japheth (ypt) [...]; and let Canaan be a slave to them.” Isaac blessed Jacob, but there was strife in it. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:4), “May He give you the blessing of Abraham, but he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35), “Your brother came with deceit”; and it is stated (in vs. 41), “Then Esau hated Jacob […, and Esau said in his heart, ‘Let the days of mourning for my father come, and I will kill my brother Jacob’].” Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he rebuked Reuben, as stated (in Gen. 49:4), “Unstable as water”; and similarly (in vs. 5), “Simeon and Levi [are brothers; weapons of violence are their swords].” And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned it] from the Holy One, blessed be He. When he created Adam, He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:27-28), “male and female. Then [God] blessed them.” And the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7), “And the Lord said, “I will blot out the humanity which I created.” When Noah left the ark, the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1), “Then God blessed Noah and his children.” The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world, and He added blessing, as stated (in Gen. 12:2), “For I will make you into a great nation.” Once Abraham came, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “It is not honorable for Me, that I should be obliged to bless My creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who they issue a blessing, I am placing my seal upon [those blessings], as stated (in vs. 2, cont.), ‘[I will bless you and magnify your name] and so become a blessing.’” (Vs. 3:) “I will bless those who bless you….” What is the meaning of “I will bless?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Take note. I am handing over the blessings to all whom you bless, and I am sealing [them] through you.” But if from then on the blessings were [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said, “If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking.” A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard, (See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5.) [and] gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said, “If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard.” And so also did Abraham say, “If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Rather look here. I will leave him alone until the Holy One, blessed be He, comes, when He will deal with what belongs to Him.” Jacob came and received five blessings: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One, blessed be He. (Cf. Gen. R. 94:5.) From his father, as stated (in Gen. 27:33), “Then Isaac trembled (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why “trembled?” R. Eliezer ben Pedat said, “[He did so] because he saw Gehinnom open in front of him. He wanted to say, ‘Cursed will be [Jacob.’ Instead,] he went back [on it], and added blessing [to it], when he said (ibid., end), ‘he also shall be blessed.’” Here is one [blessing]. A second (is in Gen. 28:1), “So Isaac called Jacob and blessed him.” The blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He, (is in Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob [… and blessed him].” The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4), “And may He grant you the blessing of Abraham.” And the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30), “and he (the angel) blessed him there.” When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessings that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28), “All these are the tribes of Israel, [twelve in number, and this is what their father spoke to them when he blessed them, each one with his own blessing is how he blessed them].” (The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe.) When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” [According to another interpretation, Moses made] an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel, (Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4.) since it was fitting for him to bless them with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars [he had built]; (On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29.) but [Balaam] only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10), “but here you have even blessed them these three times.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O wicked one, your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair; then he will bless Israel.” And it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9), “He that has a benevolent eye shall be blessed (ybrk).” Do not read “ybrk [with vowels meaning] shall be blessed,” but [with vowels meaning] “shall bless.” This refers to Moses our master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel, such that he blessed them with [the other] four blessings: The first is (in Exod. 39:43), “When Moses saw all the work […] he blessed them.” The second is (in Lev. 9:23), “Then Moses and Aaron came unto the tent of meeting; and when they came out, they blessed the people….” The third is (in Deut. 1:11), “May the Lord God of your ancestors add [to your numbers a thousand times more than you are and bless you].” The fourth is (here in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” It is therefore stated (in Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.”(Deut. 33:1:) And this is the blessing.” It was fitting for Moses to bless Israel because he had constantly risked his life for them. (PRK 31(suppl. 1):12.) For this reason, it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing [that Moses blessed... the Children of Israel].” (Deut. 33:1:) “The man of God (the Power).” If it says, “man,” why does it say, “God,” and if it says, “God,” why does it say, “man?” It is simply that at the time he fled from in front of Pharaoh, he was a man, but at the time he trounced [the Egyptians], he was a power. Another interpretation: At the time that he went up to the firmament, he was a man; in front of the angels that were all fire, he was a man. But at the time he came down, he was a power. Before he went up to the firmament, he was a man, as he would eat and drink. But all the time that he was there, he was a power, as stated (in Exod. 34:20), “and they were afraid to approach him.”
And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came from Padan-aram (Gen. 35:9). May it please our master to teach us: What is the punishment meted out to one who does not permit the poor to glean from his field? Thus do our masters teach us: One who does not allow the poor to glean from his field, or permits one and not another, or assists one of them at the time of reaping or harvesting, is considered guilty of robbing the poor. Concerning this it is said: Remove not the landmark of old ('olam) (Prov. 22:28). This should be read as “landmark of the poor” (olim).
A lady asked of R. Yosé the son of Halafta: “In how many days did the Holy One, blessed be He, create the world?” “In six days,” he replied, “as it is written: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth (Exod. 20:1).” “What has He been doing since then?” she asked. “He has been erecting ladders,” he answered, “upon which one ascends and another descends; one becomes wealthy and the other poor.” You know this to be so from the fact that it is written with reference to Jacob’s going to Aram-naharaim: With my staff I passed over this Jordan (Gen. 32:11). And he took one of the stones of that place and put under his head (ibid. 28:11). Surely, if he had owned a mattress or a cushion he would have placed them under his head, yet after he joined Laban’s household he became wealthy, as is said: And the man increased exceedingly (ibid. 30:43). Why did he become wealthy? Because of the power of the blessings his father had bestowed upon him, as it is said: And give thee the blessing of Abraham (ibid. 28:4). What was Abraham’s blessing? And the Lord blessed Abraham in all things (ibid. 24:1). After his return from Laban’s house, the Holy One, blessed be He, said: Now I must bless him Myself. Immediately, the Holy One, blessed be He, appeared before him and blessed him, as it is said: And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came from Padan-aram, and blessed him (ibid. 35:9).
Another interpretation of "Happy is the man" (Psalm 1:1): This refers to the righteous men. The prophets are happy because they give form to the image of God, and to the one who plants the tree. This is what the scripture means by "For the Lord God is a sun and shield" (Psalm 84:12). Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said: "Happy are they who are like the sun, which shines forth, and like a shield, which protects." Another interpretation of "shield": This refers to the Persian Targum for a curtain that surrounds a person, protecting them from the four winds. And how do we know that it includes the fourth wind? It is written, "You crown us with loving-kindness" (Psalm 5:13). Another interpretation of "sun" and "shield": This refers to Abraham, our forefather. "Sun" refers to Abraham, as it is written, "Who raised up righteousness from the east" (Isaiah 41:2) The shield represents Abraham, as it is said, "I am your shield" (Genesis 15:1). The God represents Abraham, as it is said, "You are a prince of God in our midst" (Genesis 23:6). Grace and glory God gives represent Abraham, as it is written, "And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold" (Genesis 13:2). "He does not withhold good from those who walk with integrity" represents Abraham, as it is said, "Walk before me, and be blameless" (Genesis 17:1). If Scripture speaks of Abraham in this way, then when it says, "He does not withhold good from those who walk with integrity," what does it mean to walk with integrity? Rather, just as Abraham, who walked with integrity before the Holy One, Blessed be He, had a shield, so too anyone who walks with integrity before Him has a shield. After him, what is written? "Happy is the man who trusts in You" (Psalms 84:13). Abraham is not written here, but rather "man," meaning all people. David said, "Happy is the man whom You discipline, Lord, and whom You teach from Your law" (Psalms 94:12). Rabbi Yudan opened by saying, "Do not boast before the king, and do not stand in the place of great men" (Proverbs 25:6). Rabbi Yudan read it from the place where this section was closed and from the place where the previous section was opened. Rabbi Pinchas worked an extended passage from Psalms 119:100, "I understand more than the aged." At first, the Holy One, Blessed be He, blessed His world, as it says, "And God blessed them" (Genesis 1:28). Once Noah stood, He blessed him, as it says, "And God blessed Noah and his sons" (Genesis 9:1). Once Abraham stood, He blessed him, as it says, "And God blessed Abraham in everything" (Genesis 24:1). What is the meaning of "it will be a blessing"? Rav Nachman said that He handed the blessings over to him and said, "Until now, I have been required to bless the world, but from now on, the blessings are in your hands, and whomever you bless will be blessed." Once Isaac stood, he blessed him, as it says, "And Abraham gave everything he had to Isaac" (Genesis 25:5). What did he give him? Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Nechemia, and the Rabbis (said): Rabbi Yehuda said it was the firstborn. Rabbi Nechemia said it was a blessing. And the Rabbis said it was burial and a deed of inheritance. Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Chama: they only gave him gifts. And why didn't they give him a blessing? It is like a king who had a garden and gave it to a tenant, and in it were all kinds of trees intertwined with each other, one of the Tree of Life and one of the Tree of Death. The tenant said, "If I water the Tree of Life, the Tree of Death will live with it. And if I do not water it, how will the Tree of Life live?" The tenant returned and said, "This year I will complete my tenancy and go, and what do I care about the king's garden?" Abraham said, "I will not bless Isaac now because the children of Ishmael and the children of Keturah are now being blessed." I am flesh and blood today, but tomorrow I will be in the grave, and what needs to be done in his world will be done. When Abraham died, God revealed Himself to Isaac and blessed him, as it says, "After Abraham's death, God blessed Isaac his son" (Genesis 25:11). And so He did to Jacob, as it says, "God appeared to Jacob again when he came from Paddan Aram, and He blessed him" (Genesis 35:9). And Isaac stood and blessed Jacob with giving, as it says, "May God give you of the dew of heaven" (Genesis 27:28), and he sealed it with a call, "And Isaac called Jacob, and he blessed him" (Genesis 28:1). Jacob stood to bless the tribes and began with what Isaac had sealed. This is what is written, "And Jacob called to his sons and said" (Genesis 49:1), and he sealed it with this, as it says, "And this is what their father said to them" (Genesis 49:28). Moses stood to bless Israel, and said, "Jacob is the firstborn of the Holy One, blessed be He," and he began with a call and sealed it with "And this is the blessing" (Deuteronomy 33:1), and he sealed it with "Happy are you" (Deuteronomy 33:29). When David stood, he opened with "God is my Lord," and sealed it with "Blessed are You, God" (Psalms 118:27).
Noah handed on the tradition to Shem, and he was initiated in the principle of intercalation; he intercalated the years and he was called a priest, as it is said, "And Melchizedek king of Salem… was a priest of God Most High" (Gen. 14:18). Was Shem the son of Noah a priest? But because he was the first-born, and because he ministered to his God by day and by night, therefore was he called a priest. Shem delivered the tradition to Abraham; he was initiated in the principle of intercalation and he intercalated the year, and he (also) was called priest, as it is said, "The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek" (Ps. 110:4). Whence do we know that Shem delivered the tradition to Abraham? Because it is said, "After the order of Melchizedek" (ibid.). Abraham delivered the tradition to Isaac, and he was initiated in the principle of intercalation, and he intercalated the year after the death of our father Abraham, as it is said, "And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that God blessed Isaac his son" (Gen. 25:11), because he had been initiated in the principle of intercalation and had intercalated the year (therefore) He blessed him with the blessing of eternity. Isaac gave to Jacob all the blessings and delivered to him the principle of intercalation. When Jacob went out of the (Holy) Land, he attempted to intercalate the year outside the (Holy) Land. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob! Thou hast no authority to intercalate the year outside the land (of Israel); behold, Isaac thy father is in the (Holy) Land, he will intercalate the year, as it is said, "And God appeared unto Jacob again, || when he came from Paddan-Aram, and blessed him" (Gen. 35:9). Why "again"? Because the first time He was revealed to him, He prevented him from intercalating the year outside the (Holy) Land; but when he came to the (Holy) Land the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Jacob ! Arise, intercalate the year, as it is said, "And God appeared unto Jacob again,… and blessed him" (ibid.), because he was initiated in the principle of the intercalation, and He blessed him (with) the blessing of the world. Thus were the Israelites wont to intercalate the year in the (Holy) Land. When they were exiled to Babylon || they intercalated the year through those who were left in the (Holy) Land. When they were all exiled and there were not any (Jews) left in the (Holy) Land, they intercalated the year in Babylon. (When) Ezra and all the community with him went (to Palestine), Ezekiel wished to intercalate the year in Babylon; (then) the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Ezekiel ! Thou hast no authority to intercalate the year outside the Land; behold, Israel thy brethren, they will intercalate the year, as it is said, "Son of man, when the house of Israel dwell in their own land" (Ezek. 36:17). Hence (the Sages) have said, Even when the righteous and the wise are outside the Land, and the keeper of sheep and herds are in the Land, they do not intercalate the year except through the keeper of sheep and herds in the Land. Even when prophets are outside the Land and the ignorant are in the Land they do not intercalate the year except through the ignorant who are in the land (of Israel), as it is said, "Son of man, when the house of Israel dwell in their own land"(ibid.) it is their duty to intercalate the year.
Our forefather Jacob was 63 when he was blessed. Ishmael died at that time as is written, "Esau saw that Isaac had blessed...Jacob listened to his father...Esau saw [the Canaanite women] were bad [in the eyes of Isaac]...Esau went to Ishmael..."(Genesis 28:9). There seems no need for the verse to state "sister of Nebaioth." What do we learn from the fact that it says "sister of Nebaioth"? We learn that Ishmael died and Nebaioth [Ishmael's firstborn therefore] married off his sister to Esau. Jacob our forefather hid [from Esau] 14 years in the land of Israel and served Eber. Eber died two years after Jacob went to Aram-Naharaim. [Jacob] left and went to Aram-Naharaim and he was found by the well when he was 77 years old and he was in Laban's house for 20 years: 7 before he married any matriarchs, 7 from when he married in the Matriarchs and 6 years after the 11 tribes and Dinah were born. It comes out that all the tribes were born in seven years besides Benjamin. Each and every one each 7 months. He left Aram-Naharaim and came to Succoth and stayed there 18 months as is written "And Jacob went to Succoth" (Genesis 33:17). He left Succoth and went to Bet El and made 6 new encampments close to the place.
ויתן לך אלוקים, “and may G–d give you, etc.;” Yitzchok, -remarkably- addresses the attribute of Justice of G–d when we might have expected him to address the attribute of mercy. By doing so he implied that this blessing was conditional on the person on whom it had been bestowed being worthy of it. Nonetheless, when it comes to Esau, we see that Yitzchok does not include such a condition in his blessing, as in verse 39 in our chapter he reassures him by saying: “your dwelling will be in the fat parts of the earth and you will enjoy the dew from above. You will live by the sword, although you will serve your brother.” He adds that on the contrary, the blessing given to his brother Yaakov is conditional on his not making your life intolerable.” [my choice of words. Ed.] It is noteworthy that in his lengthy prayer after consecrating the Temple he has built, King Solomon attaches the condition of worthiness when speaking of how G–d shall respond to the prayers of the Israelites, whereas when speaking of gentiles coming to Jerusalem to pray there, he does not attach such a condition but asks G–d to grant the wishes of such gentiles, regardless. (Kings I 8,32-43) Solomon is concerned that the gentiles should not get the impressions that our G–d is someone with Whom one needs to bargain. Yitzchok was concerned about the same when realising that Esau, if he insisted on his blessing surely credited G–d in heaven with being the One Who would provide its becoming reality. If he did not think so, why would he demand it? [When G–d fulfills the requests of a gentile, without regard to his worthiness, if the gentile as a result does not become G–d fearing and grateful, he will find that the very fulfillment of his request will eventually boomerang and he will more than lose its benefit. Ed.] You will also find that there are ten different categories of blessings, corresponding to the ten utterances used by G–d when He created His universe, and corresponding to the Ten Commandments. These blessings were pronounced on seven different occasions. 1) here; 2).Genesis 28,3: ואל שדי יברך אותך and the attribute of G–d known as shadday will bless you. 3) Genesis 28,13 (to Yaakov); 4) Genesis 32,27: “I will not let you depart (Yaakov to the angel he had wrestled) until you bless me;” 5) Genesis 35,9: “G–d appeared to Yaakov;” 6) Genesis 46,3; and Genesis 12,2, where G–d blessed Avraham for the first time. Avraham was blessed by G–d on seven different occasions. The Jewish people were given seven different (days) that are holy, most of them festivals: Sabbath, Passover, Shavuot, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, and Sh’mini Atzeret. There are seven stars that serve the sun and the moon in their orbits. [The author adds some astronomical observation that have to do with the time to plant and harvest being related to sunset and sunrise which I have not understood. Ed.]
In the stories of Jacob, however, the Torah always uses “Lord,” for he was more complete than was Isaac. Thus, unlike Isaac, who had not been as | complete as Abraham, (36. Kaspi says that in the following verses, which refer to Isaac, the memory and merits of Abraham are invoked in order to increase the well-being of Isaac. This indicates that Abraham was the greater of the two.) it is not said of Jacob, “because that Abraham hearkened to my voice,” (37. Gen. 26:5.) or “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” (38. Gen. 26:24.) The exception (where “God” appears in the stories of Jacob) is “the house of God,” (39. Gen. 28:17.) and that is on account of its being followed by “and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob said that because he recognized that the place was conducive to prophecy and perception because of the celestial cause that predominated there, as Ibn Ezra noted. (40. Ibn Ezra says on this verse: “This is the house of God—in which a person can pray in time of need, for his prayer will be heard on account of its being a special place.”) He continued to say, “If God will be with me …” (41. Gen. 28:20.) (using ’Elokim) in accordance with the opinion of our Torah that the world of Separate Intelligences is the first cause. (42. As explained above, ’Elokim refers to the upper two worlds, which are here referred to by Kaspi as ha-sekhel ha-nifrad (“the separate intellect”), which as an entity influences the events of the sublunar world below them.) The proof of this is provided by the opening verse of the Torah, “In the beginning God created …” as I have explained. (43. See above chap. II, n. 1.) When Jacob’s wives speak, and when Jacob speaks to them, they mention “God,” (44. Gen. 31:5, 9, 11, 16.) for that is appropriate for them, as we have already mentioned. This is especially the case as they are the daughters of (the pagan) Laban, as is proved by Rachel when she coveted the teraphim. (45. Gen. 31:19.) When on occasion they do mention “Lord,” (46. Gen. 29:32–33, 30:24.) it is only because they learnt this from Jacob. Notice the precision regarding Laban when the Torah says, “and God came to Laban,” (47. Gen. 31:24.) similar to what was written of Abimelech, (48. Gen. 20:3.) in accordance with his confused belief in the power of the Heavenly Sphere and that of the imagination. Laban said to Jacob, “the God of your father spoke unto me yesternight saying …,” (49. Gen. 31:29.) for how could the god of Laban assist Jacob when (Jacob) did not believe in him. Similarly he said, “the Lord watch between me and thee,” (50. Gen. 31:49.) in accordance with Jacob’s belief. Furthermore Laban made Jacob swear by the Lord, for Jacob feared Him, and not God. In summarizing in conclusion, Laban said, “The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor … judge betwixt us …” (51. Gen. 31:53.) whereas “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.” (52. Ibid.) Jacob uses “God” when saying “and the angels of God met him,” (53. Gen. 32:2.) and “this is God’s camp,” (54. Ibid.) as well as “I have seen God face to face” (55. Gen. 32:28.) and “for thou hast striven with God,” (56. Gen. 32:20.) for all of them are in a prophetic use of the imagination. (57. He means that they take place in a prophetic vision, which with the exception of Moses, necessarily involves the imaginative faculty.) It is similar with “And God said unto Jacob,” (58. Gen. 35:1.) | and “there God was revealed unto him,” (59. Gen. 35:7.) as well as “and God appeared unto Jacob again” (60. Gen. 35:9.) and “where God spoke with him.” (61. Gen. 35:15.)
It is worthwhile to note that the total number of animals offered on New Moons was 11 as this number corresponds to the 11 hours which the sun is older than the moon. The sun was created (made operational) on the fourth day at the beginning of the day (night), whereas the moon was made operational 11 hours later. The number 11 also recalls the fact that the solar year is (on average) 11 days longer than the lunar year (12 months), seeing the solar year is 365 days and the lunar year 354 days. The reason that the bulls were being offered in respect of Avraham (and Sarah) is because Avraham and Sarah originally were like טומטום ואנדרונינוס, hermaphrodite and epicene (people whose sexual organs were underdeveloped preventing them from bearing or siring children). The ram offered in respect of Yitzchak symbolised the uniqueness of the ram Avraham had slaughtered at the time, of which we learned in Avot 5,6 that it had been designated as such an offering since the days of the creation. The seven sheep offered in respect of Yaakov acknowledge symbolically that his features are engraved on the throne of G’d above the seven heavens (Bereshit Rabbah 68,18). The three tenths ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a gift-offering for each of the bulls correspond to the three verses in which G’d is described as appearing to Avraham (Genesis 12,7; 17,1; 18,1). The two tenths ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as gift-offering which accompanied the ram offering were in respect of the two verses in the Torah in which G’d is described as appearing to Yitzchak (Genesis 26,2; 26,24). The reason that only one tenth ephah fine flour mixed with oil was brought as gift-offering alongside the seven sheep is that we have only one verse in which G’d is described as appearing (וירא) to Yaakov (Genesis 35,9). The reason that the Torah repeats the word עשרון in connection with the single tenth ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as gift-offering in respect of the seven sheep symbolising Yaakov, is that it alludes to both of Yaakov’s names, יעקב and ישראל. It also alludes to the two blessings he received (from his father), one instead of Esau’s blessing, the other prior to his departure to Charan. He also received 10 blessings when he was called Yaakov when his father gave him the first blessing (compare Genesis 27,28-29 and Genesis 32,30 [where the individual blessings are not enumerated; presumably G’d confirmed Yitzchak’s blessing. Ed.]). Yaakov also used the word עשר twice when he promised to tithe (twice) everything G’d would give him (Genesis 28,23). This applied especially to his son Levi as we pointed out in connection with Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 37 why Levi was considered the tenth son (compare author’s comments on Genesis 28,22). It may be worth considering in this connection that Jeremiah 31,8 quotes G’d as saying: “Ephrayim is My firstborn.” When you count backwards from Ephrayim you will find that Levi is the tenth son. When you count from Levi to Aaron in descending order, i.e. Gershon, Kehat, Merari, Livni, Shimi, Amram, Yitzhar Chevron, Uzziel, Aaron you also have Aaron as the tenth (collective) descendant of Levi named by the Torah (compare Chronicles I 6,1-3). This is also why we find in Chronicles I 23,13: “Aaron was set apart, he and his sons, forever to be consecrated most holy, to make burnt-offerings to the Lord, etc.”
לתת להם את ארץ כנען TO GIVE THEM THE LAND OF CANAAN — Of Abraham it is stated in the chapter that contains the commandment of the Circumcision, (Genesis 17:1, and 17:8) “[The Lord appeared to Abraham and said unto him], I am God Almighty etc., and I will give to thee and to thy seed after thee the land of thy sojourning”. Of Isaac it is stated, (Genesis 26:3) “[The Lord appeared unto him and said], For unto thee and unto thy seed I will give all these countries, and I will establish the oath which I sware unto Abraham, thy father”, and that oath here referred to which I sware to Abraham I uttered by the name of God Almighty. Of Jacob it is stated, (Genesis 35:9, 11, 12) “[And God appeared unto Jacob … and God said unto him], I am God Almighty; be fruitful and multiply, … the land which I gave [Abraham and Isaac to thee I will give it] etc.” So you see that I made certain vows to them and I have not yet fulfilled them.
When Abram was ninety-nine years old, יהוה appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am El Shaddai. (El Shaddai Traditionally rendered “God Almighty.”) Walk in My ways and be blameless. I will establish My covenant between Me and you, and I will make you exceedingly numerous.” Abram threw himself on his face; and God spoke to him further, “As for Me, this is My covenant with you: You shall be the father of a multitude of nations. And you shall no longer be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, (Abraham Understood as “father of a multitude.”) for I make you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fertile, and make nations of you; and kings shall come forth from you. I will maintain My covenant between Me and you, and your offspring to come, as an everlasting covenant throughout the ages, to be God to you and to your offspring to come. I assign the land you sojourn in to you and your offspring to come, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting holding. I will be their God.” God further said to Abraham, “As for you, you and your offspring to come throughout the ages shall keep My covenant. Such shall be the covenant between Me and you and your offspring to follow which you shall keep: every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you. And throughout the generations, every male among you shall be circumcised at the age of eight days. As for the homeborn slave and the one bought from an outsider who is not of your offspring, they must be circumcised, homeborn and purchased alike. Thus shall My covenant be marked in your flesh as an everlasting pact. And if any male who is uncircumcised fails to circumcise the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from kin; he has broken My covenant.” And God said to Abraham, “As for your wife Sarai, you shall not call her Sarai, but her name shall be Sarah. (Sarah I.e., “princess.”) I will bless her; indeed, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she shall give rise to nations; rulers of peoples shall issue from her.” Abraham threw himself on his face and laughed, as he said to himself, “Can a child be born to a man a hundred years old, or can Sarah bear a child at ninety?” And Abraham said to God, “O that Ishmael might live by Your favor!” God said, “Nevertheless, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac; (Isaac Heb. Yiṣḥaq, from ṣaḥaq, “laugh.”) and I will maintain My covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring to come. As for Ishmael, I have heeded you. (I have heeded you Heb. shema‘tikha, play on “Ishmael.”) I hereby bless him. I will make him fertile and exceedingly numerous. He shall be the father of twelve chieftains, and I will make of him a great nation. But My covenant I will maintain with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this season next year.” Done speaking with him, God was gone from Abraham.
יהוה appeared (appeared Or “initiated communication (with); made contact (with)”—without indicating a visual experience—as in 12.7; 17.1; 26.2, 24; 35.9–10; 48.3–4; and seven passages elsewhere in the Bible.) to him by the terebinths of Mamre; he was sitting at the entrance of the tent as the day grew hot. Looking up, he saw three figures (figures Lit. “participants whose involvement defines the depicted situation.” Or “agents [of the divine],” as the notice of the advent of divine communication in v. 1 (see previous note) implies an agency situation that casts these participants in their defining role as agents. Trad. “men.” Cf. Rashbam, Ramban; see further the Dictionary under ’ish; Agent.) standing near him. Perceiving this, he ran from the entrance of the tent to greet them and, bowing to the ground, he said, “My lords! (My lords Or “My lord,” referring either to the delegation’s apparent leader or to God.) If it please you, do not go on past your servant. Let a little water be brought; bathe your feet and recline under the tree. And let me fetch a morsel of bread that you may refresh yourselves; then go on—seeing that you have come your servant’s way.” They replied, “Do as you have said.” Abraham hastened into the tent to Sarah, and said, “Quick, three seahs of choice flour! Knead and make cakes!” Then Abraham ran to the herd, took a calf, tender and choice, and gave it to a servant-boy, who hastened to prepare it. He took curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared and set these before them; and he waited on them under the tree as they ate. They said to him, “Where is your wife Sarah?” And he replied, “There, in the tent.” Then one said, “I will return to you next year, (next year Heb. ka-‘et ḥayyah; cf. Gen. 17.21; 2 Kings 4.16–17.) and your wife Sarah shall have a son!” Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent, which was behind him. Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in years; Sarah had stopped having her periods. (her periods Heb. ’oraḥ ka-nashim, lit. “the way of women”; NJPS “the periods of women.” (Perhaps, in light of Akkadian ’arḥu “month,” the lit. meaning is actually “women’s menses.”)) And Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “Now that I’ve lost the ability, (I’ve lost the ability Precise force of Heb. veloti uncertain. NJPS “I am withered,” trad. “I am waxed old.”) am I to have enjoyment—with my husband so old?” Then יהוה (יהוה The agent who is speaking is labeled with the principal’s name, to underscore that the following message is delivered on the principal’s behalf. (A narrative convention throughout the Hebrew Bible; cf. Kimhi at 31.3.)) said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I in truth bear a child, old as I am?’ Is anything too wondrous for יהוה ? I will return to you at the same season next year, and Sarah shall have a son.” Sarah lied, saying, “I did not laugh,” for she was frightened. Came the reply, “You did laugh.” The agents (agents Lit. “[other] participants whose involvement defines the depicted situation.” See note at 18.2.) set out from there and looked down toward Sodom, Abraham walking with them to see them off. Now יהוה had said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, since Abraham is to become a great and populous nation and all the nations of the earth are to bless themselves by him? For I have singled him out, that he may instruct his children and his posterity to keep the way of יהוה by doing what is just and right, in order that יהוה may bring about for Abraham what has been promised him.” Then יהוה said, “The outrage of Sodom and Gomorrah is so great, and their sin so grave! I will go down to see whether they have acted altogether according to the outcry that has reached Me; if not, I will take note.” The agents went on from there to Sodom, while Abraham remained standing before יהוה. Abraham came forward and said, “Will You sweep away the innocent along with the guilty? What if there should be fifty innocent within the city; will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake of the innocent fifty who are in it? Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring death upon the innocent as well as the guilty, so that innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?” And יהוה answered, “If I find within the city of Sodom fifty innocent ones, I will forgive the whole place for their sake.” Abraham spoke up, saying, “Here I venture to speak to my lord, I who am but dust and ashes: What if the fifty innocent should lack five? Will You destroy the whole city for want of the five?” “I will not destroy if I find forty-five there.” But he spoke up again, and said, “What if forty should be found there?” “I will not do it, for the sake of the forty.” And he said, “Let not my lord be angry if I go on: What if thirty should be found there?” “I will not do it if I find thirty there.” And he said, “I venture again to speak to my lord: What if twenty should be found there?” “I will not destroy, for the sake of the twenty.” And he said, “Let not my lord be angry if I speak but this last time: What if ten should be found there?” “I will not destroy, for the sake of the ten.” Having finished speaking to Abraham, יהוה departed; and Abraham returned to his place.
Elohim again appeared [became revealed] to Yaakov when he came from Padan Aram, and He blessed him.
The God of eternity, whose name be Blessed for ever and ever, hath taught us precepts which are beautiful and statutes that are comely: He hath taught us the blessing of matrimony from Adam and his bride, as the scripture expoundeth And the Word of the Lord blessed them, and the Word of the Lord said to them, Be strong and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it. He hath taught us to visit the afflicted, from our father Abraham the Righteous, when He revealed Himself to him in the plain of Vision, and gave him the precept of circumcision, and made him to sit in the door of his tent in the heat of the day; as the scripture expoundeth and saith, And the Word of the Lord revealed Himself to him in the plain of Vision. And again He hath taught us to bless those who mourn, from our father Jakob the Righteous: for He revealed Himself to him on his coming from Padan of Aram, when the way of the world had happened to Deborah, the nurse of Rivekah his mother, and Rahel died by him in the way, and Jakob our father sat weeping and bewailing her, and mourning and crying. Then wast Thou, 0 Lord of all worlds, in the perfection of Thy free mercies revealed to him, and didst comfort him, and blessing the mourners didst bless him concerning his mother, even as the scripture expoundeth and saith, The Word of the Lord revealed Himself unto Jakob the second time on his coming from Padan Aram, and blessed him.
And the Lord revealed Himself to Jakob again on his return from Padan of Aram, and the Lord blessed him by the name of His Word, after the death of his mother.
| וַיֹּֽאמֶר־ל֥וֹ אֱלֹהִ֖ים שִׁמְךָ֣ יַעֲקֹ֑ב לֹֽא־יִקָּרֵא֩ שִׁמְךָ֨ ע֜וֹד יַעֲקֹ֗ב כִּ֤י אִם־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ יִהְיֶ֣ה שְׁמֶ֔ךָ וַיִּקְרָ֥א אֶת־שְׁמ֖וֹ יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ | 10 P | saying to him, “You whose name is Jacob, You shall be called Jacob no more, But Israel shall be your name.” Thus he was named Israel. |
Now, this specifically [refers to] the aspect of Da’at and Chochmah which are in the head of Yisroel-ישראל [which spells] “a head for me-Li Rosh-לי ראש,” as explained previously. Because of this [the angel] told him, (Genesis 35:10) “Yisroel-ישראל shall be your name.”
,לא יקרא שמך עוד יעקב'שמך יעקב, “your name has been Yaakov; it will no longer be Yaakov;” The Torah means that henceforth his name would no longer only be “Yaakov,” but the name “Yisrael” would be added to it. If the name “Yaakov” were to be eliminated completely, this would be interpreted as having been a name describing a person with negative character traits up to now. (Compare Esau’s comment in Genesis 27,36) Henceforth the Torah will refer to YaakovYisrael sometimes by his original name and sometimes only by his additional name. When G-d changed Avram’s name to Avraham, He had never said that שמך אבדם, “your name is or was Avram.” This is why the sages have said that anyone referring to Avraham as Avram, is equivalent to violating a positive commandment of the Torah. (Talmud B’rachot 13).
כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך, “but your name shall be Yisrael.” The name implies that the one possessing it wields authority, as the angel had said to Yaakov: ”you have contended with Divinity and you have prevailed.” (32,29) The name is very appropriate for you as you will be the founding father of kings. Rashi here claims that the reference in this verse is to King Shaul and his son Ish Boshet. Should you ask that we have been taught (in Sanhedrin 20) that Avner was punished for having delayed David’s occupying the throne of the Kingdom for two and a half years, i.e. the years during which Ish Boshet ruled after he appointed him as Shaul’s successor; why would he be punished for this, seeing it has been decreed already in the Torah that he would rule (according to Rashi)? We would have to answer that he was not punished for having crowned Ish Boshet, but because he had crowned Ish Boshet not because he considered him as fit to rule, but that he was motivated exclusively by trying to thwart David from ascending the throne.
THY NAME SHALL NOT BE CALLED ANYMORE JACOB. You shall no longer be called only Jacob but also Israel.
לא יקרא שמך יעקב כי אם ישראל, "You will not be called Jacob but Israel, etc." We need to understand the difference between when G'd renamed Abram and when he renamed Jacob. Berachot 13 states that anyone who calls Abraham Abram nowadays violates a positive commandment, whereas it is permissible to refer to Jacob as either Jacob or Israel. Although our rabbis in the Talmud there point out that the Torah itself refers to Israel as Jacob after G'd renamed him, in view of the fact that we ignore the words לא יקרא when it comes to Jacob, why should the same rule not apply to Abraham and we should have the choice of calling him by either name?
Perhaps the very fact that G'd limited the good news when He renamed Jacob by saying: "your name is Jacob," made this change of name qualitatively different from that of Abraham at the time. There had been no need for G'd to repeat "your name is Jacob." Who did not know this? Surely what G'd meant by this was that Jacob's permanent name would remain Jacob, but that on some occasions he would be referred to by an additional name, i.e. Israel. Why would it bother G'd that we should not refer to Abraham's original name? I believe there is a very good reason. We have to remember that names describe the nature of its bearers' souls, their essence. The Talmud Berachot 7 illustrates this point. Jacob's essence then is described by the name Jacob. Whenever he enjoyed a large measure of Holy Spirit he was referred to as "Israel." There is certainly no reason why Jacob should be deprived of his original name on account of an occasional infusion of רוח הקודש. It was quite different in the case of Abraham who retained all the letters of his original name in his expanded name also. This is why G'd commanded to call him only by his new and expanded name Abraham. By doing so one did not deny his original name at all. Perhaps Chronicles I,1 26 refers to this when it states: "Abram is Abraham." When the Torah said: "your name shall not be called, etc," the meaning is that it should not be called exclusively Jacob but also Israel. This is exactly parallel to Genesis 17,5 where Abraham's name was changed.
שמך יעקב, “your name Yaakov, etc.” According to Nachmanides, although Esau’s guardian angel had already told Yaakov that his name would henceforth be Israel, (32,29) G’d told him that as of this moment his name was still Yaakov. However, from that time on his name would be Israel. This is the meaning of the words: ויקרא שמו ישראל. Thus far Nachmanides’ comment. This then is the meaning of Isaiah 48,12 וישראל מקוראי, ”and Israel whom I have called.” Rabbeinu Chananel explains that the name Israel which G’d bestowed on Yaakov was in addition to the name Yaakov which Yaakov retained. The word עוד in our verse means “only, exclusively.” The correct translation of our verse is: “your name will no longer be Yaakov exclusively, but your name will (also) be Israel.” We find something analogous to this in Jeremiah 3,16 לא יאמרו עוד ארון ברית ה’, “they will no longer refer to the ark of G’d as the only location where G’d can be found, etc.” but the whole of Jerusalem will be so designated.” They will refer to the whole of Jerusalem as כסא ה’, “the throne of the Lord.” Similarly, here; the words כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך, “but Israel shall be your name, i.e. sometimes you will be referred to as “Yaakov,” other times as “Israel.” This is precisely what the prophet had in mind in Isaiah שמע אלי יעקב, ישראל מקוראי. We find something similar in Isaiah 46,28 אל תיראי עבדי יעקב, ואל תחת ישראל, “do not fear My servant Yaakov, do not be scared Israel.”
לא יקרא עוד שמך יעקב כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך. This means that G’d gave him an additional name to his existing one. The word עוד means the same as בלבד, exclusively. G’d informed Yaakov that henceforth he would have two names, used alternatively. We find something similar in Jeremiah 3,16 לא יאמרו עוד ארון ברית ה', where it also means that henceforth the Holy Ark would not only be referred to as ארון ברית ה'. What was meant was that henceforth the site of the Holy Ark would not be the exclusive site for the Presence of the Shechinah, but that the entire city of Jerusalem would have a similarly holy status. This is the meaning of: בעת היא יראו לירשלים כסא ה' “at such a time they will refer to the city of Jerusalem as G’d’s throne” (verse 17 in the above mentioned chapter in Jeremiah). This then is the meaning of כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך,i. Sometimes the name Yaakov would be used, other times the name Yisrael. Proof that this is correct is found in Isaiah 48,12 where the prophet uses both names simultaneously, שמע אלי יעקב וישראל מקוראי, as well as in Jeremiah 46,28 אל תירא עבדי יעקב ואל תחת ישראל, “do not fear My servant Yaakov, nor be afraid Yisrael.” (quoted by Rabbeinu Bachya)
THY NAME IS JACOB. G-d is saying, “Now you are still called Jacob even though the lord of Esau has changed your name (Above, 32:29. See Rashi, ibid., Verse 24, that it was “the lord of Esau” who strove with Jacob and then finally blessed him.) because he was not sent to you to change your name. However, from now on, thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name,” this being the meaning of the end of the verse, and He called his name Israel. It may be that it alludes to the fact that He called his name Israel in addition to the name Jacob, but not that it be forbidden for him to be called Jacob.
לא יקרא שמך עוד יעקב THY NAME SHALL NOT BE CALLED ANY MORE JACOB— which means a man who comes as a lurker and trickster, but it shall be Israel (ישראל), which signifies Prince and Chief.
שמך יעקב, at this time I make your name Yaakov an eternal name, i.e. after all the other nations will have perished you alone will remain. This will give a positive meaning to the word עקב, “heel,” meaning something that will survive all that precedes it. Compare Jeremiah 46,28 כי אעשה כלה בכל הגוים ואותך לא אעשה כלה, “when I shall put an end to all the nations, I will not put an end to you.
לא יקרא עוד שמך יעקב, when the time will come when Yaakov will be the only surviving nation on earth as Bileam said in Numbers 25,9 הן עם לבדד ישכון, “this is a nation which will dwell in solitary splendour,” there will no longer be any significance to the name Yaakov. [as there are no others to relate its meaning to. Ed.]
כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך, seeing that you will rule, תשתרר over the remnants of all the nations that have ceased to exist as such. This also corresponds to the previous prophecy of Bileam in Numbers 24,17 וקרקר כל בני שת, “he (Yaakov) will smash all the foundation of the sons of Seth (mankind.)
ויקרא את שמו ישראל, He blessed him in that the predictions which were meant for the end of time, were beginning to be implemented already from that time on, and not only while Yaakov was on holy soil in the land of Canaan, but even when he would be outside (as in Egypt). From this time on no one who would attack Yaakov and his family would meet with success. This was the meaning of what our sages said in Sanhedrin 76 that ”wherever Yaakov and his family walked on they became princes over their masters,” and this is what the prophet Jeremiah bewailed in Lamentations 1,1 as what the Jewish people lost as a result of the destruction of the Temple.
A term denoting a person who comes in ambush and deceit... מארב means as in וארב וקם עליו, “And will ambush him, arising against him” (Devarim 19:11).
God said to him: Your name is currently Jacob. However, your name shall no longer be called Jacob; rather, Israel shall be your name; and He called his name Israel. Although Jacob had already been informed of the change of his name (32:29), at that stage he had heard it only from an angel, and in the context of a struggle. Now, the new name is confirmed by God Himself. Similarly, Ishmael’s name was originally announced before his birth by an angel (16:11) and was later given to him officially (16:15).
שמך יעקב, “your name is Yaakov.” Your name is still Yaakov even though the celestial representative of Esau had changed it to “Yisrael,” it had not been that angel’s mission to change your name. However, from now on your name will be Yisrael. The meaning of the apparent repetition ויקרא שמו ישראל, “He called his name “Yisrael,” is hat this was an additional name and it was not forbidden to call him Yaakov.
“You shall be called Jacob no more, but Israel shall be your name” [35:10]. Rashi writes. You shall not be called Jacob, which means, you have wrongfully taken away the blessings. But Israel should be your name, which means you have been victorious, that is to say, you are a lord. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:10.) Bahya and Hizkuni write. You should not be called Jacob alone, but sometimes Jacob and sometimes Israel. You should have two names, but not Jacob alone, which means, you have wrongfully taken away the blessings. (Bahya, Genesis, 35:10; Hizkuni, Genesis, 35:10.)
And this prohibition is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and makes himself a clairvoyant in one of the ways from all the matters we have mentioned or in another matter, and tells people things that he sees through his clairvoyance, is liable for lashes — and that is when he does some act in the thing, as we do not administer lashes without an act. But one who asks [something] from a clairvoyant is not under the liability of lashes. Nonetheless, very disgusting is anyone who fixes his thoughts or expends his time on these vanities. As it is not appropriate for one whom God has graced with knowledge and given the true religion as an inheritance to think about these vanities. Rather, he should fix his thoughts on the service of the Creator, may He be elevated, and not fear the words of the clairvoyant; since God, in His kindnesses will change the system of the stars, and nullify the power of the constellations, [so] as to do good to His pious ones. And it is known that we are the holy people, such that we are not under [the power of] a star or constellation — “the Lord is our inheritance, as He spoke to us.” And [it is] like the matter that we found with the forefathers, that God placed their stature above the ministers above: Like that which is written about Yaakov, “but rather Yisrael will be your name” (Genesis 35:10), “for you have dominated (sarita) with powers, etc.” (Genesis 32:29); meaning that God made him a minister (sar) over the [celestial] ministers. And so [too,] is Yitschak called Yisrael, as it is stated (Genesis 46:8), “these are the Children of Israel that were coming to Egypt, Yaakov and his children.” And so [too,] Avraham is called Yisrael, as we wrote in the Introduction of the book. And this is [the meaning of] what is written about the matter of the disagreement of the prophet, Eliyahu, with the prophets of Baal, as is stated (I Kings 18:31), “like the number of tribes of the children of Yaakov,” whose name was called Yisrael: As he was rebuking them [about] why they were leaving the service of the Master, the Lord of Hosts, who has in His hand to nullify all the actions of the powers and the constellations; and like the matter that He did with the forefathers, such that He put the constellations under their hand. And that is [the meaning] of its stating in that place (I Kings 18:31), “like the number of tribes of the children of Yaakov, to whom was the word of the Lord, saying, ‘Yisrael will be your name,’” — meaning to say, that He made him a minister over the [celestial] ministers, to change their system and their power with his merit. [This is] meaning to say, Israel, who are the children of Yaakov, are also ministers over the celestial ministers; and hence it would be fitting for them to not worship anything besides God alone. And so did we find with Yehoshua, who decreed to the sun and the moon to stand — as it is written in Joshua 10:12, “Sun, be still in Giveon, moon in the Ayalon Valley” — and they stood. And so [too,] several pious ones of Israel who changed the system of the constellations [and their power] with their merit. The matter would [take too] long, to bring [the] several stories that happened in Israel about this matter.
Since the Torah has gone to some considerable length to underline that the Jewish people never saw an image at the revelation, meaning that G-d is completely abstract, the idea of building a tabernacle for such an abstract entity, seems completely baffling. The Rabbis moreover have made a point of referring to G-d as makom, place, on occasion. They wanted to drive home the point that G-d is not bound by space "place," but that He is the Maker of everything spatial, everything connected with "space" or "place." When we recite in the kedushah, emulating the angels in Ezekiel 3, 12, "blessed the majesty of G-d mi-mekomo," this may be understood as "because He is the foundation, basis of all." The word does not mean "from His place" as we commonly translate it in other contexts. It follows that the sanctuary we build here on earth is purely symbolic, though governed by the strictest halachot, rules of conduct. If the concept of the sanctuary is one that embodies ideas expressed symbolically, then details of the construction and everything else connected with it are also full of symbolism. The author treats the subject in detail. We summarise only some of the highlights.
Midrash Tanchuma at the beginning of Parshat Kedoshim, states "you shall be holy because I am holy." G'd said to Israel: "before I created the universe, the angels used to praise Me, using your name. They said "blessed be the Lord G'd of Israel from time immemorial until the end of time." When Adam had been created, the angels said before the Almighty: "Lord of the universe, is this the one whose name we use when we praise You?" G'd replied:"no. This one is a thief, since it is recorded that he ate from the tree." (Genesis 3) When Noach appeared, the angels asked G'd again whether he was the one whose name they used when they praised G'd, and G'd replied that Noach was a drunkard, as it is stated in Genesis 9,21, "he drank of the wine and became drunk." When Abraham arose, the angels said to G'd that surely this must be the one. G'd said that he was a gentile since he had sired Ishmael. When Isaac appeared, the angels again felt sure that he must be the one whose name they recited when praising G'd; again G'd told them "this one loves the one who hates Me." (Genesis 25) When Jacob appeared, the angels said "this is he." G'd said to them "yes." It is written in Genesis 35,10, "your name shall not be Jacob anymore, your name shall be Israel" All the Jewish people will bear his name. At that hour, G'd sanctified Israel with His name, as it is written in Isaiah 49,3, "Israel, through you I become glorified. The holy One said to Israel "since you bore My holy name even before the universe had been created, attain holiness like Myself!" This is the meaning of the verse "be holy for I am holy."
“Your name will no longer be called Abram, but your name will be Abraham; for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations” (Genesis 17:5). “Your name will no longer be called Abram, but your name will be Abraham” – bar Kappara said: Anyone who calls Abraham Abram violates a prohibition. Rabbi Levi said: [He violates] a positive commandment, and a prohibition: “Your name will no longer be called Abram” – a prohibition; “but your name will be Abraham” – a positive commandment. But you see that the members of the Great Assembly called him Abram, as it is stated: “You are the Lord the God, who chose Abram, and took him out of Ur of the Chaldeans, and set his name as Abraham.” (Nehemiah 9:7) (The Sages at the beginning of the era of the building of the Second Temple were known as the Men of the Great Assembly, including Ezra, who is the speaker in this verse.) That case is different, as [it means:] You chose him while he was still called Abram. Similarly, does one who calls Sarah Sarai violate a positive commandment? (“God said to Abraham: Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, as Sarah is her name” (Genesis 17:15).) It was [only] he [Abraham] who was commanded regarding her. Similarly, does one who calls Israel Jacob violate a positive commandment? It is taught: [God’s intent was] not that the name Jacob should be uprooted from its place, but rather, “[Your name is Jacob]…rather, Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Israel is to be the primary name, and Jacob the secondary name. Rabbi Zavda in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: In any case, “your name is Jacob…rather, Israel” – Jacob is the primary name, and Israel is in addition to it.
“He said to him: What is your name? He said: Jacob” (Genesis 32:28). “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name; rather, Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29). “He said to him: ‘What is your name?’ He said: ‘Jacob.’ “He said: No more shall Jacob be said to be your name.” “Who confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers” (Isaiah 44:26) – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Since He “confirms the word of His servant and fulfills the counsel of His messengers,” do we not know that it says: “Of Jerusalem: It will be inhabited; and of the cities of Judah: They will be built” (Isaiah 44:26)? (Namely, from the fact that the Lord fulfills the word of the angel who told Jacob that his name would be changed, we can learn that He will fulfill the word of His prophets who prophesied that Jerusalem would be inhabited.) [It refers] to one angel who appeared to our patriarch Jacob. That is what is written: “He said to him: What is your name.… No [more…] Jacob.” “And fulfills the counsel of His messengers” – as the Holy One blessed be He appeared to our patriarch Jacob in order to fulfill the decree of that angel that said to him: “No [more…] Jacob.” The Holy One blessed be He also said so to him. That is what is written: “God said to him: Your name is Jacob; [your name shall no longer be called Jacob]” (Genesis 35:10) – “no [more] shall Jacob be said.” Bar Kappara said: Anyone who calls Abraham Abram violates a positive commandment. Rabbi Levi said: A positive commandment and a prohibition. “[Your name] shall no longer be called [Abram]” (Genesis 17:5) – a prohibition; “but your name shall be Abraham” (Genesis 17:5) – a positive commandment. And yet the members of the Great Assembly called him Abram, as it is written: “You are the Lord God who chose Abram…”? It was relating a narrative and saying that while he was still Abram You chose him. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Sarah Sarai violates a positive command? (And according to Rabbi Levi a positive command and a prohibition (Genesis 17:15).) It is, rather, that only he (Abraham. The verse states: “God said to Abraham…you shall not call her name Sarai.” In the case of Abraham the verse stated “your name shall no longer be called Abram.”) was commanded in her regard. Similarly, let us say that one who calls Israel Jacob violates a positive command? It is taught: It is not that the name of Jacob will be uprooted. Rather, “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Israel will be primary and Jacob secondary. Rabbi Zechariah in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: In any case: Your name is Jacob… “but Israel shall be your name” (Genesis 35:10) – Jacob is primary, and Israel is in addition to it. “For you have striven with God and with men, and you have prevailed” – you have wrestled with the heavenly and prevailed over them, and with the earthly and prevailed over them. With the heavenly – this is the angel. Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: He was Esau’s ministering angel. This is what he said to him: “For therefore, I have seen your face, as the sight of the face of angels [penei elohim]” (Genesis 33:10). Just as penei elohim is judgment, so too, your face is judgment. (As it were, Esau is passing judgment on Jacob (see Bereshit Rabba 76:7).) Just as penei elohim – “you shall not appear before Me [yera’u fanai] empty-handed” (Exodus 23:15), so too, you, I will not appear before you empty-handed. With the earthly and you prevailed over them – this is Esau and his chieftains. Alternatively, “for you have striven with God” – it is you whose image is carved on High. (The image of man in the Throne of Glory.)
It was taught that Ben Zoma said to the sages: "Is it truly so that the Exodus from Egypt will be mentioned [as a miraculous incident] after Messiah will come? Has not the prophet long ago said (Jer. 23, 7.) Therefore, behold, days are coming, saith the Lord, when they shall no more say, as the Lord liveth, who hath brought up the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt; But as the Lord liveth, who hath brought up, and who hath led forth the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and out of all countries whither I had driven them." "This," said the sages, "is intended to mean, not that the memory of the redemption of Egypt will be removed from its place (entirely extinct), but that the latter redemption will be the principal consideration and the redemption of Egypt the secondary. Just as it is said (Gen. 35, 10.) Thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name. (Fol. 13a.) It means not that the name Jacob will entirely fall into disuse, but that Israel shall be the principal name and Jacob the secondary. And this is meant by the passage (Is. 43, 18.) Remember not the former things, and ancient events regard no more. Remember not former things, alludes to the present subjugation, and ancient events regard no more, refers to the redemption of Egypt." Behold, I will do a new thing; now shall it spring forth (Ib. ib. 10). R. Joseph recited a Baraitha that this alludes to the war of Gog and Magog. It is likened to a man who while walking on the road met a wolf from whom he escaped, and as he was exulting over the miracle of the wolf, he met a lion and also escaped him. He exulted over his escape from the lion, forgetting the miracle of the escape from the wolf. He then met a serpent and also escaped. He forgot all the former escapes and exulted over the miracle of the serpent. Thus it is with Israel; the later troubles make them forget the earlier ones.
[(Exod. 12:29:) AND IT CAME TO PASS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.] This text is related (to Is. 44:26): CONFIRMS THE WORD OF HIS SERVANT. (PRK 7:3.) R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Levi: What is the meaning of CONFIRMS THE WORD OF HIS SERVANT? Do we not know that (ibid., cont.) HE SAYS TO JERUSALEM: YOU SHALL BE INHABITED, AND TO THE CITIES OF JUDAH: THEY SHALL BE REBUILT? It is simply that a certain angel appeared to our ancestor Jacob. He said to him: What is your name? He told him: Jacob. (in Gen. 32:29 [28]): YOUR NAME SHALL NO LONGER BE JACOB, …. (Is. 44:26, cont.:) AND FULFILLS THE COUNSEL OF HIS MESSENGERS. The Holy One appeared to Jacob to affirm the command of his angel, AND (in Gen. 35:10) GOD SAID TO HIM: YOUR NAME IS JACOB. In the case of Jerusalem, over which all the prophets have prophesied, how much the more ?
Another interpretation (of Lev. 19:2:) YOU SHALL BE HOLY. The Holy One said to Israel: Before I created my world, the ministering angels praised my name through you and sanctified me through you by saying (in I Chron. 16:36): BLESSED IS THE LORD GOD OF ISRAEL FROM EVERLASTING TO EVERLASTING. (Tanh., Lev. 7:2.) When the first Adam was created, the angels said: Sovereign of the World, is this the one in whose name we are praising you? He told them, [No]. This person is a thief, since it is stated (of him in Gen. 3:17): < BECAUSE YOU OBEYED YOUR WIFE AND > ATE OF THE TREE ABOUT WHICH I COMMANDED YOU, < SAYING: DO NOT EAT OF IT. CURSED IS THE LAND BECAUSE OF YOU >. < When > Noah came, they said to him (i.e., to the Holy One): Is this the one? He told them, [No]. This person is a drunkard, since it is stated (of him in Gen. 9:21): THEN HE DRANK OF THE WINE AND BECAME DRUNK…. < When > Abraham came, they said to him: Is this the one? He told them: This is a stranger (ger). < When > Isaac came, they said to him: Is this the one? He told them: This one loves my enemy, as stated (in Gen. 25:28): NOW ISAAC LOVED ESAU. When Jacob came, they said to him: Is this the one? He told them, Yes, for so it says (in Gen. 35:10): GOD SAID TO HIM: YOUR NAME SHALL NO LONGER BE JACOB, BUT YOUR NAME SHALL BE ISRAEL…. So all Israel was called by his name. At that time the Holy One, Blessed be He, sanctified them because of his name, as stated (in Is. 49:3): ISRAEL, IN WHOM I WILL BE GLORIFIED. The Holy One said to him: Since you were sanctified for my name before I created my world, Be holy as I am holy. It is so stated (in Lev. 19:2:) YOU SHALL BE HOLY, BECAUSE I, THE LORD YOUR GOD, AM HOLY. To what is the matter comparable? To a king who betrothed a wife. He said to her because you have been betrothed (literally: sanctified) to my name, I am a king and you, a queen. Just as it (i.e., my name) is an honor for me, so it is an honor for you. Why? Because you are my wife. Thus the Holy One said to Moses. Go and sanctify (i.e., go and betroth) Israel, as stated (in Exod. 19:10): GO UNTO THE PEOPLE AND SANCTIFY (rt.: QDSh) THEM TODAY AND TOMORROW. {The Holy One sanctified them} [He sanctified them. The Holy One came] and said to them (in Exod. 19:6): BUT YOU SHALL BE FOR ME A KINGDOM OF PRIESTS, A HOLY (rt.: QDSh) NATION. Why? (Lev. 19:2:) BECAUSE… I AM HOLY. And you also shall be sanctified (rt.: QDSh) just as you have sanctified me, as stated (in Lev. 19:2) SPEAK UNTO THE WHOLE CONGREGATION OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND SAY UNTO THEM: YOU SHALL BE HOLY (rt.: QDSh)…. The Holy One said unto them: If you are worthy, you shall be called a congregation of saints (rt.: QDSh); < if > you are unworthy, you shall be called an evil congregation. (Numb. 14:27:) HOW LONG SHALL THIS EVIL CONGREGATION…?
(Lev. 19:2:) “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “Before I created My world, the ministering angels praised My name through you and sanctified Me through you by saying (in I Chron. 16:36), ‘Blessed is the Lord God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting.’” When the first Adam was created, the angels said, “Master of the world, is this the one in whose name we are praising You?” He told them, “No. This person is a thief, since it is stated (of him in Gen. 3:17), ‘and you ate of the tree.’” [When] Noah came, they said to Him (i.e., to the Holy One, blessed be He), “Is this the one?” He told them, “[No]. This person is a drunkard, since it is stated (of him in Gen. 9:21), ‘Then he drank of the wine [and became drunk].’” [When] Abraham came, they said to Him, “Is this the one?” He told them, “This is a stranger (ger), from which Yishmael came out.” [When] Isaac came, they said to Him, “Is this the one?” He told them, “This one loves My enemy, as stated (in Gen. 25:28), ‘Now Isaac loved Esau.’” When Jacob came, they said to Him, “Is this the one?” He told them, “Yes, for so it says (in Gen. 35:10), ‘God said to him, “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but your name shall be Israel.”’ So all Israel was called by his name.” At that time the Holy One, blessed be he, sanctified them because of His name, as stated (in Is. 49:3), “Israel, in whom I will be glorified.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Since you were sanctified for My name before I created My world, be holy as I am holy.” It is so stated (in Lev. 19:2), “[You shall be holy,] because I am holy.” To what is the matter comparable? To a king who betrothed a wife. He said to her, “Because you have been betrothed (literally, sanctified) to my name, I am a king and you, a queen. Just as it (i.e., my name) is an honor for me, so it is an honor for you. Why? Because you are my wife.” Thus the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Go and sanctify (i.e., go and betroth) Israel,” as stated (in Exod. 19:10), “and sanctify (rt.: qdsh) them today and tomorrow.” The Holy One, blessed be He, sanctified them and said to them (in Exod. 19:6), “But you shall be for Me a kingdom of priests, a holy (rt.: qdsh) nation.” Why? (Lev. 19:2:) “Because I the Lord am holy.” And you also shall be sanctified (rt.: qdsh) just as you have sanctified Me, as stated (in Lev. 19:2) “Speak unto the whole congregation of the Children of Israel, and say unto them, ‘You shall be holy (rt.: qdsh).’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said unto them, “If you are worthy, you shall be called a congregation of holy ones (rt.: qdsh); [but if] you are unworthy, you shall be called an evil congregation, as stated (Numb. 14:27) ‘How long shall this evil congregation?’”
Another interpretation: Who will ascend? This refers to our father Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 35:1), "Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there." Who will stand? This refers to Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 28:11), "And he encountered the place." Clean of hands. This refers to Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 31:38), "I worked for you for fourteen years." And with a pure heart. This refers to Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 37:3), "For he was the son of his old age." "Who did not lift up my soul in vain." This refers to Laban. And he did not swear to deceive, as it is said (Genesis 31:53), "And Jacob swore by the fear of his father Isaac." He will receive a blessing from the Lord, as it is said (Genesis 35:9-10), "And God appeared to Jacob and blessed him."
3. [God] confirmeth the word of His servant, and performeth the counsel of His messengers; that saith of Jerusalem: 'She shall be inhabited'; and of the cities of Judah: 'They shall be built, and I will raise up the waste places thereof';(Is 44:26) R. Berekiah said in the name of R Levi: Whoever confirmeth the word of His servant, and performeth the counsel of His messengers, do we not [therefore also] know that he will say of Jerusalem: 'She shall be inhabited'; and of the cities of Judah: 'They shall be built?' Rather [the apparent repetition may be understood by another text]: an angel appeared to our father Jacob and said to him, 'What is thy name?' And he said: 'Jacob.' And he said: 'Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel;(Gen 32:28-29). The Kadosh Baruch Hu appeared [afterwards] to our father Jacob to fulfill the decree of the angel [in another verse]: And God said unto him: 'Thy name is Jacob: [thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name'; and He called his name Israel.] (Gen 35:10) Jerusalem, of which all the prophets prophesied that it will be built, all the more so! Another interpretation: “[God] confirmeth the word of His servant” refers to Moses, [as he is called in another verse]: My servant Moses is not so. (Num 12:7) “Performeth the counsel of His messengers” refers to Moses, [as he is called in another verse]: [God] sent a messenger, and brought us forth out of Egypt. (Num 20:16) The Kadosh Baruch Hu said to Moses, “Go, tell the people Israel that I will go through the land of Egypt in that night, [and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt.]” (Ex. 12:12) Moses went and said to Israel, “Thus saith the LORD: About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt.” (Ex 11:4) The Kadosh Baruch Hu said, “Already I have made my promise to Moses, And I said of him 'My servant Moses is not so; he is trusted in all My house.' (Num 12:7) Should I make a liar out of My servant Moses? No, instead Since Moses said “About midnight,” then I will go out at midnight. So it happened that it came to pass at midnight, [that the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt.]
This change of name takes place not once but twice. After the encounter with Esau, and the episode of Dinah and Shechem, God told Jacob to go to Beth El. Then we read: “After Jacob returned from Paddan Aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him, ‘Your name is Jacob, but you will no longer be called Jacob; your name will be Israel.’ So He named him Israel” (Gen. 35:9–10).
THE LORD MADE NOT THIS COVENANT WITH OUR FATHERS. Alone. (But also with us.)
ויחי יעקב, Jacob lived, etc. Although G'd had changed Jacob's name to Israel in 35,10, this is one of numerous instances when the Torah refers to him again as Jacob. I have explained that Jacob's permanent personality (נפש) had not changed as we know from Berachot 7 which interprets Psalms 46,9 where the word שמות, desolation, is re-interpreted to mean also שמות, names. The name Israel was an additional name reflecting spiritual highs that Jacob attained from time to time.
I shall make a short list of instances where the respective names of Jacob and Israel clearly reflect different frames of mind of Jacob/Israel. In Genesis 35,10 where G'd tells Jacob for the first time that though his name remains Jacob he will henceforth also be entitled to the name Israel, the reason that G'd emphasised that at that time his name was still Jacob is that he had just heard about the death of his mother Rivkah (compare Bereshit Rabbah 82, which understands the words: "He (G'd) blessed him" in 35,9 as the blessing one extends to mourners). This is why the name Jacob continues to appear throughout this paragraph. The time when Rachel died (immediately afterwards according to the report in the Torah) was also a period during which Jacob could not qualify for the additional name Israel. The Torah (35,20) speaks about Jacob erecting a tombstone on the site where Rachel died and was buried. As soon as the thirty days of mourning had passed, we find that G'd called Jacob "Israel" in 35,21 where he is described as continuing his journey towards reunion with his father. When we find Jacob's children referred to as "the sons of Jacob" instead of as "the sons of Israel" in 35,22, this does not contradict what we have written, as the Torah merely wants to inform us that Israel's children were not on the same spiritual level as their father. The fact that Reuben was guilty of a misdemeanour with Israel's concubine at that time, is clear evidence of that. When the reunion between Isaac and his son Jacob is described in 35,27, the reason that Jacob is not called Israel is simply that it would not be good manners for the son to be called by a name which suggests a higher spiritual level than that of his father Isaac. You will find confirmation of this thought in Yalkut Shimoni item 875 on Psalms 116,15 "that the death of His faithful is precious to the Lord," where the author writes: "if Abraham had been alive at that time, how could his son Isaac have exercised any authority?" The same argument applied to all the other patriarchs. The above teaches that while one's illustrious father or teacher is alive, the son or disciple is not allowed to outshine him. This is why the Torah refers to Jacob as Jacob at that time. When we read about Jacob settling in the land of Canaan in 37,1 he is again called Jacob to remind us that during all the years he remained in the land of Canaan his life was full of mental anguish with very brief exceptions. One such exception was his relationship with Joseph before the latter was sold into slavery. This is why the Torah speaks of that relationship as "Israel loved Joseph, etc." The name Israel is used by the Torah only three times from the time Joseph was sold until 45,28 after Jacob had regained a measure of Holy Spirit as stated in 45,27 ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם, "their father Jacob's spirit revived." The three instances during the period between the sale of Joseph and Jacob's receiving the news that he was alive and well are 43,6: "Israel said: 'why did you harm me,'etc,"--43,8: "Yehudah said to Israel his father, etc." and 43,11: "Their father Israel said to them, etc." In all those instances Jacob spoke to his sons as a person who exercised his position of authority; this is why the Torah describes him with his full title "Israel." In those instances Jacob/lsrael had to assert his authority when he noticed that his sons did not give due consideration to their father's anguish. By acting as "Israel" he indicated that he would not forgive them if they did not heed his words. As soon as Jacob heard the news about Joseph he is referred to repeatedly as the "Israel" of old. This situation continues until Jacob/lsrael is told that he has to remain in Egypt, i.e. in exile. From then on the Torah called him Israel only at the moment of his reunion with Joseph or when the Torah referred to his sons. During the period Jacob dwelled in Egypt the Torah generally calls him Jacob until shortly before his death. It was important that his sons and family should remember that they had lost not merely a Jacob but an Israel. Besides, as Jacob prepared for death, his mind became filled with other-worldly concerns. It was therefore easy for him to attain the serenity needed to be Israel once more. The Zohar first section, 218 elaborates on the spiritual growth of the human soul shortly before its death in connection with "Israel prostrating himself at the head of the bed" during the period described in the Torah as "the days approached when Israel was to die," (47,29 and 47,31). All of this is the plain meaning of these verses. They do have implications of a more profound and mystical nature, however.
ויעקב איש תם, “and Yaakov was a straightforward man.” Actually, the Torah should have written: ויעקב היה איש תם. This would have corresponded to the line ויהי עשו איש יודע ציד, or ויהי הבל רועה צאן (Genesis 4,2). On the other hand, there too Kayin’s vocation is described in the terms וקין היה עובד אדמה, “Kayin had become a tiller of the soil.” Why these changes in describing the development of the respective people and their vocations? The expression היה, “he was,” or “he had become,” is used in connection with Esau as he had been called “Esau” already at birth and he remained Esau until the day he died. Just as Esau’s name did not change so his character did not undergo any change either. Not so Yaakov, who eventually qualified for the name Israel (Genesis 35,10). This is why the word היה, or ויהי would not have been appropriate in connection with describing his vocation. When G’d changed his name, He emphasised the permanence of that change by using the very word יהיה, (a form of הויה) which the Torah had avoided using earlier.
his owner Heb. קֹנֵהוּ [is] like מְתַקְּנוֹ, the one who affixes him to the plowshare for plowing by day, and since he has accustomed him to this, he knows him. The dull donkey, however, does not recognize his master until he feeds him. Israel was not intelligent like the ox, to know, when I called him and said, “Israel will be your name” (Gen. 35:10), and I informed them of several of My statutes, yet they deserted Me, as is related in Ezekiel (20:39): “Let each one go and worship his idols.” Even after I took them out of Egypt and fed them the manna and called them, “My people, the children of Israel,” they did not consider even as a donkey. Another explanation is: An ox knows its owner An ox recognizes his owner so that his fear is upon him. He did not deviate from what I decreed upon him, by saying, I will not plow today. Neither did a donkey say to his owner, I will not bear burdens today. Now, these [creatures,] who were created to serve you, and are not destined to receive reward if they merit, or to be punished if they sin, did not change their manner, which I decreed upon them. Israel, however, who, if they merit receive reward, and if they sin are punished.
God said to him, “Your name is Jacob; your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel should be your name.” And He called his name Israel. Genesis 35:10 “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob,” which connotes a person who comes in stealth and treachery [akavah]; rather, your name will connote nobility [sar].” Rashi, ad loc.
Twelve years had passed since Joseph’s birth, (Seder Olam 2.) and since Jacob emerged shalem, (Genesis 33:18.) complete, from the dangers of Laban and Esau. His house was built; he was named Israel by God. (Genesis 35:10.) The birth of Joseph marked a critical juncture for Jacob. Joseph was his ben zekunim, (Genesis 37:3.) the beloved child of his old age, (R. Saadiya Gaon, Rashi, Ramban, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra on Genesis 37:3.) who seemed to round out the patriarch’s household. (“These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph was seventeen years old… ” Genesis 37:2.) And yet, Jacob was not done, and his house was not truly complete, for Rachel had not yet given everything that she could to Beit Yisrael. Upon the birth of Joseph, she recognized instantly that this must not be her final act – that “God should grant me another son” (yosif Hashem li ben aĥer), and even named Joseph in that hope. Only with Benjamin, who resembled her more purely than did Joseph, was the family of Israel to be whole.
On a similar note, you say: The meaning of the expressions: It will not say, and they will no longer mention, are not absolute, as in the verse: “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob; rather, Israel will be your name” (Genesis 35:10). There, too, the meaning is
Rava raises an objection to this baraita: The verse states: “And Jacob rose up from Beersheba; and the children of Israel carried Jacob their father, and their little ones, and their wives in the wagons that Pharaoh had sent to carry him” (Genesis 46:5). This occurred before the Torah was given at Sinai, and therefore proves that the title “the children of Israel” was in use before the Torah was given. The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, this occurred after the incident, i.e., after Jacob wrestled with the angel and after the prophetic vision in which God changed Jacob’s name to Israel (Genesis 35:10).
Ben Zoma said: There will be a future time when Israel will no longer mention the Exodus. What is the reason? (Jer. 23:7–8) “Therefore, days will come, says the Eternal, that one no longer will say, by the Eternal Who brought the Children of Israel up from Egypt, but rather, by the Eternal Who raised and brought the descendants of the House of Israel from the Northern land …” They said to him, not that the Exodus will be eliminated but the Exodus will be additional to the Kingdoms (“Kingdoms” is short for שעבוד מלכיות “subjugation by alien kingdoms,” a general term for the sufferings of the Jewish people inflicted by Gentiles.) . The Kingdoms will be principal and the Exodus additional. And similarly it was said (Gen. 35:10): :Your name shall not be called Jacob anymore, but Israel shall be your name.” Not that the name Jacob will be taken away but Jacob will be additional to Israel. Israel will be principal and Jacob additional. And so it says (Is. 43:18–19): “Do not remember the first things”; this means the Egyptians, “And what was earlier do not dwell on”; this means the Kingdoms, “Behold, I create something new, now it will grow”; this refers to Gog. They gave a simile: to what can this be compared? To someone who encountered a wolf and was saved from it. He started telling about the wolf when he encountered a lion and was saved from it. He forget about the wolf and started telling about the lion.After that, he encountered a snake and was saved from it. He forgot about both of them and started telling about the snake. So it is with Israel, the last troubles make them forget the earlier ones.
I. No Longer Shall You Be Called Yaakov THE CORE IDEA After his wrestling match with the angel, Yaakov was told: “No longer will your name be Yaakov, but Yisrael, for you have struggled with God and with men, and have won” (Bereshit 32:29). This new name is in fact given a second time in our parasha. After his meeting with Esav, and the story of Dina and Shekhem, God tells Yaakov to go to Beit El. Then we read: “After Yaakov returned from Padan Aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him, ‘Your name is Yaakov, but you will no longer be called Yaakov; your name will be Yisrael.’ So He named him Yisrael” (Bereshit 35:9–10).
Said he, “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven (striven Heb. saritha, connected with first part of “Israel.”) with beings divine and human, (beings divine and human Or “God (Elohim, connected with second part of ‘Israel’) and human beings.”) and have prevailed.”
Then Elijah took twelve stones, corresponding to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob—to whom the word of GOD had come: “Israel shall be your name” (Israel shall be your name See Gen. 35.10.) —
Elohim said to him. Your name is Yaakov. No longer will your name be Yaakov, but Yisrael will be your name; and He named him Yisrael.
And the Lord said to him, Heretofore was thy name Jakob: thy name shall be no more called Jakob, but Israel shall be thy name.
We mention the Exodus from Egypt at night. Said Rebbi Elazar Ben Azaryah, “Here I am like a seventy year old man and I have not merited to hear that one should mention Exodus from Egypt at night, until the exegesis (Derasha) of Ben Zoma.” “In order that you should remember the day that you left Egypt, all the days of your life." (Deuteronomy 16:3), the days of your life [means] days, all the days of your life [means] nights.” These are the words of Ben Zoma. And the Chachamim (Sages) say, “Days of your life [means] this world, all the days of your life [means] the days of the Mashiach (Messiah).” Ben Zoma said to the Chachamim, “And are we going to mention the Exodus from Egypt during the days of the Mashiach? Does not it say: “Therefore behold, the days are coming, the word of Hashem, and they will not say anymore, as lives Hashem, who has brought the Children of Israel from the land of Egypt. But rather, [they will say], as lives Hashem who has brought and who will bring the seed of the House of Israel from the Northern land and from all the lands to which I have pushed them there, and they will dwell in their land?” (Jeremiah 23:7-8) They said to him, “It does not [mean] that the Exodus from Egypt will be uprooted from them, but rather that Egypt will be added to the [other] kingdoms. [Other] kingdoms will be the main [subject], and Egypt will be a secondary [subject]. Similarly [it says], your name will not be called anymore, Yakov, but rather Yisrael will be your name. (Genesis, 35:10) [It does] not [mean] that [the name] Yakov was completely uprooted from him, but rather [the name] Yakov was added to [the name] Yisrael. Yisrael was the main [name], and Yakov was the secondary [name].”
Why did they say one short [Beracha (blessing)]? In the place where they said to be long, one is not allowed to be short, [and in the place where they said] to be short, one is not allowed to be long. [In the place where they said] to seal off [the Beracha], one is not allowed not to seal off, [in the place where they said] not to seal off [the Beracha], one is not allowed to seal off. [In the place where they said] to begin [the Beracha] with [the word] Baruch (Blessed), one is not allowed not to begin with Baruch, [in the place where they said] not to begin [the Beracha] with Baruch, one is not allowed to begin with Baruch. [In the place where they said] to bend down, one is not allowed not to bend down , [and in the place where they said] not to bend down, one is not allowed to bend down.
| וַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ל֨וֹ אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֲנִ֨י אֵ֤ל שַׁדַּי֙ פְּרֵ֣ה וּרְבֵ֔ה גּ֛וֹי וּקְהַ֥ל גּוֹיִ֖ם יִהְיֶ֣ה מִמֶּ֑ךָּ וּמְלָכִ֖ים מֵחֲלָצֶ֥יךָ יֵצֵֽאוּ׃ | 11 P | And God said to him, “I am El Shaddai. (El Shaddai Cf. 17.1.) Be fertile and increase; A nation, yea an assembly of nations, Shall descend from you. Kings shall issue from your loins. |
Genesis 49,4. “unstable as water, you will not enjoy the additional portion due to the firstborn;” How could Yaakov deliberately ignore the commandment not to deprive even the son of a wife who was hated of the rights accruing to him as a firstborn? (Deut. 21,17) Nachmanides writes concerning this problem that Yaakov penalized Reuven in accordance with the nature of his sin. Personally, I believe that Yaakov saw in his prophetic vision of the future what the Torah calls גוי וקהל גויים, “a nation and a community of nations,” (Genesis 35,11) a promise made to him by G’d at a time when he personally had concluded siring children, that another two tribes would become part of the Jewish people, so that in order for the number of tribes not to exceed the number 12, “something had to give.” He had not been aware that these two “tribes” would not be sons, but grandsons of his. The only way he was able to explain G’d’s promise of two more tribes was by assuming that an existing one would prove unworthy.
This is why the brit is referred to by the Holy Name Shadai, as is written (Genesis 35:11), “I am the Omnipotent Shadai ; be fruitful and multiply.” For ShaDaI indicates “that yeSh DaI (there is enough) of My Godliness for every creation” (Rashi, Genesis 17:1). But when a person—because of haughtiness—fails to guard the brit, he makes a god of himself. He makes it appear as though there is not enough in His Godliness for him, so that he requires idol worship. And thus he blemishes the Name Shadai ; for there is enough of His Godliness for every creation. Whereas, by guarding the brit, he is rewarded with a light that directs him to repentance, as above.
And this is the meaning of, “Shadai will be your treasure”—that is, through the mezuzah; “and money will fly to you”—through this your livelihood will fly into your hand. This is because Shadai corresponds to the Covenant, as in (Genesis 35:11), “I am God, Shadai; be fruitful and multiply.”
BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY. This is a blessing as in the account of the Creation. (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 1:26.)
Cf. 17.1.
ויאמר...אני א-ל שדי; strong and self-sufficient, able to guide all of history, in charge of all developments. We explained this on 17,1. The three matriarchs had all been genetically barren, and G’d overcame their genetic handicaps so that each bore children. This was a display of the attribute א-ל שדי at work.
פרה ורבה, (a promise) you will be fruitful and you will multiply. We explained this in connection with Genesis 1,22. G’d gave a similar promise to Avraham in 17,7 where the promise applied to Avraham’s offspring. Seeing that Yaakov did not have another child after this blessing was pronounced, it is clear that in his case just as in Avraham’s case the promise applied to the next generation, i.e. all of Yaakov’s children were included in this blessing.
גוי וקהל גוים, they will all belong to one distinctive nation. This is stated in Chronicles I 17,21 ומי כעמך ישראל גוי אחד בארץ, “and who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation on earth?” This nation will develop into a community of nations i.e. 12 tribes including the son that is about to be born to you now. ומלכים, as per its plain meaning, i.e. “kings.” Basically G’d blessed Yaakov with the same blessing as the one He had bestowed on Avraham, seeing Yaakov was Avraham’s special seed. [of Avraham’s 8 sons, only Yaakov carried on the tradition. Ed.] In Bereshit Rabbah 82,4 our verse is understood as referring specifically to Rachel’s sons. The word גוי is understood as referring to Binyamin, whereas the words קהל גוים are understood as referring to Menashe and Ephrayin, whereas the word מלכים is understood as referring to the two kings from the tribe of Binyamin, Sha-ul and Ish Boshet. Is it possible that Avner who was a righteous man should have rejected the Kingdom of David and appointed Ish Boshet instead? We must answer that he found this Midrash and based himself on that, appointing a king who was a descendant of Binyaim. [and who would be putty in his hands. Ed.]
אני אל שדי I AM GOD, ALMIGHTY, for I have the power to bless because the blessings are Mine.
פרה ורבה BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY — God said this in allusion to the fact that Benjamin was not yet born although she (Rachel) was soon to give birth to him (Genesis Rabbah 82:4).
גוי A NATION — referring to Benjamin. (Genesis Rabbah 82:4)
גוים NATIONS — referring to Manasseh and Ephraim who would come from Joseph — and these actually were counted as tribes.
ומלכים AND KINGS — referring to Saul and Ishbosheth who were of the tribe of Benjamin and these were not yet born. This verse Abner explained in this sense when he made Ishbosheth king, and the tribes of Israel also explained it thus and therefore became friendly again with the tribe of Benjamin. For so it is written (Judges 21:1) “They said there shall not any of us give his daughter unto Benjamin to wife”. Afterwards they retracted this, saying, “If, indeed, he was not to be counted among the tribes), the Holy One, blessed be He would not have said to Jacob in reference to Benjamin and kings shall come out of thy loins” (and since there have not yet been kings of the tribe of Benjamin that tribe must not be exterminated). Genesis Rabbah 82:4
גוי וקהל גוים “A NATION AND AN ASSEMBLAGE OF NATIONS” — this means that his sons are destined to become nations the same in number as the nations (of the ancient world) which was seventy. So, too, the whole Sanhedrin consisted of seventy. Another explanation is that it signifies that his children will sacrifice on high places at a time when this practice is forbidden, as other nations always did — this refers to the days of Elijah (Genesis Rabbah 82:5). From “This verse” is found in an old text of Rashi.)
גוי וקהל גוים, das Volk, das von ihm stammen wird, soll nach außen eine Einheit und nach innen eine einheitlich gesammelte Vielheit werden. Jeder Stamm soll eine gesonderte Volksindividualität repräsentieren. Das Jakobsvolk, das als "Jisrael" die alles irdisch Menschliche siegreich durchdringende und gestaltende Gotteskraft den Völkern offenbaren soll, soll darum nicht eine einseitige Erscheinung bieten, sondern als Mustervolk in nuce die verschiedensten Völkererscheinungen darstellen. Es soll in seinen Stämmen das Kriegervolk wie das Handelsvolk, das Volk des Ackerbaus, wie das der Wissenschaften usw. zur Darstellung bringen, auf daß die Wahrheit durch die Welt hin leuchte, daß die Hingebung und Heiligung des Menschenlebens im Gottesbunde seines Gesetzes durch keine besondere Berufsstellung und Völkereigentümlichkeit bedingt, sondern die ganze Menschheit in aller ihrer Mannigfaltigkeit berufen sei, den von Israel gelehrten einen einheitlichen Gottesgeist in sich aufzunehmen und die ganze Mannigfaltigkeit der Menschen- und Völkerindividualitäten zu einem einheitlichen Gottesreiche zu gestalten. Da dürfte denn auch das ולזרעך אחריך אתן את הארץ mit dem Siporno heißen: und deinem dir nachfolgenden Samen werde ich einst die Erde geben — wie וצדיקים יירשו ארץ — es wird ihnen und dem von ihnen in treuer Nachfolge bewahrten geistigen und sittlichen Vermächtnis dereinst die ganze Erde zufallen. (Jes. 2, 3.)
אני א-ל שדי, I swear by My own name when I swear an oath. One such example is found in Deut. 32,40 ואמרתי חי אנכי לעולם, “as I have said, I, the One Who lives forever.” G’d’s oaths to Yaakov were always by the attribute Shadday.
Be fruitful and increase. Do not be afraid that your offspring will be destroyed, even if they are imperfect, because the name “Almighty Shakkai” indicates that I keep My word even to the unworthy.
ומלכים מחלציך יצאו. This blessing means that the Jewish people would always possess persons who are fit to occupy the throne, as opposed to the Edomites who, as we know from 36,36-37, had to rely repeatedly on outsiders to become their kings.
I have the power to bless because the blessings are Mine. Rashi is answering the questions: Why does it say אני? And why does it say שדי, rather than another Name?
Menasheh and Ephraim... Re’m writes that the Rashi text should read: “וקהל גוים. This refers to Menasheh and Ephraim.” [I.e., adding וקהל]. For Rashi interprets גוי as one son, and וקהל גוים as another son. Otherwise, the question arises: Why does Rashi say on 48:4, “Hashem informed me that there would yet emanate from me קהל ועמים,” [referring to Menasheh and Ephraim]? Alternatively, Rashi’s text on 48:4 should read קהל עמים, deleting the ו. And here, the text reads גוים [without וקהל. And the word גוים, which is plural, implies two sons] Menashe and Ephraim. But see the Gur Aryeh on 48:4, who [writes that the Re’m unnecessarily] alters the Rashi text.
Shaul and Ish Boshes who were from the tribe of Binyamin... Rashi is saying, that which is written “Kings will come out of your loins,” implies that they were still in his loins—and this could only refer to the tribe of Binyamin, who had not yet been born.
God said to him: I am God Almighty. This name alludes to God’s might and His power to grant offspring. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and an assembly of nations shall be from you, and kings shall emerge from your loins. Your offspring will merit greatness.
Our rabbis, of blessed memory, found it necessary to awaken us to this, and therefore informed us of a very important principle when they said, (Talmud Berachot 58a) “The earthly kingdom is similar to the heavenly kingdom.” That is, if it is necessary to be careful about all the above matters when entering into the presence of an earthly king of flesh and blood, how much more is this so of a person who enters to greet the face of the King, King of kings, the Holy One, blessed is He, He Who is blessed and exalted.
“God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and an assembly of nations will be from you, and kings will emerge from your loins” (Genesis 35:11). “God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply” – Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak: I used to say: Reuben was already out. Simeon was already out. Benjamin had already emerged from his loins and was still in his mother’s womb. (He used to wonder who this blessing referred to, given that Jacob’s sons were all born except for Benjamin, and Rachel was already pregnant with him, such that he had already emerged from Jacob’s loins. ) Then I said: “A nation” – this is Benjamin; “and an assembly of nations” – this is Manasseh and Ephraim, as it is written: “His descendants will be a plenitude of the nations” (Genesis 48:19). Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Ḥelbo, and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Yerovam and Yehu. The Rabbis say: Is it possible that Avner was a righteous man and he disputed that the kingdom [belonged to] the house of David? It is that he expounded a midrash, and crowned Ish Boshet. (See II Samuel 2:8–9. ) That is what is written: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Saul and Ish Boshet. What did they see that led them to draw near and ostracize in the case of the concubine in Giva? (See Judges chap. 20–21. ) It is, rather, that they read a verse and ostracized them, and read a verse and immediately welcomed them. They read a verse and ostracized them: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be like Reuben and Simeon for me” (Genesis 48:5). (They felt justified in ostracizing the tribe of Benjamin because Manasseh and Ephraim counted as two tribes, such that there would be twelve tribes even without Benjamin. ) They read a verse and welcomed them: “A nation and an assembly of nations will be from you.” (As stated above, this refers to Benjamin as well as Manasseh and Ephraim, and therefore they welcomed Benjamin back and cancelled his ostracization. )
Rabbi Yudan, Rabbi Aivu, and Rabbi Mashyan ben Nagari said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: [God told Jacob:] ‘Your descendants are destined to become a nation like the assembly of peoples; (Your descendants will act like the other nations. ) just as the assembly of peoples sacrifice [on private altars] at the time when the private altars are prohibited, so, your descendants will sacrifice at the time when the private altars are prohibited.’ (It is permissible for other nations to sacrifice on private altars, even though they also have the ability to brings sacrifices to the Temple. Similarly, there will be a time when Jacob’s descendants will sacrifice a permissible offering on a private altar at a time when the prohibition of sacrificing on a private altar was in effect. This alludes to the incident of Elijah on Mount Carmel (see I Kings chapter 18; Yefeh To’ar). ) Rabbi Ḥanina cites it from here: “Elijah took twelve stones [according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob,] to whom was the word of the Lord, saying: Israel will be your name” (I Kings 18:31) – from the moment that this name was given to him, it was stated to him: “A nation and an assembly of nations will be from you.” Rabbi Simlai cites it from here: “They called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their forefather, who was born to Israel” (Judges 18:29) – from the moment that this name was given to him, it was stated to him: “A nation and an assembly of nations will be from you.” Rabbi Yoḥanan cites it from here: “They will call peoples to the mountain; there they will slaughter offerings of righteousness” (Deuteronomy 33:19) – when your descendants will become like the peoples at Zebulun’s mountain, (When they come to Mount Carmel to sacrifice offerings to idols. ) “there they will slaughter offerings of righteousness.” It is not written here: “There they will offer prohibited offerings on private altars,” but rather, “offerings of righteousness.” I will perform righteousness with them and accept their offering. But “a nation and an assembly of nations will be from you” – to obligate each and every tribe; this is the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. (Rabbi Shimon interprets the verse as stating that if one tribe sins unwittingly based on the ruling of the Sanhedrin, that tribe is obligated to collectively bring the bull offering for an unwitting communal sin (see Mishna Horayot 1:5).) Rabbi Yehuda says: To obligate each and every congregation. (Rabbi Yehuda says that even if one tribe sinned based on the ruling of its own court, that tribe is obligated to collective bring the bull offering (see Mishna Horayot 1:5).)
Rabbi Ze’eira began: “My lyre is for mourning, and my flute is for the voice of weepers” (Job 30:31). There it is taught: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: There were no days as joyous for Israel as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur, on which the daughters of Jerusalem would go out in white borrowed garments so as not to embarrass one who did not have one. All the garments require immersion. The daughters of Israel would go out in them and dance in the vineyards. (Mishna Taanit 4:8.) It is taught: One who did not have a wife would turn to there. What would they say? ‘Young man, lift your eyes and see what you are choosing for yourself. Do not look at beauty, look at lineage.’ Likewise it says: “Emerge, daughters of Zion, and gaze at King Solomon, at the crown with which his mother crowned him on the day of his wedding, and on the day of the rejoicing of his heart” (Song of Songs 3:11). “The day of his wedding” – this is the giving of the Torah. “The day of the rejoicing of his heart” – this is the building of the Temple, may it be built speedily in our days. Granted Yom Kippur, as it is a day of pardon and forgiveness for Israel, the day on which the last tablets were given. However, what is the fifteenth of Av? Rabbi Yaakov bar Aḥa said in the name of Rabbi Asi: It is the ideal time for chopping trees, as all the trees chopped on it do not produce a worm, and it is taught: Any wood in which a worm is found is disqualified from being atop the altar. (Mishna Midot 2:5.) Rabbi Abba bar Kahana and Rabbi Asi said in the name of Ulla in the name of Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi]: It was then that Hoshea ben Ela canceled the sentries that Yerovam ben Nevat had deployed on the roads. (Yerovam, king of Israel, appointed sentries to prevent the residents of his kingdom from ascending to Jerusalem for the pilgrimage festivals.) Rav Kahana asked before Rav: Is it possible that he did all this good and it is written in his regard: “Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, ascended against him, [and Hoshea became his servant]” (II Kings 17:3)? Rather, it is because he removed the collar from his neck and placed it on the neck of the masses, and he did not say: All the people should ascend and pray, but rather, anyone who wishes to ascend let him ascend. (Hoshea was punished, and the rest of his kingdom was punished as well (see II Kings 17:6), because he did not encourage them to ascend to Jerusalem and most of the people did not actually ascend. Previously it had been the king’s fault that the people did not ascend, as they could not go because of the sentries; subsequently it was the people’s fault, and therefore the entire kingdom was punished.) Rabbi Shmuel bat Naḥmani [said], and some say it in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak: [The fifteenth of Av is] the day the tribes were permitted to enter into marriage with one another, as it is stated: “And every daughter who inherits an inheritance [from the tribes of the children of Israel shall be a wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father]” (Numbers 36:8), and it is written: “And no inheritance shall pass from tribe to another tribe…” (Numbers 36:9). Is it possible for a daughter to inherit [from] two tribes? Rather, say on this basis, her father was from one tribe and her mother from another tribe. (The verse refers to a daughter who inherits “from the tribes of the children of Israel,” implying that her parents were from different tribes. But then the verse goes on to state that a woman cannot marry a man from a different tribe. The Sages understood this to mean that it was only in the first generation when Israel entered the land that women could not marry men from other tribes. The date when it was officially determined that from then on it was permissible was the fifteenth of Av.) The Rabbis said: [It is] the day the tribe of Benjamin was permitted to enter the congregation, as it is written: “Cursed is one who gives a woman to Benjamin” (Judges 21:18). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They read a verse and drew them near, they read a verse and distanced them. They read a verse and drew them near: “A nation and an assembly of nations shall be from you” (Genesis 35:11). (When God promised this to Jacob, Benjamin had not yet been born, meaning that it was necessary to ensure that Benjamin would procreate.) They read a verse and distanced them: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be like Reuben and Simeon for me” (Genesis 48:5) – as they are not considered with their brothers. (The total of twelve tribes could be achieved without Benjamin, with the addition of Ephraim and Manasseh.) Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: It was the day that the tribes were permitted [to marry each other]. Rav Matna said: It was the day that the slain of Beitar were allowed to be buried. Rabbi Eliezer the Great said: It is reasonable on the fifteenth; from that point on, the intensity of the sun wanes and they would no longer chop wood for the arrangement. Rabbi Menasya said: They called it the day of the breaking of the scythe. From that point on: One who adds, adds, and one who does not add, will be gathered. (From this point on, the nights begin to be lengthy. Since night is a good time for Torah study, the midrash states that years of life will be added for one who adds to his hours of Torah study. One who does not will die young.) Rabbi Avin and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is the day that the digging for those who died in the wilderness was halted. Rabbi Levi said: Every eve of the ninth of Av, Moses would dispatch a herald to the entire camp, saying: ‘Go out and dig,’ and they would go out and dig graves and sleep in them. In the morning, he would dispatch a herald saying: ‘Rise and separate the dead from the living,’ and they would stand and take themselves out. Fifteen thousand and more were subtracted, (Each year) for a total of six hundred thousand. In the fortieth year, the last one, they did so and found themselves intact. They said: It appears that we were mistaken in our calculation, and they did the same on the tenth, the eleventh, the twelfth, the thirteenth, and the fourteenth. When the moon was full, they said: It appears that the Holy One blessed be He abrogated the decree from upon us, and they then rendered it a holiday. But due to their iniquities, mourning beset this world with the destruction of the Temple twice. That is what is written: “My lyre is for mourning, and my flute is for the voice of weepers” (Job 30:31). “The people wept that night” (Numbers 14:1) – when they were exiled, Jeremiah began lamenting over them: “How does…sit solitary?” (Lamentations 1:1).
[(Gen. 35:9, 11:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN]… < AND GOD SAID TO HIM: I AM GOD ALMIGHTY >. This text is related (to … Ps. 61:6 [5]): FOR YOU, O GOD, HAVE HEARKENED TO MY VOWS; < YOU HAVE GRANTED THE HERITAGE OF THOSE WHO FEAR YOUR NAME >. Isaac had a face with a visage like < that of > his father. (Gk.: prosopon. On Isaac’s face being like that of Abraham, see Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 25:19; BM 87a.) (Gen. 25:19:) THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF ISAAC BEN ABRAHAM: ABRAHAM SIRED ISAAC. What is the meaning of ABRAHAM SIRED ISAAC? That he had a face with a visage like that of his father. Ergo (in Ps. 61:6 [5]): YOU HAVE GRANTED THE HERITAGE OF THOSE WHO FEAR YOUR NAME. (According to BM 87a, Isaac’s visage miraculously became like that of Abraham and thereby demonstrated his paternity, i.e., that Isaac had a heritage.) Just as Abraham had the Holy One speak with him at the age of ninety-nine years (in Gen. 17:1), so did Jacob have the Holy One speak with him at the age of ninety-nine years. Just as Abraham had the Holy One say to him (in Gen. 17:1): I AM GOD ALMIGHTY; BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY; (These last four words are not found in the Masoretic Text.) so did JACOB have him speak with him as God Almighty. It is so stated (in Gen. 35:9, 11:) NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN … < AND GOD SAID TO HIM >: [I AM GOD ALMIGHTY); BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY.
(Gen. 35:11:) AND GOD SAID < TO HIM >: I AM GOD ALMIGHTY; BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY … [AND KINGS SHALL COME OUT OF YOUR LOINS]. The sages have said: On the basis of this text Abner drew an interpretation, as a result of which he enthroned Saul's son Ishbosheth, (Gen. R. 82:4.) namely, that Benjamin was going to produce two kings, since < God > had said to him: AND KINGS (in the plural) SHALL COME OUT OF YOUR LOINS. (Abner’s argument was that, as a promise, the passage refers to the future and that the next event mentioned (in vss. 16-18) is the birth of Jacob’s last son, Benjamin.) Now until then only Saul had arisen (as a king out of Benjamin). He therefore enthroned Saul's son Ishbosheth. And not only that, but also in < the incident of > the concubine at Gibeah (Jud. 19-21), {< the Israelites > had readmitted him (i.e., Benjamin)}. R. Samuel bar Nahman said: < They did so > on the basis of this text. When they had opposed him, they had said (in Jud. 21:1): NONE OF US SHALL GIVE HIS DAUGHTER IN MARRIAGE TO BENJAMIN. Thus they had banished him, but they later repented and accepted him. They said: If he were not more exalted than the heavens, the Holy One would not have said to our father Jacob (in Gen. 35:11), when he came < back > to the land from abroad: AND KINGS SHALL COME OUT OF YOUR LOINS. Thus on the basis of this text they readmitted him.
Another interpretation (of Gen. 35:11): I AM GOD ALMIGHTY. Aquila translated (in his Greek version): I AM TRUSTWORTHY TO REPAY TO EVERYONE ACCORDING TO HIS WORKS. (Apart from this reference in the Buber Tanhuma, all other evidence indicates that Aquila regularly translated GOD ALMIGHTY (El Shadday) with the Greek words ischyros and hikanos, which mean “mighty” and “sufficient.” So Joseph Reider and Nigel Turner, An Index to Aquila (“Supplements to Vetus Testamentum,” 12; Leiden: Brill, 1966), s.v., hikanos, ischyros, El, and Shadday; so also Gen. R. 46:3, as interpreted by Reider, Prolegomena to a Greek-Hebrew and Hebrew-Greek Index to Aquila, 1913 Dropsie College Ph.D. thesis (Philadelphia: Dropsie, 1916), p. 152.)
Balak and Bileam were both very clever and learned people who used their knowledge to evil purpose. They were both well aware of the close relationship that existed between Israel and its G–d. Balak was even wiser than Bileam. He was privy to the great chain of the dynasty of David and how it would eventually result in the Messiah's descent from David. He knew that this very strength of Israel was rooted in himself, i.e. עצום ממני, as we have outlined. The reason he was afraid was that he realized that purity can emerge from an impure source, that the good can have an evil source, in order that the מלאך רע would have to say אמן, as we have explained above. This is why his mind worked overtime to devise a plan to sever this close relationship between Israel and its G–d. He wanted to reverse the relationship. He thought that if he were to succeed all the deeds of valour that would be performed by David in the future would accrue to his own people instead of to Israel. This is why the paragraph starts by telling us "Balak son of Tzippor saw all that Israel had done to the Emorite." The three names by which Balak refers to Israel represent three distinct merits or advantages of Israel. He called them עם, because they were very numerous, since G–d had blessed them to become as "numerous as the stars in the sky" (Genesis 22,17). The description בני ישראל, implies an even closer relationship with G–d. When Balak referred to Israel as ישראל he described their highest level, the level that we hope to attain when we all qualify to be the elite. The word בני, "sons of," implies that we are only branches of something just as children are branches, offshoots of their parents. ישראל on the other hand is the trunk that these offshoots come from, the place in which the image of the original Israel, the fighter for G–d, our patriarch, is engraved, the throne of G–d Himself. That is the source from which all souls are "hewn" as from a quarry. As mentioned, Balak was well aware of the cosmic forces and the role Israel played in that constellation. In order to loosen the bond between Israel and G–d he wanted Bileam to curse them at the precise moment in time when G–d is "angry." The significance of a curse is to reinforce the voice of the accuser who brings Israel's iniquities to G–d's attention at that moment when G–d allows Himself to become angry, i.e. the רגע של זעם. Since Bileam was a יודע דעת עליון, privy to G–d's mind, he knew the right time and he also knew how to present an unfavorable picture of someone. He was the ideal man for this task. Balak had a vision of an imminent sin Israel would commit, as proved indeed the case when they sinned shortly thereafter by becoming seduced by the daughters of Moab. This is why he urged Bileam ועתה לך ארה לי, "curse them for me now," seeing that their punishment by G–d would follow almost immediately. Balak had seen the expression of G–d's closeness to Israel by the many miracles G–d had performed for that people. All this is reflected in the Torah's stating וירא בלק את כל אשר עשה ישראל לאמורי, "Balak saw all that Israel had done to the Emorite." He realised that only a people who enjoyed such a lofty spiritual status as indicated by the name ישראל, could have accomplished that feat. Although Balak had witnessed the defeat of the Emorite, seeing that he had been one of the princes of the Emorite, his people had not seen it, had only heard about it. Hence when describing the feelings of his people, the term used for Israel is simply "העם." Nonetheless, even the people of Moab were aware that there existed a special relationship between Israel and its G–d; hence ויקץ מואב מפני בני ישראל. When the Moabites discussed what to do with the elders of Midian who were not aware of the special relationship between G–d and Israel, they emphasized the numerical strength of the Jewish people by referring to them as קהל, meaning that every individual tribe qualified for the description עם, and that they were as described in Genesis 35,11, גוי וקהל גוים ממך יצאו, "a nation as well as a community of nations will come out of you." The expression קהל then emphasizes the twelve tribes that between them made up this nation.
Verse 3, i.e. the words אף חובב עמים, require analysis. Rashi writes that the two words mean that G–d displayed this additional love for Israel by treating each tribe as a whole nation. He bases this on G–d's blessing of Jacob in Genesis 35,11 where He refers to the as yet unborn Benjamin as a "nation." Rashi's comment on this verse is generally understood to mean that the title "nation" bestowed on a mere tribe indicates special fondness for that tribe. I do not believe that this is what Rashi had in mind. I believe that Rashi referred to the words אף חובב as meaning "a different dimension of fondness." The word אף indicates something additional. We have evidence of this in the statement in Avot 3,14: חביבין ישראל שנקראו בנים למקום, followed by the words: חיבה יתירה נודעת להם שנקראו בנים למקום. "Israel are beloved of G–d for they are called 'children of G–d.' They enjoy an additional degree of fondness (by G–d) for they have been called 'children of G–d.'" The very repetition of the wording in these two statements in the Mishnah makes it plain that the author wanted to tell us that the "fondness," חיבה, described here is not of the ordinary variety. Rashi meant to convey the same idea, i.e. that the fondness displayed by G–d for Israel is not of the ordinary variety. The verse refrains from spelling out the nature of this different dimension of "fondness" G–d displays for the Jewish people. The example Rashi quoted is only an illustration of the fact that Israel the nation is referred to in the plural i.e. as עמים, instead of merely as עם. This is why Rashi quoted the example of the tribe of Benjamin itself as being called a nation. The additional dimension of G–d's fondness for Israel then is that the whole nation is called עמים (pl.), and not that a single tribe of it is called עם. Personally, I feel that these words allude to something else. Since the Torah has many facets I may be allowed to state my own view. I understand the word אף here as hinting to us that the words חובב עמים should be read as if they had been repeated, the message being that the Torah also alludes to the light which has been hidden and will only be revealed to the righteous in the future. Since it is going to be revealed to them exclusively, this represents an additional dimension of G–d's fondness for us because we cleave to G–d.
When Rashi refers to Jacob as staying behind to retrieve פכים קטנים, he meant that Jacob was solitary as long as Benjamin had not been born. When G–d had told Jacob at Bet El in 35,11: "Be fruitful and multiply…and kings will come forth from your loins," He used the plural to indicate that He referred to King Saul and his son Ish Boshet who were both anointed from a cruse. David and Solomon were anointed from a horn. Due to our various and numerous sins, G–d גדע, "dehorned Israel in a display of burning anger" (Lamentations 2,3), until in the future the horn of G–d's anointed Messiah will again be raised.
"Let there be a firmament:" In Chagigah 12a, [it is written,] "Rav said, 'At the time that the Holy One, blessed be He, created the world, it expanded like two bundles of woof, until the Holy One, blessed be He, rebuked it and made it stand in place, as it is written (Job 26:11), "The pillars of the skies tremble, and are astonished by his rebuke."' and this is what was stated by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, 'That which is written (Genesis 35:11), "I am the Power, the Omnipotent [Sha-dai, which can be broken down into two words that mean, that enough]," I am the One that said to my world, "Enough!"' and some say [that he said,] 'At the time that the Holy One, blessed be He, created the sea, it expanded and continued, until the Holy One, blessed be He, rebuked it, etc.'" And we should reflect upon what the writer of this statement told us, since [ostensibly, we could simply discard it and say] 'what was, was.' And it appears, that he is coming to advise man, [about] that which we see; that is in his nature to always long for his actions to extend without end and without limit and that everything should be permissible in his eyes; 'everything that he wants, he does;' and if a man relies on his nature, then there will be no boundary and end to the chariot of the lusting of his desire; and anarchy [would seem] good for him, such that there should be no limiting and stop to any action; up until God rebuked us through this Torah, which gives us a boundary and measure to all [our] actions; [to inform us] how far they can extend, according to the divine Will, and up until where is it permitted for [man] to send out the rein of his desire.
L’MOSHCHAH BAHEM’ (TO BE ANOINTED IN THEM). “L’moshchah means to be raised to dignity by means of them, for the term m’shichah (anointing) is sometimes used in the sense of ‘authority,’ just as in these expressions: unto thee have I given them ‘l’moshchah’ (as a distinction); (Numbers 18:8.) touch not ‘bimshichai’ (My noble ones).” (Psalms 105:15.) This is Rashi’s language. Perhaps it is so. For because authority in Israel belonged to those who were anointed — the king and the High Priest — they used the term [“anointing”] metaphorically for all kinds of authority. Similarly, when it says, thou shalt anoint Hazael to be king over Aram… and Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah shalt thou anoint to be prophet in thy stead, (I Kings 19:15-16.) [the term “anoint” is used metaphorically — “appoint” or “designate”]. Here, however, the correct interpretation of l’moshchah bahem is to anoint with the garments the High Priests above their sons, and to consecrate them to offer the sacrifices. Likewise, unto thee have I given them ‘l’moshchah’ (Numbers 18:8.) means that I have given them [i.e., the priestly gifts] because I have anointed you to minister unto Me. (Above, Verse 1.) Similarly, touch not ‘bimshichai’ (Psalms 105:15.) means that he who touches them touches the anointed ones of G-d [i.e., the kings] who are destined to come from them, as He said, and kings shall come out from thy loins; (Genesis 35:11.) kings of peoples shall be of her. (Ibid., 17:16.) It is even possible that we say that the expression thou shalt anoint Hazael to be king over Aram, (I Kings 19:15-16.) means that he [i.e., Elijah] is to send him oil to be anointed as king, in order to inform him that this was the command of G-d; and Elisha [his disciple] did so in accordance with the charge of his master when he told Hazael that he will rule as king. (II Kings 8:13.) Now even though it is not written there, [he yet actually anointed him as king], and [so did Elijah] anoint Elisha as a prophet [in accordance with G-d’s command to him]. Perhaps they (The prophets who lived in the time of Cyrus.) also did so to Cyrus [king of Persia] whom they anointed like the kings of Israel, in order that he would know that it was a prophet in Israel who prophesied that he would reign, and [generations before his birth] he even called forth his name, for [the glory of] G-d. Therefore [Isaiah] said, to His anointed, to Cyrus, (Isaiah 45:1.) upon which our Rabbis have commented: (Megillah 12a.) “And was Cyrus the anointed one? etc.” (“Rather, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the Messiah: “I complain to you about Cyrus. I said he will build My house and gather My exiles, but he said, Whosoever there is among you of all His people… let him go up.” (Ezra 1:3) — From this text it would appear that the Rabbis understood the verse to mean that Cyrus was really anointed [for otherwise there would have been no place at all for their question], except that he later became impaired in character.) Thus all these verses speak of real anointing. However, the verse stating, The spirit of the Eternal G-d is upon me; because the Eternal ‘mashach’ me to bring good tidings unto the humble, (Isaiah 61:1.) is by way of metaphor, comparing the holy spirit which came to rest upon the prophet with precious oil, similar to that which is said, A good name is better than precious oil. (Ecclesiastes 7:1.)
AND MITZRAIM BEGOT. Scripture mentions the descendants of Mitzraim but does not specify their habitation as it does concerning the others. With the sons of Japheth it mentioned the isles, (Verse 5 here.) with the sons of Cush it mentioned the land of Shinar (Verse 10 here.) and Asshur, (Verse 11.) and with the sons of Canaan it mentioned the boundaries of their land, (Verse 19.) and likewise with the sons of Shem. (Verse 30.) This was because Mitzraim (Egypt), the land of his habitation, was known for it was called by his name, and all his children lived around Egypt, and the names of their countries were also like their names. Thus we find for Pathrusim, (Verse 14.) [one of the children of Mitzraim], the land of Pathrus, which is part of the land of Egypt, as it says, And I will put a fear in the land of Egypt. And I will make Pathros desolate; (Ezekiel 30:13-14.) Into the land of their origin. (Ibid., 29:14. The verse reads: And I turn the captivity of Egypt, and will cause them to return into the land of Pathros, into the land of their origin. This shows that the land of Pathros is near Egypt.) Similarly, Lud and all the Arabians (Ibid., 30:5.) were also around Egypt, and the names of their countries were like their names. So also the land of the Philistines was called Philistia, and so it is written [in Exodus 15:14], the inhabitants of Philistia. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that these [names — Ludim, and Anamim, etc., in Verses 13-14] — are names of countries, and in each and every country there dwelled one family. This is why the names are all in the plural form, [that is, on account of the persons in the family, hence Ludim and not “Lud”]. And the real proof [that these are names of countries is the expression], ‘misham’ (whence) went forth, (Verse 14.) for this word misham alludes to a place. In the opinion of the commentators, (Rashi and Ibn Ezra.) the meaning of the expression, that went forth, is that they begot them, just as in the expression, And kings shall come out of thy loins. (Genesis 35:11.) Now Rashi wrote: “They [the Philistines] were descended from both of them [the Pathrusim and the Casluhim], for the Pathrusim and Casluhim used to live together in promiscuous intercourse, and the Philistines were their offspring. Thus in Bereshith Rabbah.” (37:8.) In my opinion, by way of the plain meaning of Scripture, the Casluhim dwelled in a city of that name — which was part of the land of Caphtor where the Caphtorim their brethren were — and they went forth from there, meaning from the Caphtorim who were of the seed of Casluhim. And they went in order to look for a resting-place for themselves, (Numbers 10:33.) and they left the land to their brethren and conquered for themselves a land by the name of Philistia, after which they came to be called Philistines. This is why Scripture says, The Caphtorim, that came forth out of Caphtor, destroyed them, and dwelt in their stead, (Deuteronomy 2:22.) the Caphtorim being of the sons of Casluhim, dwellers of the land of Caphtor.
AND I WILL MAKE NATIONS OF THEE. The language of Rashi: “Israel and Edom are referred to here, for Ishmael was already born to him, and He could not therefore have been making any announcement concerning him.” But in my opinion it is not correct that He should inform him of Esau at the time of the covenant of circumcision since Esau does not observe circumcision and has not been commanded thereon, as the Sages expounded in Tractate Sanhedrin: (59b.) “For in Isaac shall seed be called to thee, (Further, 21:12.) but not all of Isaac.” (Not all of the children of Isaac, namely Jacob and Esau, but only “in” Isaac, meaning only one, Jacob.) Instead, [the proper interpretation is that] Israel alone is called “nations” and “peoples,” as in the verses: Yea, He loveth the peoples; (Deuteronomy 33:3.) They shall call peoples unto the mountains; (Ibid., Verse 19.) After thee, Benjamin, among the peoples. (Judges 5:14.) Even after the birth of all the tribes, He said: A nation and a company of nations shall be of thee; (Further, 35:11.) And I will make of thee a company of peoples. (Ibid., 48:4.)
יצף, from that location. Compare Ezekiel 3,17 where the word צופה is a noun, “sentinel.” The relative construction between יצף and צופה is parallel to Genesis 1,22 ירב בארץ and פרה ורבה in Genesis 35,11.
אף חבב עמים YEA, HE LOVED THE PEOPLES — Also He loved the tribes with exceeding love. — Each individual tribe may be termed עם (or גוי), “a people”, for, you see, Benjamin alone was yet to be born when the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob, (Genesis 25:11, see Rashi thereon) “A nation and a congregation of nations shall be of you."
אשר נשבעת להם בך TO WHOM THOU SWAREST BY THINE OWN SELF — Thou didst not swear to them by a thing which is perishable — neither by the heavens nor by the earth, nor by the mountains, nor by the hills — but by Thy very Self, Who endurest forever and Whose oath endures for ever. For it is stated that God said to Abraham, (Genesis 22:16, 17) “By Myself have I sworn saith the Lord … [I will greatly multiply thy seed]”; to Isaac it was said, (Genesis 26:3, 4) “and I will perform the oath which I sware by Myself unto Abraham thy father … [and I will multiply thy seed]”; and to Jacob it was said, (Genesis 35:11) “I am God Almighty, be fruitful and multiply”; thus to him also God swore by Himself — by God Almighty (Shemot Rabbah 44:23).
לתת להם את ארץ כנען TO GIVE THEM THE LAND OF CANAAN — Of Abraham it is stated in the chapter that contains the commandment of the Circumcision, (Genesis 17:1, and 17:8) “[The Lord appeared to Abraham and said unto him], I am God Almighty etc., and I will give to thee and to thy seed after thee the land of thy sojourning”. Of Isaac it is stated, (Genesis 26:3) “[The Lord appeared unto him and said], For unto thee and unto thy seed I will give all these countries, and I will establish the oath which I sware unto Abraham, thy father”, and that oath here referred to which I sware to Abraham I uttered by the name of God Almighty. Of Jacob it is stated, (Genesis 35:9, 11, 12) “[And God appeared unto Jacob … and God said unto him], I am God Almighty; be fruitful and multiply, … the land which I gave [Abraham and Isaac to thee I will give it] etc.” So you see that I made certain vows to them and I have not yet fulfilled them.
ונתתיך לקהל עמים AND I WILL MAKE OF THEE AN ASSEMBLY OF PEOPLES — He announced to me that there were yet to issue from me an assembly of peoples (i.e. at least two more tribes). Now, it is true that He then said to me, (Genesis 35:11) “A nation and an assembly of nations [shall be of thee]”, but when He said “a nation” He intended it to refer to Benjamin who was not yet born, and this promise of “a nation” has been fulfilled by the birth of Benjamin, and for that reason I do not mention it now. “An assembly of nations [shall be of thee]”, however, presupposes that two more would descend from me besides Benjamin. Consequently, since no other son besides Benjamin was born to me, He was really telling me that one of my tribes (i.e. the tribe formed by one of my sons) would be divided so as to constitute at least two tribes, thus giving that son more importance, and that privilege I confer upon you (Genesis Rabbah 82:4; Pesikta Rabbati 3).
To whom the word of Adonoy had come, saying, “Yisroel will be your name.” Why is this stated here? Because on the day that the Divine Presence was revealed to Yaakov in Beis Eil and named him Yisroel, on that day He said to him, “A nation and a community of nations will come from you,” (Bereishis 33:20.) i.e., your children are destined to congregate like other nations and build an altar upon which to burn sacrifices during the period of the prohibition [of offering sacrifices on] the high places. Nevertheless, I will consent to it. [Thus is stated] in Bereishis Rabboh. (Bereishis 35:11.)
for a light to nations Every tribe is called a nation by itself, as the matter is stated (Gen. 35:11): “A nation and a congregation of nations.”
[23] So then He is shown to be the Lord of the foolish in that He holds over them the terrors that are proper to the sovereign. Of those who are on the way to betterment He is called in scripture God, as in this present passage, “I am thy God,” or “I am thy God, increase and multiply” (Gen. 35:11). Of the perfect He is both Lord and God as in the Decalogue “I am thy Lord God” (Ex. 20:2), and elsewhere “The Lord God of your fathers” (Deut. 4:1),
And Rav Yehuda said that Rav said, with regard to the same matter: When the Holy One, Blessed be He, created the world, it continued to expand like two balls of a warp, whose cord lengthens as they unravel, until the Holy One, Blessed be He, rebuked it and made it stand still, as it is stated: “The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at His rebuke” (Job 26:11). And this is the same as that which Reish Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “I am the Almighty God [El Shaddai]” (Genesis 17:1)? It means: I am He Who said to the world “enough [dai],” instructing it to stop expanding. Similarly, Reish Lakish said: When the Holy One, Blessed be He, created the sea, it continued to expand until the Holy One, Blessed be He, rebuked it and made it dry, as it is stated: “He rebukes the sea and makes it dry, and desiccates all the rivers” (Nahum 1:4).
HALAKHAH: “If the Court ruled and all the public acted,” etc. (The entire Halakhah is shortened from Pesaḥim 7:6. Num. 9:9–14 prescribes that individuals who were impure on Passover have to bring their Passover sacrifice a month later, on the Second Passover celebrated on the 14th of the Second Month. It is concluded that if the entire people are impure, the Second Passover is impossible and everybody celebrates the (First) Passover in impurity in the Temple. The problem then arises which percentage of the people have to be impure so that they represent the entire people; just as here the question is, how many people do have to follow the erroneous ruling of the Court so that “all of Israel were in error” (Lev. 4:13).) Who stated “a majority”? Rebbi Meïr, as it was stated: Either half of the tribes or half of each tribe, if only it be a majority (He holds that everywhere 50%+1 represent “all”; Babli 5b.) . Rebbi Jehudah says, half of each tribe, but only a majority of entire tribes (The language is somewhat self-contradictory. He also requires that a majority of Israel follow the erroneous ruling but in addition he demands that in a majority of tribes a majority follow the ruling. Babli 5b.) . One tribe drags all tribes (If one tribe has more members than all the others together, the action of one tribe triggers the obligation of all of them. He does not hold that the law about erroneous rulings of the High Court became moot with the exile of the Ten Tribes. Even later, when the tribe of Jehudah represented the overwhelming majority of Israel, a majority of the people can be considered a majority of all twelve tribes and the majority of Judeans triggers the obligation for all tribes.) . Rebbi Meïr says, all tribes are called “the public” (The purification sacrifice for an erroneous ruling by the Court has to be brought by “the public” (Lev. 4:14). The difference of opinions in the Mishnah is traced to different interpretations of this notion. R. Meïr holds that only the entire people of Israel qualify as “public”; RR. Jehudah and Simeon consider each tribe as a separate public. (Babli 5b, Pesahim80a, Menahot 15a).) . Rebbi Jehudah says, each single tribe is called “public”. And Rebbi Simeon follows Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah said, each single tribe is called “public”, so Rebbi Simeon says, each single tribe is called “public”. What is between them? Dragging. Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes (If one tribe has more members than all the others together, the action of one tribe triggers the obligation of all of them. He does not hold that the law about erroneous rulings of the High Court became moot with the exile of the Ten Tribes. Even later, when the tribe of Jehudah represented the overwhelming majority of Israel, a majority of the people can be considered a majority of all twelve tribes and the majority of Judeans triggers the obligation for all tribes.) . Rebbi Simeon says, one tribe does not drag all tribes (Therefore he requires a separate sacrifice for the people of Israel in their entirety.) . [Even though Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes,] (Missing in the ms., from B and the Pesaḥim text; required by the context.) he agrees that only if the ruling came from the ashlar hall (Even though each tribe has to bring its own sacrifice, the ruling of a tribal High Court cannot trigger an obligation of any other tribe; only the Court sitting at the central sanctuary has this power.) . Rebbi Yose said, the reason of that Tanna: From this place which the Eternal will choose (Deut. 17:10.) . Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Bejamin ben Levi: The verse supports him who said that each tribe is called “public”, as it is written (Gen. 35:11, said to Jacob after the birth of 11 sons. Babli 5b.) : A people and a public of peoples will come from you, and Benjamin was not yet born. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, just as they differ here, so they differ about impurity (The entire Halakhah is shortened from Pesaḥim 7:6. Num. 9:9–14 prescribes that individuals who were impure on Passover have to bring their Passover sacrifice a month later, on the Second Passover celebrated on the 14th of the Second Month. It is concluded that if the entire people are impure, the Second Passover is impossible and everybody celebrates the (First) Passover in impurity in the Temple. The problem then arises which percentage of the people have to be impure so that they represent the entire people; just as here the question is, how many people do have to follow the erroneous ruling of the Court so that “all of Israel were in error” (Lev. 4:13).) , as we have stated: If the public was half pure and half impure; pure [people] celebrate the first [Passover] and impure the second. Rebbi Jehudah said, the pure ones celebrate for themselves, and the impure ones celebrate for themselves (Both offer their sacrifices in the Temple, in separate groups. For this to happen, the number of pure people in Jerusalem on the 14th of Nisan must be exactly equal to the number of impure ones.) . They told him, there is no split Passover; either all celebrate in impurity or all celebrate in purity. Who is “they told him”? Following Rebbi Jehudah? As it was stated (Mishnah Menahot 2:2.) : “If one of the loaves or one of the (leftovers) [orders] (The text in parentheses is from the ms.; the text in brackets is from B, the text in Pesahim, and all sources of the Mishnah; it is the only one which makes sense. The Mishnah speaks of the two public cereal offerings which have to be baked, viz., the weekly show-bread and the two leavened loaves presented at Pentecost. The 12 show-breads were presented in two rows, here called “orders” (Lev.24:6).) became impure, Rebbi Jehudah said, both have to be brought to be burned (Outside the Temple precinct.) for a public offering cannot be split. But the Sages say, the impure in its impurity, and the pure shall be eaten. (By the officiating priests.) ” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, who is “they told him”? The Sages (Since the opinions of R. Jehudah and his opponents in Pesaḥim are the opinions of his opponents and R. Jehudah in Menahot, both seem to contradict themselves. One has to conclude that they agree in principle and they only differ about the practical applications of their theory. In this sense, B reads: The Sages acting in the sense of R. Jehudah.) who argue like Rebbi Jehudah.
HALAKHAH: Who is the Tanna of “majority” (Discussion of the statement in the Mishnah, that Pesaḥ is celebrated in impurity if most (50%+1) of the people are impure. The following is an extended version of Halakhah 1:6 in Horaiot, where the problem is what is called “community”.) ? Rebbi Meïr (He holds that everywhere 50%+1 represent “all”; Babli Horaiot 5b.) , as it was stated: Either half of the tribes or half of each tribe, if only it be a majority (In order to trigger the ceremony required if all the community acts in error(Lev. 4:14), by following an erroneous ruling either of the High Court at the central sanctuary or of a majority of tribal High Courts.) . Rebbi Jehudah says, half of each tribe, but only a majority of entire tribes (The language is somewhat self-contradictory. He also requires that a majority of Israel follow the erroneous ruling but in addition he demands that in a majority of tribes a majority follow the ruling. Babli Horaiot 5b.) . One tribe drags all tribes (If one tribe has more members than all the others together, the action of one tribe triggers the obligation of all of them. He does not hold that the law about erroneous rulings of the High Court became moot with the exile of the Ten Tribes. Even later, when the tribe of Jehudah represented the overwhelming majority of Israel, a majority of the people can be considered a majority of all twelve tribes and the majority of Judeans triggers the obligation for all tribes.) . Rebbi Meïr says, all tribes are called “the public” (The purification sacrifice for an erroneous ruling by the Court has to be brought by “the public” (Lev. 4:14). The difference of opinions in the Mishnah is traced to different interpretations of this notion. R. Meïr holds that only the entire people of Israel qualify as “public”; RR. Jehudah and Simeon consider each tribe as a separate public. (Babli Horaiot 5b, Pesaḥim 80a, Menaḥot15a).) . Rebbi Jehudah says, each single tribe is called “public”. What is between them? Dragging. Rebbi Meïr says, a single tribe does not drag all tribes (Therefore he requires a separate sacrifice for the people of Israel in their entirety.) , but Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes. And Rebbi Jehudah follows Rebbi Simeon. Just as Rebbi Simeon said, one tribe drags all tribes (In Horaiot, the opposite is asserted, that in this particular R. Simeon sides with R. Meïr; this also is required by the later statements in this Halakhah. R. Simeon agrees that each single tribe is called “public”.) , so Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes. Even though Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes, he agrees that only if the ruling came from the ashlar hall (Even though each tribe has to bring its own sacrifice, the ruling of a tribal High Court cannot trigger an obligation of any other tribe; only the Court sitting at the central sanctuary has this power.) . Rebbi Yose said, the reason of that Tanna: From this place which the Eternal will choose (Deut. 17:10.) . What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? The entire community of the Children of Israel will be forgiven (Num. 15:26. R. Jehudah argues that the verse promises forgiveness for all of Israel even if only one tribe followed an erroneous ruling; this proves that “one tribe drags all the other tribes.” R. Simeon disagrees since the last clause in the verse states that the entire people have to be in error; only a majority of the tribes triggers the obligation.) . What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? Since the entire people acted in error (Num. 15:26. R. Jehudah argues that the verse promises forgiveness for all of Israel even if only one tribe followed an erroneous ruling; this proves that “one tribe drags all the other tribes.” R. Simeon disagrees since the last clause in the verse states that the entire people have to be in error; only a majority of the tribes triggers the obligation.) . How does Rebbi Simeon uphold Rebbi Jehudah’s reason, the entire community of the Children of Israel will be forgiven? Except women and children (Not that they will not be forgiven but they are not counted in determining what is a majority.) . How does Rebbi Jehudah uphold Rebbi Simeon’s reason, since the entire people acted in error? Except if the beginning was criminal and the conclusion in error. Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Benjamin bar Levi: The verse supports him who said that each tribe is called “public”, as it is written (Gen. 35:11, said to Jacob after the birth of 11 sons. Babli Horaiot 5b.) : A people and a public of peoples will come from you, and Benjamin was not yet born. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, just as they differ here, so they differ about impurity, as it was stated: If the public was half pure and half impure; pure [people] celebrate the first [Pesaḥ] and impure the second, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, the pure ones celebrate for themselves, and the impure ones celebrate for themselves (Both offer their sacrifices in the Temple, in separate groups. For this to happen, the number of pure people in Jerusalem on the 14th of Nisan must be exactly equal to the number of impure ones. Tosephta 6:2 in the name of R. Simeon. This latter attribution seems to be correct since in the paragraph after the next the Amoraim explain that R. Jehudah never considers this case but requires that the number of pure people present be diminished.) . They told him, there is no split Passover; either all celebrate in purity or all celebrate in impurity. Who is “they told him”? Rebbi Meïr. The argument of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted, as we have stated there (Mishnah Menaḥot2:2. The Mishnah refers to the two public cereal offerings which have to be baked, viz., the weekly show-bread and the two leavened loaves presented at Pentecost. The 12 show-breads were presented in two rows, here called “orders” (Lev. 24:6).) : “If one of the loaves or one of the orders became impure, Rebbi Jehudah said, both have to be brought to be burned (Outside the Temple precinct.) for a public offering cannot be split (Cf. Babli 79a.) . But the Sages say, the impure in its impurity, and the pure shall be eaten (By the officiating priests.) .” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: who is “they told him”? The Sages who argue like Rebbi Meïr (In Horaiot: R. Jehudah. In any case, the question should not arise since the objecting Sages, while adopting the point of view of one of the protagonists, are not bound to follow him in all details.) .
HALAKHAH: (Babli 30b.) One understands the Day of Atonement which is atonement for all of Israel. (Babli 30b,31a; Bava batra 121a.) Why on the Fifteenth of Av? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yasa: For this is the good time to cut wood, because any wood cut on this day does not develop worms; as we have stated there, “any wood containing a worm is disqualified from the altar. (Mishnah Middot 2:5. In the Babli the reason is given that this is the last day on which wood for the altar may be cut before the rainy season.) ” Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav, because on it Hoshea ben Ela abolished the guards which Jeroboam ben Nabath posted on the roads (To prohibit pilgrimages to Jerusalem.) . Cahana asked [Rav]. He did all this good deed and it is written about him (2K. 17:3.) , against him came Salmanessar the king of Assyria? He answered him, because he removed the collar from his neck and hung it on the community’s neck. He did not say, all the people should go on pilgrimage, but, any one who wants to go may go. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac, but some say in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: On it the tribes were permitted to intermarry. As it is written (Num. 36:7.) , family heritage should not be transferred from tribe to tribe; but the Children of Israel shall stick everyone to the family heritage of his forefathers, etc. And it is written (Num. 36:8.) , any daughter inheriting family heritage in the tribes of the Children of Israel, etc. How is it possible for a daughter to inherit from two tribes? Explain it if her father was from one tribe and her mother from another tribe (According to the Babli, a later generation read Num. 36 to apply only to the daughters of Salpaad and their contemporaries.) . But the Rabbis say, on it the tribe of Benjamin was permitted to intermarry, as it is written (Jud. 21:18.) , cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin. They read a verse and included him; they read a verse and excluded him. They read a verse and included him (Gen. 48:5.) , Ephraim and Manasse shall be to me like Reuben and Simeon. They read a verse and excluded him, a people and community of peoples shall be from you and kings will come from your loins (Gen. 35:11. In the explanations, the terms “included” and “excluded” have to be switched. The text follows the usual pattern, that if possibilities A and B are raised, B is explained before A. Since the number 12 of tribe cannot be changed, either Joseph is counted as one tribe and Benjamin is included (35:11), or Ephraim and Manasse are counted as full tribes, there seems to be no place for Benjamin. This logic is not followed by the Babli.) , and Benjamin was not yet born. (Thr. rabba, Introduction (33).) Rebbi Abun said, digging stopped on it, as Rebbi Levi said, on every eve of the Ninth of Av, Moses had a declaration published in all the encampment and said, go out for digging, go out for digging. They went out, dug graves for themselves, and slept. In the morning they were getting up and found themselves missing 15’000 and detail (If always the same number died on the Ninth of Av and nobody during the year, the number would be 600’000:38 = 15’789.47.) . In the last year they did that, got up, and found themselves whole. They said, maybe we erred in the computation. The same on the Tenth, the Eleventh, the Twelfth, the Thirteenth, and the Fifteenth. Since the moon was full they said, it seems that The Holy One, praise to Him, vacated this hard judgment against us. They got up and made a holiday.
The Gemara raises a difficulty. On the contrary, the plural term: “And conquer it [vekhivshuha],” indicates that the two of them are included. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is written in the Torah without the letter vav, so that it can be read: And conquer it [vekhivsha], in the singular. Rav Yosef said: The proof is from here: “And God said to him: I am God Almighty, be fruitful and multiply [perei urvei]” (Genesis 35:11), which is in singular, and it does not state: Be fruitful and multiply [peru urvu] in the plural.
When Abram was ninety-nine years old, יהוה appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am El Shaddai. (El Shaddai Traditionally rendered “God Almighty.”) Walk in My ways and be blameless.
God parted from him at the spot where [God] had spoken to him;
Elohim said to him, I am Almighty Shaddai. Be fruitful and increase, a nation and a community of nations [an assembly of tribes] will come from you, and kings [who rule over nations] will come out of your loins [descend from you].
And the Lord said to him, I am El Shadai: spread forth and multiply; a holy people, and a congregation of prophets and priests, shall be from thy sons whom thou hast begotten, and two kings shall yet from thee go forth.
| וְאֶת־הָאָ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר נָתַ֛תִּי לְאַבְרָהָ֥ם וּלְיִצְחָ֖ק לְךָ֣ אֶתְּנֶ֑נָּה וּֽלְזַרְעֲךָ֥ אַחֲרֶ֖יךָ אֶתֵּ֥ן אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ | 12 P | The land that I assigned to Abraham and Isaac I assign to you; And to your offspring to come Will I assign the land.” |
לאברהם וליצחק, to Abraham and Isaac. Check on what we have written on Genesis 26,3 that the promise G'd made to Isaac concerning inheriting the land of Israel contained an additional dimension to the promise made to Abraham. G'd promised this additional dimension also to Jacob.
אתן את הארץ. "I shall give the land." Why did the Torah have to mention the word "the land" once more instead of simply saying "it," as the Torah did at the beginning of this verse? Perhaps the Torah wanted to tell us that G'd would give this land to Jacob in order that he personally should possess it, not merely his descendants. Had the Torah merely written לך אתננה ולזרעך, we would have understood that Jacob could only make the claim to the land over to his children as an inheritance. This is why the Torah speaks of two separate gifts here, one to him and one to his descendants. This had not been the case when G'd promised the land to either Abraham or Isaac.
אתן את הארץ, “I will give the land.” The promise is repeated twice in the same verse. The Torah does not indulge in such repetitions unless there is a compelling reason. If we adopt a kabbalistic approach the word הארץ at the beginning of the verse is a reference to an attribute of G’d, i.e. the attribute with which all three patriarchs were blessed when the Torah categorised these blessings with the words בכל, מכל, כל, respectively. The meaning then would be “that which I have already granted to Avraham and Yitzchak I will grant to you also, i.e. I will give this land to you (in your own right). It would be similar to Kings I 5,26 “and G’d had granted wisdom to Solomon.” [Seeing that verse commences with an unaccounted for letter ו, our author understands the whole word as a reference to the gift of authority, מלכות (in this instance control of the land of Israel) which G’d had bestowed on David’s son Solomon.] The meaning of the repetition of the word ארץ is that Yaakov’s descendants too would receive the gift of that land in their own right at the appropriate time. We also find a repetition in verse 13 where the Torah writes ויעל מעליו אלוקים במקום אשר דבר אתו, “G’d ascended from upon him in the place where He had spoken with him.” This “place” had already been mentioned earlier (verse 9). It is therefore likely that the word refers to an attribute of G’d such as we find in ברוך ה’ ממקומו, (Ezekiel 3,12) or ברוך המקום (Haggadah shel Pessach). Seeing that our sages have said that the patriarchs are the true carriers of the Shechinah, the Torah has to repeat itself on occasion in order for us to know when it refers to them in such a capacity and when not.
ואת...לך אתננה, as of now.
ולזרעך אחריך אתן את הארץ, for they will inherit it and settle it.
AND THE LAND WHICH I GAVE UNTO ABRAHAM AND ISAAC, TO THEE I WILL GIVE IT. “As I have given it to them so will I give it to you.” This alludes to an oath, for the land was given to them with an oath so that sin should not cause annulment of the gift, but to Jacob it was originally given without an oath. It is this which Scripture refers to when it says in all places, the land of which I swore unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. (Exodus 33:1. and elsewhere. But nowhere do we find that G-d swore to Jacob, except as implied in this verse.) It may that the repetition of the prophecy, [mentioned above, 28:13, and repeated here], constitutes an oath, as I have already explained. (Above, 26:3.)
ולזרעך אחריך אתן את הארץ, in due course, at the end of time, I will give your descendants the entire globe, not only the land of Israel. This was the real meaning of 28,14 “you will spread out to the west to the east and to the north and to the south.” This is also what Bileam prophesied when he said in Numbers 24,17 that Yaakov would uproot all the descendants of Seth, i.e. all of mankind.
And the land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac, I will give it to you, and to your descendants after you I will give the land.
ואת הארץ אשר נתתי לאברהם וליצחק לך אתננה, “and the land which I have given to Avraham and Yitzchok I will give it to you.” Although the land had already been given to him, it had not been given to him in the form of an oath, i. e. as an irrevocable gift.
Upon Yaakov’s return from Ḥaran, God said to him: I am El Shaddai. Be fruitful and multiply. A nation, yea an assembly of nations, shall descend from you. Kings shall issue from your loins. The land that I assigned to Avraham and Yitzḥak I assign to you; and to your offspring to come will I assign the land. (ibid., 35:11-12)
AND I WILL FULFILL THE OATH WHICH I SWORE UNTO ABRAHAM THY FATHER. There is no need for the Holy One, blessed be He, to assure Isaac that He will not violate the oath which He swore to his father, for He is not a man, that He should repent. (I Samuel 15:29.) Abraham had no other seed upon whom a covenant had been established with G-d except Isaac. The oath, moreover, was not given on condition. In the case of Jacob, (Further, 35:12. And [[illegible]] land which I gave to Abraham and Isaac, to thee will I give it.) it was necessary that he be given such assurance on account of his brother Esau. He was thus saying that in him [Jacob] and his seed will the covenant be fulfilled, not in Esau. [But in the case of Isaac, why was it necessary that he be given such a promise?] It would appear then that this expression, Vehakimothi eth hashevuah, is itself an oath. (It is thus to be translated, And I will ‘establish’ the oath. This is now found in most English translations.) It is for this reason that the Torah always says, The land which I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob; (Deuteronomy 34:4.) Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Thy servants, to whom Thou didst swear by Thine own self. (Exodus 32:13.) For we find no source for an oath having been given to Isaac except this verse. Now it was the desire of the Holy One, blessed be He, to swear to each one of the patriarchs to let it be known that each one was worthy of the covenant being made with him alone, and that the merit of each one stands before Him together with their seed. Even though the previous one suffices, it is an additional merit and honor to them. (That is, their descendants.) It is for this reason He said, Then will I remember My covenant with Jacob, and also My covenant with Isaac, and also My covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land, (Leviticus 26:42.) since all of them had the distinction of G-d having made a covenant with them. It is possible that He promised something additional to Isaac through this oath, namely, that He will fulfill in him himself, the oath He had sworn to Abraham his father, i.e., that he [Isaac] will be a blessing among the nations, even as He said to Abraham his father, And all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves with thy seed. (Above, 22:18.) The explanation of the verse before us will thus be: “And I will fulfill in thee the oath which I swore unto Abraham thy father since you will be a blessing among the nations.” Similarly, He also says in the case of Jacob, And in thee and in thy seed shall all of the families of the earth be blessed. (Further, 28:14.)
Took Ish Boshes. He extrapolated from a verse that two kings were destined to come from Binyomin. Because the Holy One, blessed is He told Yakov, "Kings will come forth from you," and [by this time] all of his children had been born except for Binyomin. (“Will come forth from you” implies that they were to come from someone yet unborn, and this could only be Binyomin. Avner understood this to mean that two kings will be descendant from Binyomin, Shaul and Ish Boshes (Rashi and Sifsei Chachomin, Breshis 35,11).)
The land that I gave to Avraham and Yitzchok, I will give to you; and to your offspring after you I will give the land.
And the land which I gave to Abraham and to Izhak will I give unto thee, and to thy son, after thee will I give the land.
| וַיַּ֥עַל מֵעָלָ֖יו אֱלֹהִ֑ים בַּמָּק֖וֹם אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֥ר אִתּֽוֹ׃ | 13 P | God parted from him at the spot where [God] had spoken to him; |
Genesis 35,13. “G’d rose from over him from the site at which He had spoken with him.” Rashi comments that he does not know what the words “from the site He had spoken with him” are to teach us. [We would have known that G’d rose from that site without these words. Ed.] It would appear that we can gain an insight from the words of Bereshit Rabbah 47,6 on Genesis 17,22 when a similar term is used for G’d returning to the celestial spheres after speaking with Avraham. The Midrash there understands the word ויעל , as a hint that the patriarchs were the carriers, support of the Divine chariot, Avraham having been the first one. If so, our verse would indicate that Yaakov had by now also qualified to be another such support of G’d’s chariot. Our sages stated that in order to function as such “supports,” the patriarchs had to be on holy soil, in the Land of Israel. When G’d had told Yaakov to return to the land of his fathers, He had implied that once he did so, he too would qualify as one of the supports of the מרכבה, “the Divine chariot.” (Compare Rashi on 31,3)
“And E-lohim ascended from him in the place where He spoke with him.” (Bereshit, 35:13) For God showed Yaakov that he needed to undergo further birrurim (clarifications), (That is, birrurs that he would undergo with the sale of Yosef. Tashlum.) and this is, “and God ascended from him,” as if he still needed to hold on to Him. “In the place where He spoke with him” means concerning the same financial matters with which the Torah was now dealing, for they were not yet complete. The same intention concerns what was said of Avraham (Bereshit, 17:22), “and E-lohim ascended from upon Avraham,” after the section discussing brit milah, for here too he needed to undergo further birurim with the trial of the binding of Yitzchak. There, however, it does not say “in the place where He spoke with him,” for the needed birurum and the immediate subject were not the same.
ויעל מעליו, just as we have been told in 17,22 when G’d departed from Avraham. The manifestation of His Presence revealed to the patriarchs in a vision came to an end. Yaakov had a visual impression of G’d as He was withdrawing His presence from him. In Bereshit Rabbah 82,6 Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish points out the appropriate nature of this expression for G’d “rising, as it confirms that the patriarchs were the “carriers” of G’d’s Presence on earth (merkavah).
במקום אשר דבר אתו, to inform us that the site in question was especially suitable for receiving prophetic insights. G’d spoke to Yaakov at this site already for a second time, as pointed out to him by the angel. He would speak to prophets at that location also in the future as we know from Hoseah 12,5. The site under discussion here is the one where Yaakov at the time when he had the dream with the ladder had anointed the stone which had served as his pillow. The words ויעל מעליו, are a hint that the day would come-after the sin of the golden calf- when the Presence of G’d will withdraw from the Jewish people.
AND G-D WENT UP FROM HIM. I.e., just as it said with respect to Abraham, And G-d went up from Abraham. (17:22.) In both cases, it serves to inform us that this was no mere vision or prophetic dream alone, or something like, And it brought me in the visions of G-d to Jerusalem, (Ezekiel 8:3.) but that the Divine Presence rested upon him in the place where he stood. And by way of the Truth, [that is, the mystic lore of the Cabala], “G-d went up from him,” from the place where He spoke with him, this being similar in purport to that which is said, Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from His place. (Ibid., 3:12.) Scripture is thus stating that which the Sages have mentioned: (See Ramban above, 17:22.) “It is the patriarchs that constitute the Divine Chariot.”
במקום אשר דבר אתו AT THE PLACE WHERE HE SPAKE WITH HIM — I do not know what this is intended to tell us.
במקום אשר דבר אתו. Dem ganzen Zusammenhange nach war die Stelle, an welcher sich hier Gott Jakob offenbarte, nicht dieselbe, die er bereits früher Bethel genannt hatte. Wenn gleichwohl wir V. 15 hören, daß Jakob auch diese Bethel nannte, so dürfte diesem die bedeutsame Absicht zu Grunde liegen, die Gegenwart Gottes nicht an eine besondere Stelle zu knüpfen. Überall, wo ein der Offenbarungsnähe Gottes würdiger Mensch weilt, da wird die Stelle zu einer Offenbarungsstätte Gottes geweiht, da entsteht ein "Bethel". Und dies dürfte vielleicht auch in dem Beisatz במקום אשר דבר אתו noch besonders hervorgehoben sein. "Gott enthob sich von ihm an der Stätte, wo Er mit ihm gesprochen hatte". Er, und nicht der Ort, war Basis und Bedingung der dort sichtbar gewordenen besonderen Gottesgegenwart. האבות הן הן מרכבה, wie das erläuternde Wort der Weisen zur Stelle lautet.
במקום אשר אתו, when he was on his way to Charan (34 years earlier) at that same inn. There G’d appeared to him (verse 9) and there G’d’s Presence departed from him. This is why he erected a monument at that very site.
I do not know what this teaches us. [Note: Rashi’s comment relates to v. 13.] Bereishis Rabboh derives from this verse that the Patriarchs are the מרכבה (seat and vehicle of Hashem’s Presence). And Rashi holds of this exposition, as he cited it on 17:22. Nevertheless, Rashi still holds that “At the place where He had spoken to him” is superfluous. For regarding Avraham it is written (17:22), “Elohim ascended from Avraham.” [And it teaches that the Patriarchs are the מרכבה,] even though it does not conclude, “At the place where He had spoken to him.”
God ascended from upon him in the place that He spoke with him.
ויעל מעליו האלוקים, “G’d rose from above him.” This verse teaches that this encounter with G’d did not take place at night, in a dream, but that the Divine Presence had manifested itself to Yisrael in a location where he was standing on his feet.
More numerous, however, are the instances of the first case, viz., in which these verbs are used in connection with the revelation of the word and of the glory of God, e.g., “And I will come down and talk with thee there” (Num. 11:17); “And the Lord came down upon Mount Sinai (Exod. 19:20); “The Lord will come down in the sight of all the people (Exod. 19:11); “And God went up from him” (Gen. 35:13); “And God went up from Abraham” (Gen. 17:22).
It therefore is necessary for a person to prepare himself for prayer and properly direct his thoughts, in a manner that his prayer will not be obstructed and his request will not return emptyhanded. About this our sages, of blessed memory stated, (Talmud Bavli, Berachot 30b) “A person should always take stock of himself. If he is able to focus his heart, he should pray, but if not, he should not pray,” meaning, if in his prayer he is able to focus on HaShem’s-יהו"ה title that pertains to his prayer, he should pray, but if not, he should not pray.
However, the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה (Shechinah-שכינה) was not drawn down to the earth as a permanent dwelling, but only as a temporary dwelling, and it thus hovered above them. This is the meaning of the verse, (Genesis 17:22) “God-Elohi”m-אלהי״ם ascended from upon Avraham,” meaning, “from upon Avraham” in the most literal sense. Similarly, about Yaakov the verse states, (Genesis 35:13) “Then God-Elohi”m-אלהי״ם ascended from upon him.” About this, our sages, of blessed memory, stated, (Midrash Bereishit Rabba 47:6) “Our forefathers were the Divine Chariot (Merkavah).” However, from this we find that, in their times, the Shechinah-שכינה hovered in the air and did not finding a resting place for the soles of her feet in the earth, as it was at the beginning of creation.
“He concluded speaking with him, and God ascended from upon Abraham” (Genesis 17:22). It is taught: One who departs from another person, whether of greater or lesser stature, must take his leave from him. From whom do you derive this? From Abraham. On one occasion, (Genesis 18:1–3.) Abraham was speaking with the Holy One blessed be He, when the ministering angels came to speak with him. He said to them: ‘Let me first take my leave from the Divine Presence, which is of greater stature than you, then I will speak with you.’ When he finished saying to the Holy One blessed be He all that he needed [to say], he said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, I must speak [with the angels].’ He said: ‘You may leave in peace.’ (From this incident we learn that one must take his leave when departing from someone of greater stature.) That is what is written: “[He concluded speaking with him,] and God ascended from upon Abraham.” (The Midrash interprets this to mean that God bade farewell to Abraham before leaving him. From this we learn that one should take his leave even from someone of lesser stature.) Reish Lakish said: The patriarchs are themselves the divine chariot, (God’s presence rests directly upon them, as one rides upon a chariot.) as it is stated: “God ascended from upon Abraham,” “God ascended from upon him,” (Genesis 35:13) “And behold, the Lord stood upon him” (Genesis 28:13). (God is described as being “upon” the Patriarchs.)
“God ascended from upon him, in the place where He had spoken with him” (Genesis 35:13). “God ascended from upon him” – Reish Lakish said: The patriarchs are the Divine Chariot, as it is stated: “God ascended from upon Abraham” (Genesis 17:22); “God ascended from upon him”; “the Lord stood over him” (Genesis 28:13). (These verses, stated regarding Abraham and Jacob, demonstrate that the Divine Presence rested upon the patriarchs. ) “Jacob established a monument in the place where He spoke with him, a monument of stone. He poured a libation upon it, and poured oil upon it” (Genesis 35:14). “Jacob established a monument…. He poured a libation upon it” – he poured oil on it from the full mouth of a cruse. (He did not sprinkle a little oil, but rather, poured a large stream of oil.)
Such a man is himself considered as a tabernacle, a temple and an altar. This is as our sages said (Gen. Rabba 62:6): "'and G-d went up from him' (Gen.35:13) - the forefathers are the divine chariot". Likewise, they said: "the righteous are the divine chariot".
“And He left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.” (41. V. 22.) These words are similar to “The Lord went His way as soon as He had left off speaking with Abraham,” (42. Gen. 18:33.) as well as “and God went up from him,” (43. Gen. 35:13.) said of Jacob. Undoubtedly it is always like this, but it is not always necessary that it be so written. In any case the meaning is clearly that it is God who removes Himself from the person. Maimonides explained the equivocal nature of ‘alah (“ascend”) and halakh (“went”) to allude to this. (44. Guide I:10 says: “‘Alah is the opposite of prophetic inspiration and its ennobling.”) All of this is by way of “the Torah speaks in the language of men,” (45. BT Bava’ Meṣi‘a’ 31b. This doctrine is discussed in Chapter 2.) for kings depart from servants at will, not the other way around, for a servant lacks sufficient power to hold a king back. If a servant does have any power in such matters, it is only as when Jacob said, “Let me go.” (46. In Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 90) this verse is explained as being necessary to indicate that the vision ended at this point, so that the circumcision that followed was not merely in a vision, but was carried out while fully awake. This is consistent with his comments below in chap. XIII, pp. 216–217.) These matters are all very profound, to be understood by those who know the true nature of prophecy as explained by Maimonides in the Guide II:36, as well as (the true nature of) the rational, speculative faculty.
In your letter you have adverted to the computations of the date of the Redemption and R. Saadia's opinion on the subject. First of all, it devolves upon you to know that no human being will ever be able to determine it precisely as Daniel has already intimated, "For the words are shut up and sealed." (Daniel 12:9). Indeed many hypotheses were advanced by scholars, who fancied that they have discovered the date, as was anticipated in Scripture, "Many will run to and fro, and opinions shall be increased." (Daniel 12:9). That is, there shall be numerous views concerning it. Furthermore we have a Divine communication through the medium of the prophets that many persons will calculate the time of the advent of the Messiah but will fail to ascertain its true date. We are cautioned against giving way to doubt and distrust because of these miscalculations. The longer the delay, the more fervently shall you hope, as it is written, "And it declareth of the end and doth not lie, though it tarry, wait for it, because it will surely come, it will not delay." (Habakkuk 2:3). Remember that even the date of the termination of the Egyptian Exile was not precisely known and gave rise to differences of opinion, although its duration was fixed in Scripture, where we read, "and they shall serve them and afflict them four hundred years" (Genesis 15:13). Some reckoned the period of four hundred years from the time of Jacob's arrival in Egypt, others dated it from the beginning of Israel's bondage, which happened seventy years later, while still others computed it from the time of the Covenant of the Pieces when this matter was Divinely predicted to Abraham. At the expiration of four hundred years after this event, and thirty years before the appearance of Moses, a band of Israelites left Egypt because they believed that exile had ended for them. They were subdued and slain by the Egyptians. The lot of the Israelites who remained was consequently aggravated as we learn from our sages, the teachers of our national traditions. David already alluded to the vanquished Israelites who miscalculated the date of the redemption in the verse, "The children of Ephraim were as archers handling the bow that turned back in the day of battle" (Psalms 78:9). In truth, the period of four hundred years commences with the birth of Isaac the seed of Abraham, par excellence, as may be gathered from the verse, "For in Isaac shall seed be called to thee" (Genesis 21:12), and the verse, "Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, they shall serve them, and afflict them four hundred years" (Genesis 15:13). In exile, they would rule, enslave and maltreat them, this is the implication of this text. The four hundred years mentioned in this verse refer to the duration of the exile, and not [solely] to the Egyptian bondage. This fact was misunderstood until the great prophet (Moses) came, when it was realized that the four hundred years mentioned in this verse refer to the duration of the exile, and not [solely] to the Egyptian bondage. This fact was misunderstood until the great prophet (Moses) came, when it was realized that the four hundred years dates back precisely to the birth of Isaac. Now, if so much uncertainty prevailed in regard to the date of the emancipation from Egyptian bondage, the term of which was fixed, how much more would it be the case in respect to the date of the final redemption, the prolonged and protracted duration of which appalled and dismayed our inspired seers, so that one of them was moved to exclaim, "Wilt Thou be angry with us forever? Wilt Thou draw out Thine anger to all generations?" (Psalms 85:6). Isaiah, too, alluding to the long drawn out exile, declared: "And they shall be gathered together as prisoners are gathered in the dungeon, and shall be shut up in prison, and after many days shall they be released" (24:22). Inasmuch as Daniel has proclaimed the matter a deep secret, our sages have interdicted the calculation of the time of the future redemption, or the reckoning of the period of the advent of the Messiah, because the masses might be mystified and bewildered should the Messiah fail to appear as forecast. The rabbis invoked God to frustrate and destroy those who seek to determine precisely the advent of the Messiah, because the masses might be mystified and bewildered should the Messiah fail to appear as forecast. The rabbis invoked God to frustrate and destroy those who seek to determine precisely the advent of the Messianic era, because they are a stumbling block to the people, and that is why they uttered the imprecation "May the calculators of the final redemption come to grief" (Sanhedrin 97b). As for R. Saadia's Messianic calculations, there are extenuating circumstances for them though he knew they were disallowed. For the Jews of his time were perplexed and misguided. The Divine religion might well nigh have disappeared had he not encouraged the pusillanimous, and diffused, disseminated and propagated by word of mouth and pen a knowledge of its underlying principles. He believed, in all earnestness, that by means of the Messianic calculations, he would inspire the masses with hope for the truth. Verily all his deeds were for the sake of heaven. Consequently, in view of the probity of his motives, which we have disclosed, one must not decry him for his Messianic computations. I note that you are inclined to believe in astrology10 and in the influence of the past and future conjunctions of the planets upon human affairs. You should dismiss such notions from your thoughts. Cleanse your mind as one cleanses dirty clothes.11 Accomplished scholars whether they are religious or not, refuse to believe in the truth of this science. Its postulates can be refuted by real proofs on national grounds. But this is not the place to enter into a discussion of them. Mark well, however, what Scripture has to say about the astrologers. At the time when Moses rose to leadership the astrologers had unanimously predicted that our nation would never be freed from bondage, nor gain their independence, but fortune smiled upon Israel, for the most exquisite of human beings appeared and redeemed them at the very time which was supposedly most inauspicious for them. Furthermore, Egypt was smitten with the plagues at the very time for which the astrologers foretold an epoch of wholesome climate, abundance, and prosperity for its inhabitants. To the failure of their vaticination, Isaiah alludes when he says "Where are they then thy wise men? and let them tell thee now, and let them know what the Lord of Hosts hath purposed concerning Egypt. (Isa. 19:12). Similarly the pundits, astrologers, and prognosticators were all of one mind that the administration of Nebuchadnezzar, the wicked, marked the beginning of an era of enduring prosperity. Forsooth, his dynasty was extinguished and destroyed, as was divinely forecast by Isaiah. He derided them for pretending to fore-knowledge, and held up to scorn the state which fancied itself in possession of sapient folk versed in futurity, as we read "Let now the astrologers, the star-gazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up and save thee" (47:13). They are likewise wrong in their predictions concerning the era of the Messiah, may he speedily come. For while the Gentiles believe that our nation will never constitute an independent state, nor will they even rise above their present condition, and all the astrologers, diviners, and augurs concur in this opinion, God will prove false their views and beliefs, and will order the advent of the Messiah. Again it is Isaiah who makes reference to this event in the verse: "That frustrate the tokens of the impostors, and maketh the diviners mad, that turneth wise men backward, and maketh their knowledge foolish, that confirmeth the word of his servant, and performeth the counsel of his messengers, that saith of Jerusalem, "She shall be inhabited, and of the cities of Judah, They shall be built, and I will raise up the waste places thereof." (44:25-26). This is the correct view that every Israelite should hold, without paying any attention to the conjunctions of the stars, of greater or smaller magnitude. I have observed your statement, that science is little cultivated, and that learning does not flourish, in your country, which you attribute to the influence of the conjunctions in the earthly trigon.12 Remember that this low state of learning and science is not peculiar too your country, but is widely prevalent in Israel today. Indeed, a Divine premonition of such a state of affairs is contained in a verse in Isaiah which reads, "Therefore, behold, I will again do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work, and a wonder, and the wisdom of the wise men shall perish, and the prudence of the prudent men shall be hid." (29:14). This condition is not due to the earthly or fiery trigon, as is proven by the fact that Solomon, King of Israel, lived during the earthly trigon, and yet Scripture testifies that "he was wiser than all men." (I Kings 5:11). So did Abraham of blessed memory, who was designated the Pillar of the World, discover the First Cause of the entire universe, and demonstrated the central importance of the principle of the Unity of God for all mankind. He, Isaac and Jacob, all three of them, carry the throne of glory in their hearts, to make use of a rabbinical metaphor "The patriarchs are the chariots," (Genesis Rabbah 82:7), which in turn was suggested by the verse, "And God rose up over him." (Genesis 35:13). The meaning is that they have attained a true conception of the Deity. Now the three patriarchs lived during the earthly trigon.This matter will become clear if the following facts are borne in mind. There is first, the smaller conjunction, that is, the meeting of Saturn with Jupiter, which occurs once in approximately twenty solar years. These conjunctions continue to take place twelve times within the same trigon, covering a period of two hundred and forty years. Then conjunctions take place in the second trigon, which occur every two hundred and forty solar years. The shift to the next trigon is known as the medium conjunction. According to this calculation an interval of nine hundred and sixty years will elapse between the first and second meeting of two planets in the same point of the Zodiac.13 This is termed the great conjunction, and occurs once in nine hundred and sixty years. This is the time that must elapse between the first and second meeting of Saturn and Jupiter in the same degree of Aries. If you will calculate back, you will understand my statement above that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as well as David lived during the earthly trigon. My purpose in going into details was to dispel any suspicion of yours that the trigon exercises any influence upon human affairs. Furthermore you write that some people have calculated the forthcoming conjunction and have determined that all the seven planets will meet in one of the constellations of the Zodiac. This forecast is untrue, for no meeting of the seven planets will occur in the next conjunction, nor in the following ones. For such an event will not happen even in ten thousand years, as is well known to those who are familiar with the astronomical law of equation. Verily this is the calculation of an ignorant person, as is evinced by other remarks of his, quoted by you, to the effect that there will be a deluge of air and of dust. It is essential for you to know that these and similar assertions are fabricated and mendacious. Do not consider a statement true because you find it in a book, for the prevaricator is as little restrained with his pen as with his tongue. For the untutored and uninstructed are convinced of the veracity of a statement by the mere fact that it is written; nevertheless its accuracy must be demonstrated in another manner. Remember that a blind person submits to an individual having power of sight for intelligent direction knowing that he lacks the vision to guide him safely; and an ailing person, unskilled in the art of medicine, and uninformed as to matters detrimental to or beneficial for his health, defers to a physician for guidance and obeys him implicitly. Just so is it indispensable for the laity to yield unswervingly to the prophets, who were men of true insight, and to confide in them in respect to matters affecting the truth or the error of a given teaching. Next in importance are the sages who have studied day and night the dogmas and doctrines of our faith and have learned to distinguish between the genuine and the spurious. After this exposition you may trust me that the statements you have previously quoted are inaccurate and this applies equally to similar views which you heard expressed in conversation or met with in books. For the author of such sayings is either ignorant, a mountebank, or seeks to destroy the law and to demolish its bulwarks. Do you perceive the brazenness of these people who assert that there will be a deluge of air, and dust, and fire, in order to deceive and delude others to believe that the Deluge in the time of Noah was merely due to a concentration of water, and was not a Divine punishment for the immorality of the time, as is explicitly stated in Scripture that guides us against error and fallacy. Similarly Sodom, and the other cities were not destroyed because of the unbelief and wickedness of their inhabitants in direct contradiction to the Bible which says, "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it which is come to me." (Genesis 18:21). Thus whatever happens in this world through Divine intervention, they say is the inevitable consequence of the planetary conjunctions. They have affirmed the truth of their propositions in order to undermine the principles of our religion, and to give free reign to their animal instincts and passions as do the beasts and the ostriches. We were divinely admonished against those views in Scripture to the following effect: "If you rebel against Me so that I bring disaster upon you as a punishment for your misdeeds, but you ascribe your reverses to chance rather than to your guilt, then shall I increase your afflictions and make them more grievous." This is the intent of the verse in the Chapter of Admonition, If you will walk with me 'bekeri' I shall walk with you in the wrath of 'keri'" (Leviticus 26:21, 24). Now "keri" signifies chance, hazard. Scriptures means to say if you regard My chastisement as a fortuitous event, then shall I bring the most severe calamities upon you "sevenfold for your sins." (Leviticus 26:24). These foregoing remarks have made it abundantly clear that the advent of the Messiah is in no way subject to the influence of the stars. Indeed one of our keen minds in the province of Andalusia, calculated by means of astrology the date of the final redemption and predicted the coming of the Messiah in a particular year. Every one of our distinguished scholars made little of his declaration, discounted what he did and censured him sharply for it. But grim fate dealt with him more sternly than we could have. For at the very time when the Messiah was supposed to arrive, a rebel leader appeared in Maghreb who issued an order of conversion as you are well aware. The event proved to be a great debacle for the partisans of this prognosticator. Indeed the hardships experienced by our people in the diaspora are responsible for these extravagances, for a drowning man catches at a straw. Therefore, my co-religionists, "be strong and let your heart take courage, all you that wait for the Lord." (Psalms 31:25). Strengthen one another, affirm your faith in the Expected One, may he speedily appear in your midst. "Strengthen ye the weak hands and make firm the tottering knees." (Isaiah 35:3). Remember! Isaiah, the herald of Israel's redemption predicted that the prolongation of the adversities of exile will impel many of our people to believe that God has relinquished and abandoned us (far be it from Him), as we read "But Zion said: 'the Lord hath forsaken me, And the Lord hath forgotten me'." (49:14). But he was given the Divine assurance that such is not the case, to quote the following, "Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? Yea, these may forget, yet I will not forget thee." (49:15). In truth, this Divine promise had already been divulged by the First Prophet, who declared: "For the Lord thy God is a merciful God. He will not fail thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he swore unto them." (Deuteronomy 4:31). "Then the Lord thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion on thee, and will return and gather thee from all the peoples whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee." (Deuteronomy 30:3). It is, my co-religionists, one of the fundamental articles of the faith of Israel, that the future redeemer of our people will spring only from the stock of Solomon son of David.14 He will gather our nation, assemble our exiles, redeem us from our degradation, propagate the true religion, and exterminate his opponents as is clearly stated in Scripture "I see him but not now, I behold him but not nigh, there shall step forth a star out of Jacob, and a scepter shall arise out of Israel. And shall smite through the corners of Moab, and break down all the sons of Seth. And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also, even his enemies, shall be a possession, while Israel doeth valiantly." (Numbers 24:17-18). He will be sent by God at a time of great catastrophe and dire misfortune for Israel as was predicted in the verse "There will be none remaining, shut up or left at large" (Deuteronomy 32:36). And when he appears, he will fulfill the promises made in his behalf. A later prophet too was alluding to the Messianic tribulations when he declared "But who can endure the day of his coming" (Malachi 3:2). This is the proper understanding of this article of faith. From the prophecies of Daniel and Isaiah and the statement of our sages it is clear that the advent of the Messiah will take place some time subsequent to the universal expansion of the Roman empire and Arabic rule, which is an actuality today. This fact is true beyond question or doubt. Daniel in the latter part of his vision alludes to the Kingdom of the Arabs, to the rise of Mohammed and then to the arrival of the Messiah. Similarly Isaiah intimated that the coming of the Messiah will occur after the rise of the Madman, in the verse "A man riding on an ass, a man riding on a camel, and two men riding on horses." (21:7). Now "the man riding on an ass" is a symbolical reference to the Messiah as is evident from another verse which describes him as "lowly and riding on an ass" (Zechariah 9:9). He will follow the "man riding on the camel" that is, the Arabic kingdom. The statement "two men riding on horses" refers to both empires, the Roman and the Arabian. A similar interpretation of Daniel's vision concerning the image and the beasts is correct beyond doubt. They are conclusions derived from the plain meaning of the text. The precise date of the messianic advent cannot be known. But I am in possession of an extraordinary tradition which I received from my father, who in turn received it from his father, going back to our early ancestors who were exiled from Jerusalem, and who were mentioned by the prophet in the verse, "And the exiles of Jerusalem that are in Spain" (Obadiah 20). According to this tradition there is a covert indication in the prediction of Balaam to the future restoration of prophecy in Israel. Incidentally it may be stated that there are other verses in the Torah which contain cryptic allusions in addition to their simple meaning. For example, the word "r'du" in the remark of Jacob to his sons, "r'du Shamah," "Get you down thither" (Genesis 42:2), has the numerical value of 210, and contains a hint to the length of Israel's stay in Egypt. Likewise, the statement of Moses our Teacher, "When thou shalt beget children, and children's children and ye shall have been long in the land," (Deuteronomy 4:25), embodies a reference to the duration of Israel's stay in Palestine, from the date of their arrival to the exile in the time of Jehoiakim, which was eight hundred and forty years, corresponding to the numerical value of the word NoSHaNTeM. Similarly, many other verses could be cited. To come back to Balaam's prophecy, the verse "After the lapse of time, one will tell Jacob and Israel what God hath wrought," (Numbers 23:23), contains a veiled allusion to the date of the restoration of prophecy to Israel. The statement means that after the lapse of an interval equal to the time that passed from the Six Days of Creation to Balaam's day, seers will again tell Israel what God hath wrought. Now Balaam uttered his prediction in the thirty-eighth year after the Exodus which corresponds to the year 2485 after the Creation of the World, for the Exodus took place in the beginning of the year 2448. According to the interpretation of this chronology, prophecy would be restored to Israel in the year 4976 after the creation of the world. It is doubtless true that the reappearance of prophecy in Israel is one of the signs betokening the approach of the Messianic era as is intimated in Scripture "And your sons and your daughters shall prophecy ... And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth ... Before the great and terrible day of the Lord come" (Joel 3:1, 3, 4). This is the most genuine tradition concerning the Messianic advent. We were admonished against, and strictly prohibited form blazening it abroad, lest some folk deem it unduly postponed. We have already apprised you concerning it, but God knows best what is true. Your statement that Jeremiah alludes to the advent of the Messiah in the verse "It is a time of trouble unto Jacob" (30:7) is incorrect, for it needs must refer to the war of Gog and Magog which will take place some time after the arrival of the Messiah. Neither the fall of Giron Gate16 nor similar omens portent the oncoming of the Messiah. Some of the supposed prophetic signs are mistakenly ascribed to the sages, while others owe their origin to figures of speech and enigmatic sayings of the rabbis, which should not be taken literally.
And God said to him, “I am El Shaddai. (El Shaddai Cf. 17.1.) Be fertile and increase; A nation, yea an assembly of nations, Shall descend from you. Kings shall issue from your loins.
Jacob gave the site, where God had spoken to him, the name of Bethel.
[The Glory of] Elohim ascended from him at the place where He had spoken to him.
And the Shekinah of the Lord ascended from him in the place where He had spoken with him
| וַיַּצֵּ֨ב יַעֲקֹ֜ב מַצֵּבָ֗ה בַּמָּק֛וֹם אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֥ר אִתּ֖וֹ מַצֶּ֣בֶת אָ֑בֶן וַיַּסֵּ֤ךְ עָלֶ֙יהָ֙ נֶ֔סֶךְ וַיִּצֹ֥ק עָלֶ֖יהָ שָֽׁמֶן׃ | 14 P | and Jacob set up a pillar at the site where [God] had spoken to him, a pillar of stone, and he offered a libation on it and poured oil upon it. |
In addition I have found some more allusions from this story in this chapter: "…Nenatekah eth-moserotheimo, wenashlikhah mimenu `avotheimo/ Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us" — bands are made of hide, the aspect of tefillin. "`Avotheimo" — `avot are cords, aspect of tzitzith, as our Rabbis obm expounded this verse in tractate Avodah Zarah [3b] regarding tzitzith and tefillin. "Yoshev bashamayim yischak/ He Who dwells on High will laugh" — for, the bull and the ram laughed at him. "Az yedaber eleimo ve'apo, uv'charono yevahaleimo/ Then He speaks to them in His wrath; and He panics them with His sore displeasure" — the anger, the panic and the fear mentioned above. "Wa'ani nasakhti malki `al-tziyon har qodshi/ But I have poured/ anointed My king on Tzion, My holy mountain" — perhaps the allusion here is to the effigy that the king erected on the high mountain; zeh le`umath zeh (everything in holiness has its counterpart in evil), and this is counterpart to the king on the holy Mount Tzion, for, all the parts of the world are included there, and so forth, and this is the "mountain" there. "Nasakh" is a term as in "nasakh wayitzok/ pouring and pouring-molding" [the statue] [Gen. 35:14]. "She'al mimeni/ Ask of me" — all the advices mentioned above. "Goyim nachalathekha, wa'achuzathekha afsei-aretz/ Nations as your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for your possession" — to grasp together all ends of the earth, namely all seven parts of the world, and all the kings and nations as inheritance under him. "`Ivdu/ Serve" — is tzitzith, "be'yir'ah/ with awe" — is tefillin, and "wegilu bir`adah/ and rejoice upon the trembling" — the trembling [of the wicked; Rashi there, citing Isa. 33:14].
[AND JACOB SET UP A PILLAR.] This may be a pluperfect meaning Jacob had already set up a pillar. (Cf. Gen. 28:18, 22.) On the other hand, Jacob may now have set up a pillar a second time. I prefer the first interpretation. (I.E. prefers to believe that Jacob used the pillar which he had set up previously in Beth-el.)
AND HE POURED OUT A DRINK-OFFERING THEREON. He poured wine or water on the pillar. Jacob first washed the pillar with wine or water (I.E.’s interpretation of and poured out a drink-offering thereon.) and then poured oil thereon. Here at Beth-el Jacob kept his vow (Cf. Gen. 28:20. This is not explicitly stated in Scripture. I.E. assumes that it must have been so.) and gave a tithe of his wealth in honor of God to a contemporary who was worthy to receive it. (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 28:22.)
ויצב יעקב מצבה במקום אשר דבר אתו אלוקים, "Yaakov erected a monument in the place where G’d had spoken with him." The Torah repeats the words “where G’d had spoken with him,” with which the last verse had ended. The meaning is that G’d had spoken to Yaakov at that place already on a previous occasion at Bet El. At that time Yaakov had erected a monument. When the Torah makes reference to Yaakov erecting a monument at this point, it meant to tell us that this monument had already been erected by Yaakov many years ago; he did not now erect a second monument (compare Genesis 28,18). The difference between the meaning of the terms מזבח and מצבה respectively, is that the word מצבה refers to an altar consisting of a single stone, whereas מזבח is an altar consisting of a number of stones. Both structures serve the purpose of offering sacrifices. The מצבה serves the purpose of offering drink-offerings and the anointing with oil, whereas the מזבח is suitable for any kind of offering acceptable to G‘d. Seeing that G’d had just told Yaakov that he would no longer be called Yaakov but Israel, it is surprising that the Torah describes the person erecting the monument as Yaakov instead of as Israel. The fact that the Torah here refers to Yaakov by his original name is further proof that the name Israel was an additional name and not a substitute for the name Yaakov. We will find from now on that the Torah uses both these names on different occasions.
ויצב, the reason why the Torah repeats once more “in the place where He had spoken to him,” is to tell us that Yaakov had come to realise that that place was singularly suitable for deserving people to receive prophetic insights. Even though Yaakov had already said on the original occasion that this place must be designated as a house of G’d, now that G’d’s promises to him had materialised, seeing that G’d had spoken to him in that very place this was even plainer.
מצבת אבן, a different stone, not the one he had anointed at the time, 34 years ago. He added one more stone to the monument he had erected then.
ויסך עליה נסך, a libation consisting of wine.
ויצוק עליה שמן, also intended as a gift offering.
AND JACOB SET UP A PILLAR. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained it as meaning: “And Jacob had previously (See above, 28:18; also Ramban, ibid., Verse 17.) set up a pillar, and now he poured out a drink-offering thereon, and poured oil thereon.” This is correct.
נסך bestand entweder aus Wein, zum Ausdruck, daß man seine höchste Freude Gott verdanke, oder aus Wasser, zum Ausdruck, daß auch jeder gewöhnliche Moment mit allen seinen Lebensbedingungen unmittelbar Gottes ist. — יצק שמן על dürfte die bleibende Weihe des Steines für die Zukunft bedeuten, wie oben Kap.28, 18. Vergl. ויצק השמן על ראשו Sam. I. 9, 6.
ויסך עליו נסך, he poured a libation of wine on it. Thereby he completed paying his vow in which he had vowed to make out of the stone which had served as his pillow a monument, meaning “a house of G’d.” (28,22). By anointing this monument he had, so to speak, laid the foundation of the house of G’d to be built there in the future. What he did here was similar to what David did in his time when he prepared the foundation for the Temple his son Solomon was to build after his death in accordance with what the angel had told him at the threshing ground of Arona the Jebusite.
Apparently, Jacob did not sacrifice an offering as soon as he reached Beit El, but only after he had stayed there a while. Jacob established a monument in the place that He spoke with him, a monument of stone, and he poured out a libation of wine upon it , 20 and poured oil upon it in commemoration of this further revelation.
ויצב יעקב מצבה, “Yaakov erected a monument.” According to the plain meaning, Yaakov did this now, after the latest manifestation of G’d to him. Ibn Ezra explains that Yaakov had already erected this monument previously, after he had dreamt the dream of the ladder. At that time he did not have oil and wine with him to anoint it as a sacred altar, something that he made up for now. It is not clear whether the word ויסך refers to a libation of wine or of water. He poured the libation over the altar in order to physically cleanse it, followed by anointing it with oil to sanctify it.
And at that time, the moon will be divested of those dark husks, and will be renewed with beautiful clothes. And this is ‘the renewal of the moon’. It is this that is written: (Gen. 38:14) And she removed her widow’s garments from upon her... And it is stated of Her: (Ps. 103:5) ... your youth shall be restored like an eagle.
“God ascended from upon him, in the place where He had spoken with him” (Genesis 35:13). “God ascended from upon him” – Reish Lakish said: The patriarchs are the Divine Chariot, as it is stated: “God ascended from upon Abraham” (Genesis 17:22); “God ascended from upon him”; “the Lord stood over him” (Genesis 28:13). (These verses, stated regarding Abraham and Jacob, demonstrate that the Divine Presence rested upon the patriarchs. ) “Jacob established a monument in the place where He spoke with him, a monument of stone. He poured a libation upon it, and poured oil upon it” (Genesis 35:14). “Jacob established a monument…. He poured a libation upon it” – he poured oil on it from the full mouth of a cruse. (He did not sprinkle a little oil, but rather, poured a large stream of oil.)
NEITHER SHALT THOU SET THEE UP A PILLAR. For an idol, as which the Lord thy God hateth proves. (God hates a pillar set up to an idol.) However, a pillar which is not set up for idol worship is permitted. The most convincing proof of this is found in the portion which opens with the words And Jacob sent (Gen. 32:4). (There, Scripture (Gen. 35:14) relates that Jacob set up a pillar to God. Also see I.E. on Gen. 28:17, (Vol. 1, p. 279), where he writes that Scripture does not prohibit a pillar to honor God.)
ויצק שמן על ראשה, so that he would recognise this stone on his return from Charan. Oil stains on a stone remain for many years and do not disappear. He planned to erect an altar at this site when he would return from Charan. It is also possible that the pouring of oil on that stone was equivalent to pouring a libation of wine on the altar. In fact, when he did return to this site he is reported as doing exactly this (Genesis 35,14) All of this was to be a visible reminder that the Jewish people would take possession, inherit the land promised to them by G’d. Just as Avraham and Yitzchok during their time had treated the land as if it already belonged to them, Yaakov now did the same, albeit it in a miniscule, symbolical way. Once Yaakov had made a monument out of this stone no one had the right to use this stone for his private needs. The fact that some 34 years later he built an altar there using this stone as its foundation, shows that no one in the interval had disputed what this stone had represented. The Torah would not bother to mention that Yaakov had called this site Bet El unless the local people had been informed of this and had not objected to the name change. Clearly, just as the local population had to go along with the wells dug by Avraham and Yitzchok and the names given to these wells because G’d made them respect these patriarchs, so now G’d inspired the local residents to go along with what Yaakov had done there. The attitude G’d inspired in the local population is best described by David in Psalms 105 15 אל תגעו במשיחי ולנביאי אל תרעו, “do not dare touch My anointed, nor do harm to My prophets.”
והאבן הזאת אשר שמתי מצבה THEN THIS STONE WHICH I HAVE SET UP FOR A PILLAR etc. — Explain it as the Targum translates it: “I shall serve the Lord upon it” This, indeed, he did on his return from Padan-aram, when God said to him, (Genesis 35:1) “Arise, go up to Bethel”. What is stated there? “And Jacob set up a pillar … and he poured out a drink-offering thereon” (Genesis 35:14).
וישם אותה מצבה, he sanctified it as an altar which he would erect on his return from Charan. The Torah testifies in Genesis 35,14 that this is indeed what Yaakov did on his way home to the land of Canaan. ויצב יעקב מצבה במקום אשר דבר “Yaakov established an altar on the site where he had said.”
Yaakov set up a monument in the place where He had spoken to him, it was a monument of [a single] stone. He poured a libation [libations] on it, and he [also] poured oil on it.
And Jakob erected there a pillar of stone in the place where He had spoken with him, a pillar of stone; and he outpoured upon it a libation of wine, and a libation of water, because thus it was to be done at the feast of Tabernacles; and he poured oil of olives thereupon.
| וַיִּקְרָ֨א יַעֲקֹ֜ב אֶת־שֵׁ֣ם הַמָּק֗וֹם אֲשֶׁר֩ דִּבֶּ֨ר אִתּ֥וֹ שָׁ֛ם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בֵּֽית־אֵֽל׃ | 15 P | Jacob gave the site, where God had spoken to him, the name of Bethel. |
ויקרא יעקב….בית אל. Jacob called… it Bet El. This is difficult. We had been told this previously; even the additional word "El" had already been mentioned in verse 4. Perhaps the Torah means that at this time Jacob enlarged the area which he had previously named Bet El. Perhaps this is alluded to in the otherwise superfluous words "the name of the place that G'd spoke to him." He clearly referred to the difference between having experienced a dream with a divine message many years ago, and the present revelation where G'd appears to have addressed Jacob when he was awake.
ויקרא יעקב, this has now been mentioned already a third time, all in order to make sure that we understand that the site at which Yaakov had built the house of G’d, the monument, and the altar he called Bet El, in addition to the fact that originally the name of the whole city had been Bet El. Now the name of the town reflected what had occurred nearby repeatedly.
AND JACOB CALLED THE NAME OF THE PLACE…BETH-EL (HOUSE OF G-D). He called it so time after time [since he had previously (Above, 28:19.) called it by that name]. This is to inform us that it is truthfully and properly a House of G-d, and there the Divine Presence will ever be. The same was true with the name of Beer-sheba, [which was so called by both Abraham and Isaac. (Ibid., 21:31; 26:33.) Here too it could not refer to naming the city but rather to calling it by its name.]
המקום אשר דבר אתו. This precise expression has been repeated several times in our paragraph, seeing that in each instance the place where G’d spoke to Yaakov was in the middle of the path, not while he was in a town.
Jacob again called the name of the place where God had spoken with him Beit El, to reiterate that the place was a house of God where the Divine Presence rested (see 28:17–22). The city of Beersheba is likewise named twice. 21
ויקרא יעקב את שם המקום....בית א-ל, “Yaakov named the site where G’d had spoken to him Beyt El.” Although he had called this place Beyt E-l already 20 years ago when he had had the first revelation, he repeated the naming of it as up until now he had not been certain that what he had dreamt at that time had indeed been a vision and not a dream representing wishful thinking on his part.
In the stories of Jacob, however, the Torah always uses “Lord,” for he was more complete than was Isaac. Thus, unlike Isaac, who had not been as | complete as Abraham, (36. Kaspi says that in the following verses, which refer to Isaac, the memory and merits of Abraham are invoked in order to increase the well-being of Isaac. This indicates that Abraham was the greater of the two.) it is not said of Jacob, “because that Abraham hearkened to my voice,” (37. Gen. 26:5.) or “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” (38. Gen. 26:24.) The exception (where “God” appears in the stories of Jacob) is “the house of God,” (39. Gen. 28:17.) and that is on account of its being followed by “and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob said that because he recognized that the place was conducive to prophecy and perception because of the celestial cause that predominated there, as Ibn Ezra noted. (40. Ibn Ezra says on this verse: “This is the house of God—in which a person can pray in time of need, for his prayer will be heard on account of its being a special place.”) He continued to say, “If God will be with me …” (41. Gen. 28:20.) (using ’Elokim) in accordance with the opinion of our Torah that the world of Separate Intelligences is the first cause. (42. As explained above, ’Elokim refers to the upper two worlds, which are here referred to by Kaspi as ha-sekhel ha-nifrad (“the separate intellect”), which as an entity influences the events of the sublunar world below them.) The proof of this is provided by the opening verse of the Torah, “In the beginning God created …” as I have explained. (43. See above chap. II, n. 1.) When Jacob’s wives speak, and when Jacob speaks to them, they mention “God,” (44. Gen. 31:5, 9, 11, 16.) for that is appropriate for them, as we have already mentioned. This is especially the case as they are the daughters of (the pagan) Laban, as is proved by Rachel when she coveted the teraphim. (45. Gen. 31:19.) When on occasion they do mention “Lord,” (46. Gen. 29:32–33, 30:24.) it is only because they learnt this from Jacob. Notice the precision regarding Laban when the Torah says, “and God came to Laban,” (47. Gen. 31:24.) similar to what was written of Abimelech, (48. Gen. 20:3.) in accordance with his confused belief in the power of the Heavenly Sphere and that of the imagination. Laban said to Jacob, “the God of your father spoke unto me yesternight saying …,” (49. Gen. 31:29.) for how could the god of Laban assist Jacob when (Jacob) did not believe in him. Similarly he said, “the Lord watch between me and thee,” (50. Gen. 31:49.) in accordance with Jacob’s belief. Furthermore Laban made Jacob swear by the Lord, for Jacob feared Him, and not God. In summarizing in conclusion, Laban said, “The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor … judge betwixt us …” (51. Gen. 31:53.) whereas “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.” (52. Ibid.) Jacob uses “God” when saying “and the angels of God met him,” (53. Gen. 32:2.) and “this is God’s camp,” (54. Ibid.) as well as “I have seen God face to face” (55. Gen. 32:28.) and “for thou hast striven with God,” (56. Gen. 32:20.) for all of them are in a prophetic use of the imagination. (57. He means that they take place in a prophetic vision, which with the exception of Moses, necessarily involves the imaginative faculty.) It is similar with “And God said unto Jacob,” (58. Gen. 35:1.) | and “there God was revealed unto him,” (59. Gen. 35:7.) as well as “and God appeared unto Jacob again” (60. Gen. 35:9.) and “where God spoke with him.” (61. Gen. 35:15.)
And she called יהוה (יהוה The messenger who spoke is labeled with the principal’s name, to underscore that the message was delivered on the principal’s behalf. (A narrative convention in the Hebrew Bible.)) who spoke to her, “You Are El-roi,” (El-roi Apparently “God of Seeing.”) by which she meant, “Have I not gone on seeing after my being seen!” (Have I not gone on seeing after my being seen Meaning of Heb. uncertain.)
God parted from him at the spot where [God] had spoken to him;
Yaakov named the place where Elohim had spoken to him; Beis Eil, [the House of the Almighty].
And Jakob called the name of the place where the Lord had spoken with him Beth El.
| וַיִּסְעוּ֙ מִבֵּ֣ית אֵ֔ל וַֽיְהִי־ע֥וֹד כִּבְרַת־הָאָ֖רֶץ לָב֣וֹא אֶפְרָ֑תָה וַתֵּ֥לֶד רָחֵ֖ל וַתְּקַ֥שׁ בְּלִדְתָּֽהּ׃ | 16 E | They set out from Bethel; but when they were still some distance short of Ephrath, Rachel was in childbirth, and she had hard labor. |
ויהי עוד כברת ארץ לבא אפרתה, “it was still a short distance from Efrat;” the prefix ב is missing here before the word: עוד, the meaning of the phrase is as if it had been present.
כברת ארץ, according to Rash’bam, the word is similar to Job 34,24 הביריה, and means “a considerable amount.” It is also compared to Isaiah 10,13, ואוריד כביר יושבים, “I have deposed those who have ruled for many years.” [The prophet quotes the boast of the King of Ashur. Ed.] In our verse the line means that Yaakov was still a considerable distance from the nearest human settlement where he could bury Rachel. ותלד רחל, She did not have enough time to travel to Efrat because it was a long distance away.
SOME WAY. It is possible that the caf of kivrat (some way) is a preposition meaning similar to (In other words, kivrat (some way) is to be interpreted ki-verat, as a brat.) and that brat is a distance measured by walking. (This is the reading in Vat. Ebr. 38. The printed editions read: a king’s measure.) The word does not appear elsewhere in Scripture. (The word kivrat does appear in II Kings 5:19. Krinsky suggests that I.E. means it doesn’t appear elsewhere in the Pentateuch. Cherez maintains that I.E. means that the word berat is not found in Scripture.)
ויסעו מבית אל ויהי עוד כברת דרך לבא אפרתה, “they journeyed from Bet-El, and there still remained a tract of land before their arrival at Efrat, etc.” Efrat is another name for Bethlehem. The Torah spells this out in verse 19 where Rachel’s being buried is being described. Nachmanides explains that he personally had measured that the distance between the tomb of Rachel and Bethlehem is less than a mile. He concludes therefore that the commentators who want to derive the word כברת as stemming from כביר, “something major,” are in error. Yaakov could not have excused his burying Rachel there because the distance to Bethlehem was too great. The word כברת describes a certain land measure just as Rashi has said. The three letters ברת are root letters, the letter כ is not. The measure was one which was well known in those days.
ויסעו...כברת, the meaning of the word כברת הארץ is equivalent to approximately 1200 meters. I believe that the letter כ here is a preposition, the name of the word describing the distance being ברת. We find a similar construction in Samuel II 12,17 ולא ברה אתם לחם “he did not even eat a little amount with them. [I do not understand the relevance of this verse to the word כברת in our verse. Ed.] The letter כ may be a כף הדמיון a letter introducing an estimate, such as כעשרים איש, about 20 men, or כאלפים אמה, approximately 2000 cubits.
ותקש בלדתה, she endured great pain during her birthing. The word ותקש may be an intransitive mode of the verb in spite of the dagesh in the letter ת, or it may be in the transitive mode meaning that the pains caused her body to become rigid, interfering with the birthing process. At any rate, she suffered extreme pain.
A ‘KIVRATH’ OF LAND. Menachem ben Saruk (See Note 347, Seder Noach.) explained the word as having the meaning of kabir (much), i.e., great distance. A Midrashic explanation is: “At the time when the ground is full of holes like a sieve, when there was plenty of ploughed ground. The winter was past, but the dry season had not yet come.” This, however, cannot be the literal sense of the verse, for in the case of Naaman we find, And he departed from him a ‘kivrath’ of land, (II Kings 5:19.) [which cannot possibly have this meaning since the sense there is that he had walked away but a small distance from Naaman when Gehazi immediately ran after him] . I think that it is a name for a measure of land. This is Rashi’s language. The correct interpretation is that which Rabbi David Kimchi (An elder contemporary of Ramban, Rabbi David Kimchi, wrote extensive commentaries upon most of the books of the Bible which are deemed classical to this day. He also wrote a Hebrew grammar and lexicography. Ramban was influenced by his works.) has advanced, i.e., that the letter kaph in the word kivrath is the kaph of comparison and is not a root letter of the word, the basic word being as in the verses: They were their ‘levaruth’ (food); (Lamentations 4:10.) ‘Vethavreini’ (and give me to eat) bread, (II Samuel 13:5.) meaning a small amount of food in the morning. (R’dak’s commentary on this verse is found in his Book of Roots under the root barah, and here in his commentary.) And here the meaning of kivrath is the distance a pedestrian covers from morning to the time of eating, for all travellers measure distances in this manner. This I originally wrote when still in Spain, but now that I was worthy and came to Jerusalem (Ramban arrived in Jerusalem on the ninth day of Ellul in the year five thousand twenty-seven (1267). See my biography of Ramban (Hebrew, pp. 194-5; English p. 14 and 117). See also Note 361, Seder Noach and Note 25 in Seder Lech Lecha.) — praise to G-d Who is kind and deals kindly! — I saw with my eyes that there is not even a mile between Rachel’s grave and Bethlehem. This explanation of Rabbi David Kimchi has thus been refuted, as have the words of Menachem [ben Saruk, who said that there was a great distance between the grave and Bethlehem]. Rather kivrath is a name for a measure of land, as Rashi has said, and there is no adjectival part in the word but only a substantive as in most nouns, with the kaph serving a formative purpose to indicate that it was not an exact measure. And if the word be adjectival, modifying eretz, it is possible that brath is like bath, as in the expression, What ‘brie’ (my son)? and what “bar” (O son) of my womb? (Proverbs 31:2.) The word bath is thus the name for a small measure of land by which travellers measure the way, similar to the present day mile. It is called “bath of the land” for this small measure is as “a daughter” to the Persian mile or some other measure known in those days. And I have also seen that Rachel’s grave is not in Ramah nor near it, [as the plain meaning of the verse in Jeremiah, 31:15, would seem to indicate: A voice is heard in Ramah… Rachel weeping for her children]. Instead, Ramah which is in Benjamin is about four Persian miles distant from it, and Ramah of the hill-country of Ephraim (I Samuel 1:1.) is more than two days’ travel from it. Therefore, I say that the verse stating, A voice is heard in Ramah, (Jeremiah 31:15.) is a metaphor, in the manner of rhetorical expression, meaning to say that Rachel wept so loudly and bitterly that her voice was heard from afar in Ramah, which was on top of the mountain of [the territory of] her son Benjamin. [She cried for her children who went into exile] because they were not (Jeremiah 31:15.) there, and she was desolate of them. Thus Scripture does not say, “In Ramah, Rachel weeps for her children.” but it says that the voice was heard there. It appears to me that Jacob buried Rachel on the road and did not bring her into Bethlehem in Judah, which was near there, because he saw by the prophetic spirit that Bethlehem Ephrathah will belong to Judah, (Micah 5:1.) and he wished to bury her only within the border of her son Benjamin, and the road on which the monument over Rachel’s grave stands is near to Beth-el in the border of Benjamin. And so the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: (Sifre, Deuteronomy 33:12.) “Rachel died in the portion of Benjamin,” as it is found in the Parshath V’zoth Habrachah. (Sifre, Deuteronomy 33:12.) Now I have seen in the Targum of Yonathan ben Uziel (The standard Targum on the books of the Prophets. See Tractate Megillah 3a. See also Note 128, Seder Vayeitzei, on the three Targumim of the Pentateuch.) that he discerned this, and he translated: “A voice is heard high in the world.” [He thus interpreted Ramah, not as the name of a place, since Rachel was not buried in Ramah, as explained above, but rather on the basis of its root ram (high)], and he thus translated the whole verse (Jeremiah 31:15.) as applying to the congregation of Israel rather than Rachel.
כברת, a word which is similar to Job 34,24ירוע כבירים, “He breaks the mighty ones.” In our context it means something similar to הרבה, a considerable amount. The reason why Rachel was buried at that spot was because it was still a considerable distance from Efrat, and it would not have been dignified to transport her without a coffin for such a distance.
ותקש, this means the same as if it had said vatekashe. We have similar constructions such as ותצו as alternative for vatetzaveh, or ותכס, vatechasseh.
כברת הארץ A KIBRATH OF LAND — Menachem ben Seruk explains the word כברת to have the meaning of כביר “much” and that the phrase means a great distance. A Midrashic explanation is: at the time when the ground was full of holes and was riddled like a sieve (כברה) (cf. Rashi on Genesis 48:7) — when there was plenty of ploughed ground; the winter was passed, but the dry season had not yet come. This, however, cannot be the literal sense of the verse, for in the case of Naaman we find (2 Kings 5:19) “So he departed from him כברת ארץ” (which cannot possibly have this meaning). I think that it is a name for a measure of land, the distance of a Parsa or more, just as you say (Isaiah 5:10) “acres (צמדי) of vineyard” and (33:19) “the parcel (חלקת) of field”: In the same way in reference to a man’s journey Scripture mentions the name of a measure — viz., a כברת ארץ, a כברה of land.
כברת, das כ scheint Konjunktion zu sein, und ברת, verwandt mit ,פרת פרט ,פרד ,ברד, trennen, teilen zu bedeuten, wie wir diese Wurzel auch in ברית wieder zu finden glauben. ברת הארץ hieße demnach: ein Stück Land, eine Strecke.
Plowing is prevalent the winter has passed — and the hot weather has not yet arrived... [Rashi is saying that] even though the time was good [for traveling], so Yaakov should not have buried her on the road but rather he should have brought her to Ephros, nonetheless he did not do so. This is as Rashi explains in Parshas Vayechi (48:7). However, Rashi explains there that “it was the dry season,” implying it was the middle of summer. Therefore, perhaps Yaakov did not bring her for burial in [the settled part of] Eretz Yisrael because it was too hot [to travel]? The answer is: When Rashi said there that “it was the dry season when the earth is riddled with holes...” he did not mean that it was in the middle of summer. Rather, he meant the beginning of summer when the earth is riddled with holes from the blade of the plow, because plowing is prevalent.
However, this is not the plain meaning of the verse, for concerning Na’aman we find... I.e., what would Scripture gain there by teaching that the earth was like a sieve and the winter had passed and the hot weather had not yet arrived? What difference would it make? Perforce, כברת ארץ means it was a short distance, and Geichazi immediately ran after Na’aman [and caught up with him].
Just as you say צמד of vineyards, חלקה of a field... In other words, when one sells a vineyard to another, he says to him, “I am selling you a צמד of vineyards.” And when he sells him a field he says to him, “[ I am selling you] a חלקה of a field.” I.e., this was the known measurement for them.
They traveled south from Beit El; and it was still some distance 22 to when they would arrive at the city of Efrat; and Rachel was in childbirth, and she had difficulty in her childbirth.
“Rachel was in childbirth and had hard labor” [35:16]. Rachel had a difficult labor. The midwife said to Rachel: do not fear, you will have a son. Our sages say that with each of Jacob’s sons a daughter was also born, and with Benjamin, two daughters were born. So writes the Rabbati. (Genesis Rabbah, 82.8.) A story about two disciples of Rabbi Joshua. They changed their clothes so that they should not be recognized as Jews, since it had been commanded to kill the Jews who would not apostatize. One of the king’s officials came to them and asked them. I know well that you are Jews. Why do you not give your souls for the sake of God and you disguise yourselves so that people should not know that you are Jews? They responded: one does not need to commit suicide. That is why we do what we can. Perhaps we will not be recognized. The same gentile said to them. I will ask you something in your Torah. If you will answer me, I will not do anything to you. The verse says, “when her labor was at its hardest” [35:17]. When her labor was difficult, the midwife said to her: do not fear, you will have a son, whether she would have a son or not. The two Jews responded: the midwife should say good things to the woman when she has a difficult labor, in the hope that she will be cheered and to raise her spirits in her troubles. (Yalkut Shimoni, Vayishlach, Remez, 136.)
“Some distance” [35:16]. It was still a distance until the city of Ephrath, but as soon as Rachel died, Jacob buried her in the field. He said: because she died in childbirth, she is full of blood and therefore I do not want to take her to the city, since she will become besmeared with blood, and he placed a monument on her grave. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 35:19.) Bahya writes that it is an honor for the women to be buried in the city where they died. They should not be carried through fields. (Bahya, Genesis, 35:19.)
“They traveled from Beit El, and it was still some distance to arrive at Efrat, and Rachel was in childbirth, and had difficulty in her childbirth” (Genesis 35:16). “They traveled from Beit El, and it was still some distance [kivrat]” – Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: It was at the time when the land is perforated like a sieve [kevara] and the grain [bar] is plentiful. (The end of the summer. ) The Rabbis say: It was when the grain [habar] is already [kevar] growing, the rainy season has passed, and the summer has not yet come. “Rachel was in childbirth, and had difficulty in her childbirth” – there are three who encountered difficulty in childbirth and died after giving birth, and they are: Rachel, Pinḥas’s wife, and Mikhal daughter of Shaul. Rachel –“Rachel was in childbirth, and had difficulty in her childbirth.” Pinḥas’s wife – “His daughter-in-law, wife of Pinḥas…[she crouched and gave birth, as her pangs of labor overcame her]” (I Samuel 4:19). Mikhal, as it is stated: “Mikhal daughter of Saul did not have a child until the day of her death” (II Samuel 6:23). Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: “Until the day of her death” she did not have, but on the day of her death she had. That is what is written: “[These were the sons of David…] the sixth was Yitre’am, by Egla his wife” (I Chronicles 3:3). (Egla is understood to be another name for Mikhal. ) Why does it call her Egla? Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: Because she lowed like a calf [egla] and died.
With regard to a pregnant woman who experiences labor pains, and they are accompanied by an emission of blood, her status is that of a menstruating woman. If she experienced these pains accompanied by emissions of blood for three consecutive days within the eleven days between periods of menstruation, during which time emissions of blood render a woman a zava, and she rested from labor for a twenty-four-hour period, i.e., the pangs subsided, and she then gave birth, it indicates that the emissions were not due to her imminent labor, and this woman is considered one who gives birth as a zava. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: She is considered a zava only if the pangs subsided for a twenty-four-hour period of a night and the following day, like Shabbat evening and its accompanying day. Additionally, she is considered a zava in a case where she rested from the pain of labor but not necessarily from the flow of blood. In other words, the presence of labor pangs determines whether this blood is due to labor or the impure blood of ziva. Accordingly, if the pangs cease for twenty-four hours, she is considered a zava even if blood was discharging continuously from when she experienced her labor pains.
Die schwer Gebärende. Zu ergänzen ist (לילד) המקשה wie Chul. IV, 1 ff. Wegen des folgenden קשתה das wohl קשתה. zu lesen ist (vgl. Gen. 35, 16) ist wohl המקשה zu lesen, obwohl Gen. 35, 17 הקשותה nach ותקש steht. Ed. Liv. (Jerus.) liest allerdings המקשה und קשתה; Jerusch, ed. Venedig hat קישת.
Thus, in the case of Jacob, I admit that the entire narrative of “and Jacob sent messengers” (4. Gen. 32:4 ff.) occurred as something seen in a dream. Nonetheless, in my opinion Jacob carried this out when he awoke, as happened in many such cases. (5. Maimonides, in the Guide II:42, asserts that the entire section occurred in a vision, including the preparations for the meeting with Esau (vv. 14-24) and the wrestling with the angel (vv. 25-32). Kaspi, both here and in the Ṭirat Kesef (MK I 22), asserts that the intermediary passage, where Jacob prepared to meet Esau, did occur outside of the prophetic vision.) As for the wrestling with the angel, (6. Gen. 32:25-32.) this never occurred other than in a dream. The touching of the hollow of his thigh (and the passage following) until “the sinew of the thigh vein” (7. Gen. 32:26, 33. This comment is intended to answer the following problem: If indeed the wrestling with the angel was but a mental occurrence, how and why did Jacob limp in the morning (v. 32)?) was intended as an allusion to evil events that would befall Jacob in respect of women, for nasheh (“thigh vein”) is equivocal, (8. The Hebrew term could also be taken as the root for ’ishah (“woman”); consequently, the maiming of that limb would be an oblique allusion to being maimed on account of woman. Accordingly, Jacob was maimed in the thigh during the course of the vision, through some divine instrument.) similar to ḥovlim and the like. (9. Cf. Guide II:43, which refers to ḥovlim and other instances of metathesis. On Kaspi’s use of metathesis, see above Chapter 2.) Accordingly he experienced the events of Dinah, (10. He is referring to the rape of Dinah in Gen. 34.) Rachel, (11. He is referring to the tragic death of Rachel in Gen. 35:16 ff.) and Rebeccah’s handmaid. (12. Gen. 35:8. All three instances caused Jacob much grief.)
The Sanhedrin The Targum to pasuk 1 takes this idea a step further. The Beit Lechem beit din was not just an ordinary beit din, but rather, it was the Sanhedrin (supreme court)! It is reasonable that at the time of this megillah, the Sanhedrin met in Beit Lechem since Chazal (Bava Batra 91) identify Boaz as the shofet Ivtzan, who is specifically mentioned in Sefer Shofetim (12:8) as having lived in Beit Lechem. This identification indicates the prominence of Beit Lechem at that time. The location of Kever Rachel in Beit Lechem (We are following the popular adoption of Ramban’s (Bereishit 35:16) view that Kever Rachel is located in Beit Lechem, Yehuda.) adds to the prominence of this city. (The Sanhedrin was not located in Yerushalayim at this time, since Yerushalayim was then under the control of the Yevusim.)
Of course, there was a connection to Rachel in Beit Lechem due to Kever Rachel’s there. (There is considerable controversy as to the true location of Kever Rachel, with many arguing that its true location lies in Binyamin’s portion of Eretz Yisrael, just north of Yerushalayim (for a summary of the debate see https://www.ou.org/torah/files/r-manning-kever-rachel.pdf). The question arises to a great extent since there are more than one city called Beit Lechem in Eretz Yisrael (for this reason the first pasuk in Megillat Rut identifies the city as Beit Lechem Yehuda, meaning the Beit Lechem located in Yehuda, in contrast to Batei Lechem located in the nachalah of other shevatim). Ramban’s (Bereishit 35:16) view that Rachel Imeinu is buried in Beit Lechem Yehuda has emerged as the prevailing view. Advocates of the northern identification (such as the Chizkuni to Bereishit 48:7) might argue that Kever Rachel in Beit Lechem Yehuda is a monument created by the people of Beit Lechem in honor of Rachel when they embraced Rachel as their adoptive mother.) As a result, Da’at Mikra suggests this was a standard bracha recited at weddings in Beit Lechem, not specifically customized to this circumstance.
[96] And so God’s interpreter could not but represent the mother of vainglory as dying in the very pangs of childbirth. Rachel died, we read, in hard labour (Gen. 35:16, 19), for the conception and birth of vainglory, the creature of sense, is in reality the death of the soul.
All the people at the gate and the elders answered, “We are. May the LORD make the woman who is coming into your house like Rachel and Leah, both of whom built up the House of Israel! Prosper in Ephrathah (Ephrathah is another name applied to Bethlehem; cf. 1.2; Gen. 35.16, 19; 48.7; Mic. 5.1.) and perpetuate your name in Bethlehem!
They journeyed on from Beis Eil, and there was yet a stretch of land before [they would reach] Ephros when Rochel began to give birth. Her labor was very difficult.
And there was a space, as much ground, to come unto Ephrath; and Rahel travailed, and had hard labour in her birth.
And they proceeded from Beth El; and there was yet much space of provision land in the coming to Ephrath and Rahel travailed, and had hard labour in her birth.
| וַיְהִ֥י בְהַקְשֹׁתָ֖הּ בְּלִדְתָּ֑הּ וַתֹּ֨אמֶר לָ֤הּ הַמְיַלֶּ֙דֶת֙ אַל־תִּ֣ירְאִ֔י כִּֽי־גַם־זֶ֥ה לָ֖ךְ בֵּֽן׃ | 17 E | When her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Have no fear, for it is another boy for you.” |
כי גם זה לך בן, “for this child will also be a son for you;” Rashi writes that the midwife referred by the word גם “also” to Joseph. She meant that Rachel’s prayer at the time when she gave birth to Joseph that she would be granted to give birth to another son had been fulfilled. (Compare 30,24) She encouraged Rachel with her words suggesting that it was not G-d’s intention to let her die at this time.
WHEN SHE WAS IN HARD LABOR. Be-hakshotah (when she was in hard) is a hifil. The meaning of be-hakshotah be-lidtah (when she was in hard labor) is: the delivery caused her pain. (Hifil is a causative form. If this is the case then be-hakshotah must be transitive, hence I.E.’s comment that it means caused her hardship. Cf. Kimchi.) Va-tekash (and she had hard labor, in v. 16) is similar. (It, too, is an active form and is to be explained as in note 15.) However the latter is a pi’el. Va-tekash is similar to va-tekhal (and she was done) in And when she had done (va-tekhal) giving him drink (Gen. 24:19). (Both words are shortened forms of the pi’el. Va-tekash is short for va-tekasheh as va-tekhal is short for va-tekhalleh.)
אל תיראי כי גם זה לך בן. "Do not fear, for this one too is a son for you." What exactly was Rachel's fear which the midwife tried to alleviate? Assuming that Rachel was afraid to die, how did the midwife's words relieve Rachel's fears by saying "this one too is a son for you?" We also have to analyse the midwife's use of the word גם, "also."
In order to understand this we must refer to Bereshit Rabbah 82,8 that whereas a twin sister was born with all the other sons of Jacob, Benjamin's birth was accompanied by the birth of two twin sisters. This is why the midwife told Rachel that she should not be afraid to die but that her special difficulties were due to her giving birth to triplets, something that had not been the case when she gave birth to Joseph. The word גם was a reference to the births which would accompany the birth of Benjamin.
She may also have hinted at the statement we find in Niddah 31 that if a mother experiences difficulties when giving birth to a male child this does not threaten her life, whereas if she experiences similar difficulties when giving birth to a female child this does endanger her life. This is why the midwife reassured Rachel saying that the baby about to be born was definitely a boy.
כי גם זה לך בן, “as you had said when you gave birth to Joseph, when you asked G’d to grant you another son. (30,24.) Now get hold of yourself.”
אל תראי כי גם זה לך בן, in accordance with Rachel’s prayer at the time Joseph was born (30,24) when she asked G’d to grant her another son. The midwife reassured Rachel that G’d did not mean to kill her but that He had accepted her prayer. She wanted to calm Rachel‘s fear for her life.
כי גם זה FOR THIS ALSO — also means additional to you, over and above Joseph. Our Rabbis explained that with each of Jacob’s sons a twin-sister was born, whilst with Benjamin an additional twin sister was born (Genesis Rabbah 82:8).
אל תראי, do not be afraid that the infant about to be born will be a girl although your pains are so great that there is reason for suspecting this. The Talmud in Niddah 31 claims that the birth pangs associated with the birth of female children are greater than those associated with the birth of male children.
כי גם זה לך בן, even though you are experiencing all these pains, the child is a male.
It was as she was having difficulty in her childbirth, that the midwife said to her: Fear not, for this too is a son for you.
“It was as she had difficulty in her childbirth, the midwife said to her: Fear not; for this too is a son for you” (Genesis 35:17). “It was as she had difficulty in her childbirth…” – two students of Rabbi Yehoshua changed their outer garment during a time of persecution. (They wore Roman garments so they would not be identified as Jews. ) A Roman officer (This officer apparently was of Jewish lineage and had studied Torah. ) encountered them and said to them: ‘If you are sons of the Torah, give your lives for its sake. If you are not its sons, why should you be killed for its sake?’ (He was saying, either dress as Jews and take the risk of dying for the sake of Torah, or abandon your faith entirely and cease being Jews (Matnot Kehuna). ) They said to him: ‘We are its sons, and we are [willing to be] killed for its sake; however, it is not the way of people to commit suicide.’ He said to them: ‘I will ask you three questions. If you answer me, fine. If not, I will subject you to religious persecution.’ (I will give you the choice to convert or to die. ) He said to them: ‘One verse says: “The Lord stands to dispute [and stands to judge the peoples]” (Isaiah 3:13), but it is written: “As there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations” (Joel 4:12).’ They said to him: ‘When the Holy One blessed be He judges Israel, He judges them while standing, He abbreviates the trial and makes compromises in the sentence. But when He judges the nations of the world, He judges them while seated, is scrupulous in judgment, and extends the trial.’ He said to them: ‘That is not what your teacher Rabbi Yehoshua expounded. Rather, both in this [case] and that one, the verse is speaking of the nations of the world: When He judges the nations of the world, He judges them while seated, is scrupulous in judgment and extends the trial, and then he becomes an adversary against them.’ (He stands and implements their punishment against them.) He said to them: ‘What is [the meaning] of that which is written: “One who works his land [admato] will be sated with bread…”?’ (Proverbs 28:19). They said to him: ‘One who leases a single field, fertilizes it and hoes it, is preferable to one who leases many fields and leaves them fallow.’ He said to them: ‘That is not what your teacher Rabbi Yehoshua expounded. Rather, one who worships God will be sated with bread until the day of his death. (He expounds admato as a conjunction of the words ad moto – until the day of his death.) “And he who pursues vanities will be sated with poverty” (Proverbs 28:19) – these are the idolaters who pursue vanity, their idol worship.’ He said to them: ‘What is [the meaning] of that which is written: “It was as she had difficulty in her childbirth…”?’ They said to him: ‘This is the way that one soothes the soul of the birthing mother. One says to her: Fear not,for you have borne a male offspring.’ He said to them: ‘That is not what your teacher Rabbi Yehoshua expounded. Rather, each and every tribe had a twin sister born with him, in accordance with what Abba Ḥalfoi ben Kureya said: An additional twin sister was born with Benjamin.’ (When the first sister emerged, Rachel did not fret because she knew that a sister had been born with all the tribes. When the additional sister emerged, she was concerned that she would not be bearing her second son. That is why the midwife assured her that there was also a son.)
(Gen. 25:1:) THEN ABRAHAM TOOK AN ADDITIONAL (Again the translation of the verse has been changed to fit the midrashic context.) WIFE. This text is related (to Job 8:7): THOUGH YOUR BEGINNING WAS TRIFLING, YOUR END SHALL GREATLY FLOURISH. R. Simeon ben Laqish said in the name of R. Eleazar: You learn from here that an addition of the Holy One is more than the original. (Below, 7:20; see Gen. R. 61:4.) Abraham had previously sired no one but Isaac. When the Holy One made an addition for him, he made his addition < even > more, as stated (in Gen. 25:2): AND SHE BORE HIM < ZIMRAN, JOKSHAN, MEDAN, MIDIAN, ISHBAK, AND SHUAH >. Thus you find in the case of the first Adam that when < Eve > gave birth, she bore Cain (Gen. 4:1). Then afterwards (in Gen. 4:2): AND IN ADDITION SHE BORE < HIS BROTHER ABEL >. And so you find in the case of Rachel that she bore Joseph and said (in Gen. 30:24): MAY THE LORD ADD ANOTHER SON FOR ME. He added Benjamin for her and his twin sister. Where is it shown to be so? Here (in Gen. 35:17), < where > "This is a son for you" is not written, but FOR THIS ALSO IS A SON FOR YOU. And so you find in the case of King Hezekiah, all the days of his reign were fourteen years; but when the Holy One made an addition for him, he added fifteen years. (Is. 38:5; cf. II Kings 20:6:) SEE, I AM ADDING [FIFTEEN YEARS] TO YOUR LIFE. Now when the prophets saw that an addition of the Holy One was more than the original, they began to bless Israel with an addition. Moses said (in Deut. 1:11): MAY THE LORD [GOD OF YOUR ANCESTORS] ADD TO YOUR NUMBERS A THOUSAND TIMES [MORE THAN YOU ARE]…. David said (in Ps. 115:14): MAY THE LORD ADD TO YOUR NUMBERS. Also in the world to come the Holy One has procured an addition (rt.: YSP) for his people, as stated (in Is. 11:11): AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS IN THAT DAY, THE LORD WILL EXTEND (rt.: YSP) HIS HAND A SECOND TIME < TO PROCURE THE REST OF HIS PEOPLE >.
[(Gen. 38:1:) THAT JUDAH WENT AWAY < FROM HIS BROTHERS AND TURNED ASIDE TO A CERTAIN ADULLAMITE >.] This text is related (to Micah 1:15): I WILL YET BRING TO YOU ONE WHO SHALL DISPOSSESS YOU, < O INHABITANT OF MARESHAH; TO ADULLAM SHALL COME THE GLORY OF ISRAEL >. (Rashi on Gen. 37:35; see Gen. R. 85:1.) R. Judah and R. Nehemiah differed. The one said: The tribal patriarchs married their sisters, since it is stated (in Gen. 37:35): THEN ALL HIS SONS AND DAUGHTERS (According to R. Judah, the plural here shows that Jacob had more than one daughter.) AROSE TO COMFORT HIM. And how many daughters were there? They were simply their < brothers' twelve > twin sisters. < A given brother's mother > bore twins at his < birth >, and he would marry her. Moreover, it says so about Benjamin (in Gen. 35:17): BECAUSE THIS ALSO IS A SON FOR YOU. (Gen. R. 82:8.) "Because this is a son for you" is not stated, but BECAUSE THIS ALSO IS A SON FOR YOU, since his mother had < already > given birth to < his > twin sister. Ergo (in Gen. 37:35): THEN ALL HIS SONS AND DAUGHTERS AROSE…. Hence you learn that they married their sisters. But R. Nehemiah maintains: His daughters were his daughters-in-law. Since one's son-in-law is like his son, and his daughter-in-law, like a daughter, one does not refrain from calling his daughter-in-law his daughter. (Gen. R. 84:21.) Our masters have said: Judah, who was the eldest in his father's house, married a Canaanite. Thus it is written (in Gen. 38:2): AND JUDAH SAW THERE < THE DAUGHTER OF A CERTAIN CANAANITE >. And the prophet proclaims (in Micah 1:15): TO ADULLAM SHALL COME THE (HOLY ONE) [GLORY] OF ISRAEL. Ergo (according to Gen. 38:1-2): THAT JUDAH WENT AWAY < FROM HIS BROTHERS > AND TURNED ASIDE TO A CERTAIN ADULLAMITE < WHOSE NAME WAS HIRAH. AND JUDAH SAW THERE THE DAUGHTER OF A CERTAIN CANAANITE WHOSE NAME WAS SHUA. SO HE TOOK HER AND WENT IN UNTO HER >.
With regard to a pregnant woman who experiences labor pains, and they are accompanied by an emission of blood, her status is that of a menstruating woman. If she experienced these pains accompanied by emissions of blood for three consecutive days within the eleven days between periods of menstruation, during which time emissions of blood render a woman a zava, and she rested from labor for a twenty-four-hour period, i.e., the pangs subsided, and she then gave birth, it indicates that the emissions were not due to her imminent labor, and this woman is considered one who gives birth as a zava. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: She is considered a zava only if the pangs subsided for a twenty-four-hour period of a night and the following day, like Shabbat evening and its accompanying day. Additionally, she is considered a zava in a case where she rested from the pain of labor but not necessarily from the flow of blood. In other words, the presence of labor pangs determines whether this blood is due to labor or the impure blood of ziva. Accordingly, if the pangs cease for twenty-four hours, she is considered a zava even if blood was discharging continuously from when she experienced her labor pains.
Wenn ein Vieh schwer. המקשה Hif. wie בהקשתה בלדתה Gen. 35,17.
Die schwer Gebärende. Zu ergänzen ist (לילד) המקשה wie Chul. IV, 1 ff. Wegen des folgenden קשתה das wohl קשתה. zu lesen ist (vgl. Gen. 35, 16) ist wohl המקשה zu lesen, obwohl Gen. 35, 17 הקשותה nach ותקש steht. Ed. Liv. (Jerus.) liest allerdings המקשה und קשתה; Jerusch, ed. Venedig hat קישת.
When her labor was at its most difficult stage, the midwife said to her, Do not fear, for this one will also be a son for you.
And it was in the hardness of her travail that the midwife said to her, Fear not, for this also is to thee a male child.
| וַיְהִ֞י בְּצֵ֤את נַפְשָׁהּ֙ כִּ֣י מֵ֔תָה וַתִּקְרָ֥א שְׁמ֖וֹ בֶּן־אוֹנִ֑י וְאָבִ֖יו קָֽרָא־ל֥וֹ בִנְיָמִֽין׃ | 18 E | But as she breathed her last—for she was dying—she named him Ben-oni; (Ben-oni Understood as “son of my suffering (or, strength).”) but his father called him Benjamin. (Benjamin I.e., “son of the right hand,” or “son of the south.”) |
“And now you want to take Binyamin!” This indicates prominence, as Rashi explains (Genesis 35:18): “BiNYaMIN —he was called this because of the Land of Israel: BeN YaMIN.” And the Land of Israel is higher than all other lands (Zevachim 54b).
בצאת נפשה כי מתה, ”when her soul departed as she was dying;” she was both dying and not dying;
בנימין, the name is spelled with two letters י, as if it meant בן ימין, “the son of my right hand.” (Compare KimchiJ) Alternate version: the last letter in the word is the letter ם, i.e. ימים, “days” or “years,” and means that Yaakov considered Benjamin as a son who would assist him in his old age, seeing that he was the youngest. We find support for this interpretation in Isaiah 51,18, אין מחזיק בידה מכל בנים גדלה, “no one takes her by the hand of all the sons she raised.”
בן אוני, “son of my sorrow;” she foresaw the tragedy involving the tribe of Benjamin in a civil war described in Judges chapters 19-21.
BEN-ONI. Ben-oni means the son of my mourning. Onim (mourners) in as the bread of mourners (onim) (Hos. 9:4) and be-oni (my mourning) in I have not eaten thereof in my mourning (be-oni) (Deut. 26:14) are similar.
Understood as “son of my suffering (or, strength).”
I.e., “son of the right hand,” or “son of the south.”
ויהי בצאת נפשה, while her soul was about to depart from her body,
כי מתה, ,for she was dying and there was no hope for her, she called him
בן אוני, for I gave birth to him in great pain;
ואביו קרא לו בנימין, meaning “the son of my right hand.” The name suggested that the child is especially beloved seeing that he was born when his father was already advanced in years. We find the word ימין used in the sense of being especially beloved in Psalms 80,18 וכן תהי ידך על איש ימינך, “grant Your help to the man at Your right hand, etc.” The end of the verse על בן אדם אמצת לך, “the one You have adopted as Your own,” spells out this meaning beyond any doubt.
‘BEN ONI’ (THE SON OF MY SORROW). I am of the opinion that he was so called because he alone was born in the land of Canaan which lies to the south (yamin) as one comes from Aram-naharaim, just as it is said: In the south, in the land of Canaan; (Numbers 33:40.) Going on still toward the south. (Above, 12:9.) Binyamin thus means a son of the south, just as in the verse: The north ‘v’yamin’ (and the south) Thou hast created them. (Psalms 89:13.) For this reason the name Binyamin is here written “full” [with a yud after the mem to indicate that the name is derived from the word yamin (south)]. This is Rashi’s language. But I do not understand this claim that the Land of Israel lies to the south of Aram-naharaim for Aram is eastward of the Land of Israel, as it is written, And he came to the land of the children of the east, (Above, 29:1. ) and it is further written, From Aram Balak bringeth me, the king of Moab from the mountains of the East, (Numbers 23:7.) and Jacob crossed the Jordan which is to the east of the Land of Israel, and he returned by way of Edom which is south of the Land of Israel. Thus you find that Aram is south-east of the Land of Israel, and the Land of Israel is to its north. However, if Benjamin was born within the border of Bethlehem Ephrathah which is in the land of Judah — as it is written, Bethlehem in Judah, (Judges 19:2.) and it is further written, But thou, Bethlehem Ephratha, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah (Micah 5:1.) — this was in the south of the Land of Israel, and he was thus born between Beth-el and Bethlehem Ephrath. And if the place was in the hill country of Ephraim, then it is in the north of the Land of Israel, as it is written, Judah shall abide in his border on the south, and the house of Joseph shall abide in their border on the north. (Joshua 18:5.) And if it was in the portion of Benjamin, it was also not in the south, for it is written, And their border was on the north side. (Ibid., Verse 12.) Thus in any case there was no reason to call Benjamin “a son of the south.” The correct interpretation appears to me to be that his mother called him ben oni, and she meant to say, “the son of my mourning, similar in expression to: bread of ‘onim’ (mourners); (Hosea 9:4.) I have not eaten thereof ‘b’oni’ (in my mourning). (Deuteronomy 26:14.) And his father understood the word oni in the sense of “my strength,” similar in expression to: the first-fruits of ‘oni’ (my strength); (Genesis 49:29.) And to those who have no ‘onim’ (power). (Isaiah 40:29.) And therefore he called him Binyamin, “the son of power” or “the son of strength,” for in the right hand (yamin) there is strength and success, just as it is written: A wise man’s understanding is at his right hand; (Ecclesiastes 10:2.) Thy right hand shall overtake all those that hate thee; (Psalms 21:9.) The right hand of the Eternal is exalted. (Ibid., 118:16.) Jacob wanted to call him by the name his mother had called him, for all his children were called by the names their mothers had called them, and he thus rendered it to good and to strength. Now I have seen in Bereshith Rabbah: (82:10.) “Ben oni, ‘the son of my sorrow.’ And his father called him Benjamin, i.e., in the Sacred Language.” I do not know what this means for it is all the Sacred Language, and so are the names of all his sons in the Sacred Language. However, the Rabbis have alluded to that which I have said, namely, that Jacob rendered the expression so that it signified good.
בן אוני means SON OF MY SORROW (Genesis Rabbah 82:9).
בנימין BENJAMIN — I am of opinion that he was so called because he alone was born in the land of Canaan which is in the South (ימין) as one comes from Aram-Naharaim, as it is said (Numbers 33:40) “in the South, in the Land of Canaan”, and (12:9) “going on still towards the South”. בנימין therefore means בן ימין where ימין has the same meaning as in (Psalms 89:13) “The North and the South (ימין) Thou hast created them”. For this reason the word is here written plene (with a י after the מ).
Another explanation of בנימין is that it means “son of his old days (ימים)”, only that it is written with ן (instead of ם), like (Daniel 12:13) “at the end of days.
און .בן אוני scheint in seiner Grundbedeutung die physische, oder moralische Fähigkeit zum Erwerb und Besitz zu sein, daher auch den Anspruch auf ein Gut zu bedeuten. In diesem Sinne heißt auch און rabbinisch geradezu: Rechtstitel: כותבין ב״ק פ׳ בי) .עליו אונו). Es ist Vorbedingung und Anfang vom הון. Der Missbrauch dieser Erwerbs- und Besitzeskraft heißt: אָוֶן, wie der Missbrauch der Überordnung עול עָוֶל. Daher aber auch און das erste durch einen herben Verlust hervorgerufenen Schmerzgefühl; es ist der sich zum Besitz berechtigt glaubende Anspruch, der im Momente des Verlustes am schärfsten hervortritt, sich gleichsam gegen die Beraubung empört. Daher zunächst das durch die noch daliegende Leiche frisch gehaltene Schmerzgefühl um einen Dahingeschiedenen. ויהי העם כמתאוננים: das Volk war, als ob sie über sich selbst trauerten, sie sahen sich wie bereits Gestorbene an, und hielten gleichsam Trauer über sich. Hier somit בן אוני: Sohn meiner Trauer, d. i. Sohn meines Hinscheidens, das man bald betrauern wird. Der Vater aber nannte ihn: בן ימין, Sohn der Rechte, d.i. Sohn der Kraft, die heitere Bedeutung des און hervorkehrend. Über den Namenwechsel 17ישרא יעקב V. 20 u. 21, siehe zu Kap.45, 28.
It was with the departure of her soul, for she was dying in childbirth, that she called his name Ben Oni, son of my pain and anguish. And yet his father did not wish to call him by that name. Instead, he chose to interpret his wife’s statement in a positive manner, that oni meant my might, rather than my anguish. He therefore called him Benjamin, the right-hand son, or the strong son. 23
ויהי בצאת נפשה כי מתה, ותקרא שמו בן אוני, “it was at the moment when her soul was departing, seeing she was dying, she called him Ben Oni.” Some commentators claim that Ben Oni was named by Rachel after she had “died.” This corresponds to the plain text which first reported Rachel’s death followed by the naming of the baby. It is not unusual for a terminally sick person to pass out and create the impression that she had died, only to briefly regain consciousness before dying completely. This would explain why the Torah seems to speak of two “deaths” which Rachel experienced, i.e. “her soul departed,” and “for she had died.”
בן אוני. “son of my pain.”
בנימין, “son of my right.” Rashi explains the name in terms of Binyamin being the only one of Yaakov’s sons who had been born on the soil of the Holy Land. This land is to the south when one comes from Aram Naharayim, i.e. it is on the right hand side of the traveler. Nachmanides objects by proving that the Land of Israel is not situated to the south of Aram Naharayim. He claims that the reason that Yaakov called this son Binyamin was because his mother had called him Ben Oni, a word having a negative connotation, so that his father gave this word a positive connotation, i.e. he did not change the name but the meaning of the name, giving it the same meaning as in Genesis 49,3 where he described Reuven as כוחי וראשית אוני, “my strength and the first of my vigor.” The word בנימין referring to the strength of one’s right hand, is therefore very appropriate [all Biblical atlases have Aram Naharayim north-east of the land of Israel, so that Rashi appears correct, from the point of view of Geography, though Nachmanides’ approach that Yaakov did not actually change the name Rachel gave is more appealing. Ed.] Basically, all the sons remained known by the names given them by their mothers. Yaakov simply gave the name Ben Oni a positive connotation.
After someone dies, the deceased’s relatives who are required to mourn him are called onanim (the singular form is onen, as in “Ben Oni” [Benjamin], Genesis 35:18). Aninut is the time period between death and burial. After the burial is completed, aninut is over and the period of mourning (avelut) begins. The onen is exempt from all mitzvot, such as prayer, blessings, and laying tefillin; he is forbidden from sexual relations, bathing, anointing himself, rejoicing, eating meat, drinking wine, business dealings, and studying Torah. The reason for this is so that the onen will not be distracted from the mourning process, and may focus on the burial requirements for the deceased. The onen is permitted to recite Psalms for the dead. During the time of the Mishnah and Talmud, the Jews fasted on the day a parent died in order to rouse themselves to repentance, but over time this custom disappeared. (Herman, Ma’agal hayei ha-yom.)
“It was with the departure of her soul, as she was dying, that she called his name Ben Oni, and his father called him Benjamin” (Genesis 35:18). “It was with the departure of her soul…that she called his name Ben-oni” – the son of my travail in the Aramaic language. “And his father called him Benjamin” – in the sacred tongue. (The word on in Aramaic means suffering. In Hebrew, it means strength. Jacob replaced on with yamin, the right hand, which symbolizes strength.) “Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Efrat, which is Bethlehem” (Genesis 35:19). “Rachel died and was buried” – immediately after death, burial. “On the way to Efrat, which is Bethlehem” – Rabbi Yanai and Rabbi Yonatan were sitting. A certain heretic came and asked them: ‘What is [the meaning of] that which is written: “Upon your departure from me today, [you will find two men by Rachel’s tomb, at the border of Benjamin at Tzeltzaḥ]”? (I Samuel 10:2). Is Tzeltzaḥ not on the border of Benjamin, and Rachel’s tomb on the border of Judah, as it is written: “On the way to Efrat,” and it is written: “[But you,] Bethlehem of Efrat, [young to be among the thousands of Judah]”?’ (Micah 5:1). Rabbi Yanai said: ‘Remove my disgrace.’ (He said to Rabbi Yonatan to answer the heretic, because, to his, dismay, he was unable to answer him.) Rabbi Yonatan] said to him: ‘“Upon your departure from me today” by Rachel’s tomb, you will find two men at the border of Benjamin in Tzeltzaḥ.’ Some say [that Rabbi Yonatan said]: ‘“Upon your departure from me today” at the border of Benjamin in Tzeltzaḥ, you will find two men by Rachel’s tomb.’ This one is accurate, and you thus learn that they were at the border of Benjamin. It is [similarly] written: “…And he passed through the land of Benjamin, but they did not find. They came to the land of Tzuf” (I Samuel 9:4–5). And it is written: “He said to him: Behold, now, a man of God is in this city” (I Samuel 9:6). (The city was called Tzuf because the prophet [hatzofeh] resided there. These verses demonstrate that Saul and Samuel were in the territory of Benjamin. )
(Fol. 36) GEMARA: How is the word (Josh. 8, 33) V'hachetzyo (and the other half of them) to be explained? Said R. Cahana: "This means that just as they were divided here at Mts. Gerizim and Ebal so were they also divided in the same manner upon the stones of the Ephod. An objection was raised from the following Baraitha: Two precious stones were fixed upon the shoulders of the High-priest, one stone on one shoulder and the other stone on the other shoulder. The names of the twelve tribes were inscribed, thereon, six on one stones and six on the other stone, as it is said (Ex. 28, 10) Six of the names on one stone and the remaining six names on the other stone, according to their birth. This means that the second stone was according to their birth, but the first stone was not according to their birth, because Juda preceded the others. Fifty letters were there altogether, of them twenty-five were on one stone and twenty-five on the other. R. Chanina b. Gamliel says (Ib. b) "They were placed upon the Ephod not in accordance with their division mentioned (Num. 1, 5), but they were placed in an Ephod in accordance with their division mentioned in (Ex. 1, 1-5). How so? The children of Leah were placed in accordance with their age. Then came the children of Rachel, one on one stone, and the other on the other stone. The children of the hand-maids were placed in the middle. As to the question how can the passage, According In their order of birth, be upheld? We must explain it that it was inscribed with the names as they were called by their father and not with the names they were called by Moses — Reuben but not Reubeni, Shimon but not Shimoni, Dan but not Dani, Gad but not 'Gadi.' Hence this will refute the above statement of R. Cahana, [because none of the above opinions is in accordance with the arrangements of the Ephod]. The refutation is indeed sustained. If so, then what is the meaning of V'hachezyo? We are taught in a Baraitha that the half that was placed opposite Mt. Gerizim was more than the half placed opposite Mt. Ebal, for, the Levites were below the hill. On the contrary, since the Levites were below the hill, hence the number of tribes facing Mt. Gerizim was less? We must therefore say; Although the tribe of Levi were below the hill, nevertheless the sons of Joseph were with thim, and completed the amount, as it is said (Josh. 17, 14) And the children of Joseph spoke unto Joshua, saying 'Why hast thou given me, but one lot ... ... ... and Joshua said unto them, if thou art a numerous people, then get up to the wood country, etc. He said to them, "Go and hide yourselves in the forest so that no covetous eye may afflict you." Whereupon they answered him, "We are the descendants of Joseph whom a covetous eye cannot afflict, as it is written (Gen. 29, 22) Joseph is a fruitful bough by a spring, and R. Abahu explains thus: "Do not read Aleh Ayin (by a spring), but read it Ole Ayin (above the covetous eye.'" R. Jose b. Chanina said: "From this it may be inferred that Joseph's children are not subject to the affliction of a covetous eye, (Ib., 48, 16) And let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth. This [the word grow used by Jacob which has the derivation of Dog (fish) is to mean that just as the fishes in the sea because of their being covered by water, no eye can afflict them, so also are the children of Joseph not subject to the affliction of a covetous eye." But how do you say above that there were fifty letters in the inscription of the Ephod. Behold there were only fifty letters less one? Said R. Isaac: "The fiftieth letter was used as an extra letter to the name of Joseph, as it is said (Ps. 81, 6) He appointed it in Joseph for a testimony, when he went out over the land of Egypt." R. Nachman b. Isaac raised an objection: "The passage says that it was in accordance with the names of birth, and this is not so." We must therefore say that the extra letter was inserted in the name of Benjamin, which is spelled in the entire Torah with only one Yud, but here in the Ephod, Benjamin, is spelled with two Yuds, as it is written (Ex. 25, 18) But his father called him Benjamin [with two Yuds]. R. Chama b. Bizna said, in the name of R. Simon the pious: "Joseph, who sanctified Heaven's name in secret was rewarded with only one additional letter of the name of the Holy One, praised be He, but Juda, who sanctified Heaven's name publicly was rewarded so that his entire name was equal to that of the Holy One, praised be He." What happened with Joseph? as written (Gen. 39, 11). And it came to pass on a certain day ... ... ... We are taught in a Baraitha, Joseph was destined to produce twelve tribes, just as they were by his father Jacob, as it is said (Gen. 37, 2) These are the generations of Jacob, Joseph, however, they were produced through his brother, Benjamin. They were nevertheless called after the name of Joseph, as it is said (Ib. 46, 21) And the sons of Benjamin, Bela, Mecher, Ashbel, Gera, Na'aman, Achi, V'rosh, Muppim, Chuppim and Ard; i.e., Bela because Joseph was swallowed (lost) among the other nations; Mechcr, because he was the first born of his mother; Ashbel, because he was captured with the consent of God; Gera, because he lived in inns (having no settled home); Na'aman because he was very sweet Achi V'rosh, because he was my brother and leader; and Chuppim, because he did not see my wedding canopy nor did I see his; and Ard, according to some because he was driven among idolatrous nations, and according to others because his face was like a rose.
It is written "dead on the shore of the sea." Now were they dead? The intent is dead and not dead, i.e., "dying," as in (Genesis 35:18) "and it was as her soul departed when she died." Now was she dead? The intent is dead and not dead, i.e., "dying." Variantly: "And Israel saw Egypt dead": different types of death, one worse than the other, their having been smitten with different plagues in the sea.
Now Jacob knew nothing of all this, and he said: Anyone who has stolen thy Teraphim shall die before his proper time; and the utterance of a righteous person is like the speech from the mouth of an angel, and (Rachel) bare and died, as it is said, "And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, for she died" (Gen. 35:18).
Rabbi Ishmael said: Every son of the old age || is beloved of his father, as it is said, "Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age" (Gen. 37:3). Was he then the son of his old age? Was not Benjamin the son of his old age? But owing to the fact that (Jacob) saw by his prophetic power that (Joseph) would rule in the future, therefore he loved him more than all his sons. And they envied him with a great envy, as it is said, "And his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren; and they hated him" (ibid. 4). Further, because he saw in his dream that in the future he would rule, and he told his father, and they envied him yet more and more, as it is said, "And they hated him yet the more" (ibid. 8). Moreover, he saw the sons of his father's concubines eating the flesh of the roes and the flesh of the sheep whilst they were alive, and he brought a reproach against them before Jacob their father, so that they could not see his face any more (in peace), as it is said, "And they could not speak peaceably unto him" (ibid. 4). Jacob said to Joseph: Joseph, my son ! Verily I have (waited) many days without hearing of the welfare of thy brethren, and of the welfare of the flock, as it is said, "Go now, see whether it be well with thy brethren, and well with the flock" (ibid. 14). And the lad was wandering in the field, and the angel Gabriel met him, as it is said, "And a certain man found him, and, behold, he was wandering in the field" (ibid. 15). (The word) "man" (here in this context) is Gabriel only, as it is said, "The man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision" (Dan. 9:21).
There is a son who is a firstborn with regard to inheritance but is not a firstborn with regard to the requirement of redemption from a priest. There is another who is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest but is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance. There is another who is a firstborn with regard to inheritance and with regard to redemption from a priest. And there is another who is not a firstborn at all, neither with regard to inheritance nor with regard to redemption from a priest. Which is the son who is a firstborn with regard to inheritance but is not a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest? It is a son who came after miscarriage of an underdeveloped fetus, even where the head of the underdeveloped fetus emerged alive; or after a fully developed nine-month-old fetus whose head emerged dead. The same applies to a son born to a woman who had previously miscarried a fetus that had the appearance of a type of domesticated animal, undomesticated animal, or bird, as that is considered the opening of the womb. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The son is not exempted from the requirement of redemption from a priest unless his birth follows the birth of an animal that takes the form of a person. In the case of a woman who miscarries a fetus in the form of a sandal fish or from whom an afterbirth or a gestational sac in which tissue developed emerged, or who delivered a fetus that emerged in pieces, the son who follows these is a firstborn with regard to inheritance but is not a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest. In the case of a son born to one who did not have sons and he married a woman who had already given birth; or if he married a woman who gave birth when she was still a Canaanite maidservant and she was then emancipated; or one who gave birth when she was still a gentile and she then converted, and when the maidservant or the gentile came to join the Jewish people she gave birth to a male, that son is a firstborn with regard to inheritance but is not a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: That son is a firstborn with regard to inheritance and with regard to redemption from a priest, as it is stated: “Whatever opens the womb among the children of Israel” (Exodus 13:2). This indicates that the halakhic status of a child born to the mother is not that of one who opens the womb unless it opens the womb of a woman from the Jewish people. In the case of one who had sons and married a woman who had not given birth; or if he married a woman who converted while she was pregnant, or a Canaanite maidservant who was emancipated while she was pregnant and she gave birth to a son, he is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest, as he opened his mother’s womb, but he is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance, because he is not the firstborn of his father or because halakhically he has no father. And likewise, if an Israelite woman and the daughter or wife of a priest, neither of whom had given birth yet, or an Israelite woman and the daughter or wife of a Levite, or an Israelite woman and a woman who had already given birth, all women whose sons do not require redemption from the priest, gave birth in the same place and it is uncertain which son was born to which mother; and likewise a woman who did not wait three months after the death of her husband and she married and gave birth, and it is unknown whether the child was born after a pregnancy of nine months and is the son of the first husband, or whether he was born after a pregnancy of seven months and is the son of the latter husband, in all these cases the child is a firstborn with regard to redemption from a priest but is not a firstborn with regard to inheritance. Due to the uncertainty, he is unable to prove he is the firstborn of either father, and therefore he is not entitled to the double portion of the firstborn. Which is the offspring that is a firstborn both with regard to inheritance and with regard to redemption from a priest? In the case of a woman who miscarried a gestational sac full of water, or one full of blood, or one full of pieces of flesh; or one who miscarries a mass resembling a fish, or grasshoppers, or repugnant creatures, or creeping animals, or one who miscarries on the fortieth day after conception, the son who follows any of them is a firstborn with regard to inheritance and with regard to redemption from a priest.
There is a special reason why the Midrash chose Abigail to serve as an example of the merits that would be acquired by Jacob's descendants. I have found something on the subject in the writings of the Arizal The latter comments on Hoseah 12, 13: ויעבוד ישראל באשה, ובאשה שמר. "There Israel served for a wife; for a wife he had to guard (sheep). I have mentioned elsewhere that Abgail was the mystique or re-incarnation of Leah. I have explained that during the first union of man and wife, the male deposits a spiritual essence -רוח- within the womb of his wife, something which does not leave the body of his wife even at her death. The implications of this idea are elaborated on by the "Saba" in the Zohar on Parshat Mishpatim (Sullam edition page 34). We can see that in the case of Jacob, who deposited this spiritual essence in Rachel, he did experience the emergence of a Benjamin, whose birth the Torah described in the following words: ויהי בצאת נפשה כי מתה ותקרא שמו בנימין. "It happened when her soul left her, for she was about to die…she called his name Benjamin." [This is the version in the author's quote of the Arizal; I am aware of the true reading in the Torah. Ed.] The spiritual essence which Jacob had deposited within Rachel was called “נפשה,” and became Benjamin. The spirit Jacob had deposited within Leah during his first union with her, however, remained within her, and eventually became Abigail. [This is an explanation of the theory that nothing is ever lost in this world, and that semen that does not fertilize will eventually perform its allocated task. When you pursue this idea in the Zohar you will find that the levirate marriage is based on the brother of the deceased being able to access this residue of his deceased brother's spirit in the womb of the widow of his brother's wife. Ed.] The child emerging from this spiritual essence was expected to be a male. Since however, "Israel had served for a wife," he found afterwards that he had indeed guarded sheep for "a woman."
And the life of Sarah It is not the [usual] way to record the deaths of women, even righteous ones, unless it is by means of a deed. For behold we find only Sarah, Rachel, and Devorah -- Rivka's wetnurse -- and Miriam on the withdrawal of the well. Sarah's death is mentioned since she makes known to us how the grave was acquired with riches (and this is one of the tests [of Avraham]). Devorah's death is mentioned to make known how the name of the place is called Alon-Bachut. Rachel's death is mentioned to teach why she is not buried in Ma'arat haMachpela. And why is it that their years are not numbered, except for Sarah? Since she is the most important of them all.
ותמת שרה, “Sarah died;” it is most unusual for the Torah to report the fact that a woman died. (Miriam, Moses’ sister’s death are exceptions, Numbers 20,1 as are Rachel’s premature death in Genesis 35,18, and Deborah, Rivkah’s nursemaid in Genesis 35,8.) When such a death is reported it is not only a compliment to the virtuous lives these women had lived, but is always associated with a remarkable event. Sarah’s death is associated with the enormous amount of money paid by her husband for acquiring the land for burying her. Rachel’s premature death is reported so that we should know where she has been buried. Deborah’s death is reported so that we should know why the place where this occurred became known subsequently as אלון בכות, “oak of mourning.” [Also in order to draw our attention to the fact that her mistress, Rivkah’s death has not been reported. Ed.] Miriam’s death was the reason that the well that had accompanied the Israelites throughout their long march in the desert ceased flowing.
גורל אחד לה' וגורל אחד לעזאזל, “one lot for the Lord and one lot for Azazel.” Ibn Ezra, [at the conclusion of his commentary on this verse, Ed.], writes that when we get to thirty three, we will be able to understand the meaning of this procedure. [At the beginning of his commentary, he had already hinted that there is a mystical element, kabbalah, in all this. Ed.] What he meant was that when we count the next thirty three verses in the Torah and we get to Leviticus 17,7, the Torah will explain that the procedure described here is meant to teach us not to sacrifice to Satanic forces in the universe anymore. These Satanic forces are symbolised by the scapegoat. Just as the bird released into the air by the priest performing the ritual of the person afflicted with tzoraat is perceived as taking away his former sins, so the scapegoat is supposed to do this on behalf of the whole Jewish nation on the day of Atonement. Ibn Ezra understands the word עזאזל as a combination of two words, similar to גלעד in Genesis 31,47 or to בנימין in Genesis 35,18 or ראובן in Genesis 29,32, and many others. Whereas the first male goat is offered to the Lord as a burnt offering, the second one is symbolically tendered of the Satanic forces, the complete destruction of that animal pointing at the uselessness of idolatry The two words לעז אזל, “it went to waste, to destruction ” symbolise this concept.
Wer nach einer Fehlgeburt. einem nicht voll ausgetragenen Kinde. Als Erstgeborener in bezug auf das Erbrecht gilt das erste lebensfähige Kind, das dem Vater lebend geboren wird, nur ein solches wird ראשית אוני (Deut. 21, 17) genannt, ein Kind, um dessen Verlust das Vaterherz trauert, (און verw. mit אונן, vgl. בן אוני Gen. 35, 18). Wenn das zuerst geborene Kind ein totes oder ein nicht voll ausgetragenes war, so ist deshalb das nach diesem geborene Erstgeburt hinsichtlich des Erbrechts. In bezug auf פטר רחם, Erschliessung des Mutterschosses, gilt dagegen das zuerst geborene als Erstgeburt, selbst wenn es eine Fehlgeburt ist.
I HAVE NOT EATEN THEREOF IN MY MOURNING. The word oni (my mourning) is similar to the word oni (sorrow) in ben-oni (the son of my sorrow) (Gen. 35:18) and onim (mourners) in bread of mourners (Hosea 9:4). I alluded (It is not clear where.) to its meaning (The reference is probably to bread of mourners.) in Hebrew. (This line is not found in Vat. Ebr. 38. Some emend our verse to read, “in my book on the Hebrew language (Moznayim).” See Weiser.) The meaning of oni is, my mourning. If I was in mourning then I did not eat of it before setting aside the tithe. (Reading lo akhalti kodem ha-ma’aser. Some editions read lo akhalti kodesh ha-ma’aser, I did not eat the holy, the tithe. The latter is forbidden to a mourner in the time between the death and burial of a close relative.)
33. “Israel saw the Egyptians dead (Mitzrayim mayt) ...” (Ex. 14:30) An unusual death, one more grievous than the next. Mekhilta: another interpretation: Egypt had died but not died. As in the Scripture, “But as she breathed her last—for she was dying—she named him Ben-oni,” (Gen. 35:18) which is said regarding Rachel, she was on the verge of passing away when she named her son, Ben-oni. So it was with the Egyptians - they were dying but had not yet died to cause them much pain and so they would see the glory of Israel, and not say, “Just as they are lost, so too is Israel…” They suffered the pain of being a person who will die imminently, and yet they would have the awareness to understand and see Israel’s glory, and how many judgements are passed against a person at that hour when all of them are afflictions..
What is Maimonides' source for alternating the names of the sons of Leah between the first and the second stone of the Ephod? According to the words of Rabbi Chaninah that the names of sons of Leah were engraved in their order (of birth) there is no suggestion that this would be on alternate stones! Where does Maimonides get his theory of interpreting Rabbi Chaninah in such a manner? Finally, the כסף משנה had difficulty with providing a reason as to why Maimonides wrote that in order to complete the 50 letters on the stones of the Ephod, the name Joseph had to be spelled with an additional ה. He quotes the Talmud (Sotah 36) which says as follows: "These 50 (letters) are in reality only 49 letters. Rabbi Yitzchok said that they added a letter to his name as we find in Psalms 81,6: עדות ביהוסף שמו בצאתו ממצרים, 'they added a testimony to Joseph when he came out of Egypt.'" Rabbi Nachman questioned Rabbi Yitzchok that the Torah specified that the names should be engraved כתולדותם, i.e. as they had been known at the time of their respective births? Therefore Rabbi Nachman concludes (as opposed to Rabbi Yitzchok) that the extra letter was the letter י added to the name of Benjamin, seeing that his name is always spelled without the letter י before the final letter ן, except in Genesis 35,18 when his father Jacob named him בנימין with the additional letter י. Thus far the Talmud. It is clear from the quote of the Talmud that the idea of adding the letter ה to Joseph's name was rejected and that they accepted the alternative suggested by Rabbi Nachman. כסף משנה anwers that the rejection of Rabbi Yitzchok's theory by the Talmud applies only to the original view expressed in the Talmud concerning the arrangement of the names, but does not apply to the view expressed by Rabbi Chaninah, which is, after all, the view Maimonides' diagram is based on. The only meaning Rabbi Chaninah had derived from the Torah's directive was that the names should be כתולדותם, should not appear as Moses had referred to them, i.e. as Reuveni, Shimoni, etc. Seeing this is so, Maimonides remained entitled to accept Rabbi Yitzchok's suggestion that the name Joseph be spelled with the additional letter ה as in Psalms 81,6. Thus far the כסף משנה.
ויקרא אברם, even though the angel had instructed Hagar what name to give to the son she would bear, she conveyed this message to Avram, so that both she and Avram called her son Ishmael, in accordance with the angel's instructions. We find a similar situation in Genesis 4,25 and (Genesis 5,3) when Adam's third son was born, where the Torah tells us that both Chavah and Adam called him Sheth. On other occasions we find that father and mother named the same child differently, such as Rachel calling her youngest son בן אוני, whereas Yaakov call him .בנימין (Genesis 35,18)
FULFILL ‘SHVUA’ (THE WEEK OF) THIS ONE. The word shvua is in the construct state for it is punctuated with a sheva. It thus means the seven days of this wife, referring to the seven days of the wedding feast. These too are the words of Rashi. But if so, [i.e., if Rashi interprets shvua as referring to the seven days of the wedding feast rather than, more simply, the seven years of labor, thus implying that the seven years of work had been completed], why did not the Rabbi [Rashi] explain the verse above, my days are fulfilled, as referring to the years of work and the condition which were completed, as Onkelos has it, (The days of my work are fulfilled. (Onkelos, Verse 27.)) and which is the true sense of the verse, [instead of explaining it as referring to the length of time his mother told him to remain there or to his advanced age]? For merely because the days his mother told him to remain with him were completed or because of his advanced age, Laban would not give him his daughter before the mutually agreed time, and it is enough to expect of Laban that he fulfill his condition. It is according to Onkelos, [who says that Jacob’s seven years of work had been completed], that we are bound to explain, fulfill ‘shvua’ this one, as referring to the seven days of the wedding feast for as Jacob had told him, the days of work had already been completed. So also did Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explain it. And I do not know [how the reference here could be to “the seven days of the marriage feast,” as Rashi claims], for “the seven days of the wedding feast” is an ordinance established for Israel by our teacher Moses. (Yerushalmi Kethuboth I, 1.) Perhaps we may say that the dignitaries of the nations had already practiced this custom of old, just as was the case with mourning, as it is written, And he made a mourning for his father seven days. (Further, 50:10. Thus the seven-day period of mourning was already an established practice in the days of the patriarchs.) And that which the Rabbis have deduced from here in the Yerushalmi (Moed Katan I, 7.) and in Bereshith Rabbah, (70:18.) “One must not mix one rejoicing with another,” that is merely a Scriptural intimation based upon the customary practices of the ancient ones prior to the giving of the Torah. But in our Gemara, (Moed Katan 9a.) the Rabbis did not derive it from here, [i.e., from Laban’s statement], but instead they deduced it from the verse, And Solomon held the feast etc. (I Kings 8:65. The verse reads: And Solomon held the feast at that time … seven days and seven days, even fourteen days. The Rabbis explain that the first seven days were a feast of dedication of the new Temple, and the second seven days were the feast of Tabernacles, and he did not combine the two festivities into one because “we must not mix one rejoicing with another.” — The explanation for this principle is stated by Tosafoth Moed Katan 8b. “For just as we must not perform religious duties bundle-wise, but pay exclusive attention to each singly, so must we turn our heart completely toward one rejoicing only, without interference from another.”) Now it is possible to say that this was part of “the changing of the hire ten times” (Further, 31:41.) of which Jacob accused Laban. For Jacob told Laban originally that the days were fulfilled, and Laban kept quiet and gave him Leah. Later, Laban told him, “Fulfill ‘shvua’ this one, for the work period for Leah has not been fulfilled, and I gave her to you before the time I had agreed upon.” And Jacob listened to Laban and completed the days as defined by Laban, for he desired Rachel, and what could he do? Therefore, Scripture does not say at first, “And it came to pass when the days were fulfilled, and Jacob said, etc.,” [for this would have indicated mutual agreement concerning the completion of the work period, whereas Laban, as explained, claimed that that time had not yet arrived]. It is also possible to say that when the seventh year arrived, Jacob said to Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, meaning that this is the year in which the days will be fulfilled. Similarly, The aged with him that is full of days, (Jeremiah 6:11.) which means, “he who is attaining his final year.” Similarly, Until the day of your consecration be fulfilled, (Leviticus 8:33.) which means, “until the seventh day in which the days of your consecration will be fulfilled.” It is possible that Jacob said, My days are fulfilled, because they were about to be fulfilled and are considered as if fulfilled. There are many similar examples in Scripture. Likewise, in the next Seder (portion of the Torah), As her soul was departing, for she died, (Further, 35:18.) which means, “when she was near death, and was considered as if she had already died.” And this is the meaning of the expression, that I may come unto her, (Verse 21 here.) that is to say, Jacob said, “My request is not that you give her to me and I will then leave, but rather that I marry her and complete the few days which are still obligatory upon me for now that the period is almost over, you will not be afraid that I might leave you.” Our Rabbis have given a Midrashic interpretation to the words, that I may come unto her, (Bereshith Rabbah 70:17; also mentioned in Rashi, Verse 21: his mind was intent upon having children and rearing them in the religious traditions of his fathers.) because it is not the ethical way to mention it in this manner, the more so with righteous people, but the intent is as I have said. Laban then told Jacob, “Fulfill the seven years of this one, Leah, for perhaps since I transgressed your will by giving you Leah instead of Rachel you will not fulfill them.” Perhaps he mentioned it in order that it be known when the days of work for Rachel begin, and then he told him, “I will give you the other daughter, Rachel, for the service which thou shalt serve with me after the wedding.”
AND HE CALLED ‘LO’ (IT) E-IL-ELOKEI-ISRAEL. It does not mean that the altar was called “The G-d of Israel,” but because the Holy One, blessed be He, had been with him to deliver him, he named the altar in honor of the miracle so that the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He, would be recalled when people referred to the altar. Thus it would mean, “He Who is E-il is the G-d of me whose name is Israel.” Similarly we find in the case of Moses: And he called its [the altar’s] name Adonai-nissi. (Exodus 17:15.) It is not that the altar was called by the Divine Name Adonai but rather that he named the altar in honor of the miracle so that the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He, might be mentioned: “G-d — He is my banner.” Our Rabbis expounded that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob eil (a great and mighty man). [According to this, the verse should be interpreted as follows: “And the G-d of Israel called Jacob eil].” The words of the Torah are thus as a hammer splitting the rock into many different pieces, admitting many different explanations. I, however, make it my aim to render the plain sense of Scripture. All of this is the language of Rashi. Now the words of the Rabbi [Rashi] are correct as regards the plain sense of Scripture. And the meaning of the word lo will then be [not “it,” which would refer to the altar, but “him,” which refers to Jacob], just as is the meaning of the same word in the verses: And his father called ‘lo’ (him) Benjamin; (Genesis, 35:18.) ‘Vekarei lecha’ (and thou shalt be called) The repairer of the breach. (Isaiah 58:12.) Know that it was the custom in Israel that names be called which are indicative of the praises of G-d, such as Zuriel (Numbers 3:35.) (G-d is my rock), Zurishaddai (Ibid., 7:36.) (The Almighty is my rock), for the one who calls that name declares that G-d is his rock and the Almighty is his rock. Likewise, Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14.) (G-d is with us). And so also the name of the Messiah, who will be called, The Eternal is our righteousness, (Jeremiah 23:6.) and the name of Jerusalem will be, The Eternal is there. (Ezekiel 48:35.) And so did they do with the names of the angels: Gabriel (Daniel 8:16.) (G-d is my strength), Michael (Ibid., 10:13.) (Who is like unto G-d?), for because of their great power they proclaim with their very name that the strength belongs to G-d and who is like unto Him! Onkelos however said: “And he worshipped on it before G-d, the G-d of Israel.” In that case the meaning of the word lo will be as bo (“in it” or “on it”), in the same manner as: That thou hast chosen ‘l’ben’ (the son) of Jesse; (I Samuel 20:30.) And he took hold ‘lo’ (of him); (II Samuel 15:5.) ‘L’mei’ (In the waters) of Meribah. (Numbers 20:24.) It may be that Scripture is saying, “And he called Him G-d, the G-d of Israel,” and the meaning of the word lo is similar to the usage in these verses: I will get me unto the great men; (Jeremiah 5:5.) Get thee out of thy country. (Above, 12:1.) And by way of the Truth, [that is, the mystic lore of the Cabala, the verse is to be understood] as being in accord with the Midrash which the Rabbis have expounded in Tractate Megillah: (18a.) “Whence do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob eil? It is said, And He — the G-d of Israel — called him ‘eil.’ “ There is in this matter a great secret, which the Sages have additionally mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah (79:10.) in another way: “Jacob said to G-d, ‘Thou art the G-d of those on high, and I am the master of those down below.’” The Sages thereby alluded to that which they constantly say: the likeness of Jacob is engraved in the Heavenly Throne. (Tanchuma Numbers 19.) The intent [of Jacob’s statement quoted in the Midrash — “I am the master of those down below”] — is that the Divine Glory rests in the Land of Israel. The student learned in the mystic lore of the Cabala will understand.
AND HE CALLED HIS NAME ER. Judah called his son Er, said name being derived from the expression, Stir up (‘Or’rah’) Thy might. (Psalms 80:3.) His wife called the name of the second son Onan, (A word which suggests grief and mourning. Ramban makes the point that the name Judah chose for his son can easily be surmised, as it suggests strength. But why his wife should choose a name like “Onan” is not indicated.) but Scripture does not relate the reason for this name. Now it is possible that she experienced difficult labor, for it is customary for women to name their children after such an experience, as did the mother of Jabez who so named him, saying: Because I bore him with pain. (I Chronicles 4:9. The name “Yavetz” contains the Hebrew letters of atzev (pain).) And so did Atarah, the mother of Onam, (Ibid., 2:26.) [call him by the name Onam on account of her difficult labor], the name being derived from the expression, And the people were ‘k’mithon’nim’ (as murmurers); (Numbers 11:1.) Wherefore doth a living man ‘yithonen’ (complain)? (Lamentations 3:39.) This is similar in expression to ben oni (the son of my sorrow) (Above, 35:18.) mentioned in the case of Rachel. Judah was not particular about changing Onan’s name as his father Jacob had done. (Above, 35:18.) In Bereshith Rabbah (85:5.) our Rabbis said, by way of explaining the name Er, that he was destined to be thrown off (she’hu’ar) from the world. (Since, as Scripture relates, he died on account of his sin. (Verse 7, and see Ramban there.)) Now this is not to say that such was Judah’s intent. However, the Rabbis made their exposition since the names indicate the future.
AND THE PEOPLE WERE ‘K’MITHON’NIM.’ Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that [the word k’mithon’nim is] “of the root aven (wickedness); similarly, the thoughts of ‘oneich’ (thy evil thoughts), (Jeremiah 4:14.) for they spoke words of wickedness.” But this is not correct, for why would Scripture have concealed their sin, and not stated [clearly what it was], as it does in all other places! The correct interpretation appears to me to be that as they got further away from Mount Sinai, which was near an inhabitable settlement, and entered the great and dreadful wilderness (Deuteronomy 1:19.) in their first journey, they became upset and said: “What shall we do? How shall we live in this wilderness? What shall we eat and what shall we drink? How shall we endure the trouble and the suffering, and when shall we come out of here?” The word k’mithon’nim is thus related to the expression, Wherefore doth a living man ‘yithonein’ (complain), a strong man because of his sins? (Lamentations 3:39.) which is an expression indicating pain, and feeling sorry for oneself. Similarly, ben oni (Genesis 35:18.) means “the son of my sorrow; “‘v’anu hadayagim’ (and the fishers shall lament) and all they that cast angle into the Nile shall mourn. (Isaiah 19:8.) Thus when Scripture states that they felt anxious and upset, it has thereby already mentioned and told [the nature of] their sin. It states that they were k’mithon’nim (‘as’ murmurers), meaning that they spoke in the bitterness of their soul as do people who suffer pain, and this was evil in the sight of the Eternal, since they should have followed Him with joyfnlness, and with gladness of heart by reason of the abundance of all good things (Deuteronomy 28:47.) which He gave them, but they behaved like people acting under duress and compulsion, murmuring and complaining about their condition. It is for this reason that He states with regard to the second [sin, or punishment], and the children of Israel also wept ‘again,’ (Verse 4.) meaning that their first sin consisted of complaining about their lack of comforts in the wilderness, and now they again did a similar thing, and they did not receive correction (Jeremiah 7:28.) from the fire of G-d which devoured them. (As stated in the verse before us.)
כתולדתם ACCORDING TO THEIR BIRTH — in the order in which they were born: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali upon one, and upon the other Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph and Benjamin — the last name being written full (plene, with a י before the last letter, thus: בנימין) for that is how it is written in the passage that tells of his birth (Genesis 35:18). This gives twenty-five letters on each stone (cf. Sotah 36a).
and his mother named him Jabez, saying, “For I bore him in sadness” and she nicknamed him Jabez. A similar instance is Ben Oni. [Other editions read (Gen. 35:18): “... but his father called him Benjamin.”]
לישוב OF JASHUB — He must be identical with Job (Genesis 46:13) who is mentioned amongst those who went down to Egypt, for all the families were called by the names of those who went down to Egypt. But as for those who were born from that time and onwards their families were not called by their own names, except the families of Ephraim and Manasseh, both of whom wore born in Egypt, and Ard and Naaman, the sons of Bela the son of Benjamin (v. 40). And I have found in the work of R. Moses the Preacher why this was so in the case of the two latter — that their mother went down to Egypt when she was already pregnant with them so that they may be regarded as being among those who went down to Egypt, and on this account they formed separate families, just as Chamul and Chezron who were grandchildren of Judah (v. 21), and Cheber and Malkiel who were Asher’s grandchildren (v. 45). If this is an Agada, well and good; but if not, then I say that Bela had many grandchildren and that from these two, Ard and Naaman, there issued from each a large family, and the offspring of the other sons were called after Bela’s name, but the offspring of these two were called after their name. So, too, I say about the sons of Machir who formed two different families, one called after his name, and one called after the name of Gilead, his son, because it was a very large family. Five families are missing from Benjamin’s sons as stated before: here (i.e., by the fact that five of the families had become extinct) there was fulfilled part of his mother’s prophecy which is alluded to in the fact that she called him Ben Oni (my unfortunate son), (Genesis 35:18), whilst by the incident of the concubine in Gibea (Judges 20:35), the whole of it was fulfilled for practically the entire tribe was exterminated. This I found in the work of R. Moses the Preacher.
There was still a stretch of land to go to Ephrath, when Rachel went into labor and had difficulty in her childbirth. And it was when she had difficulty in her labor that the midwife said to her, “Have no fear, for this one, too, is a son for you.” And it came to pass, as her soul was departing – for she died – that she called his name Ben-Oni, but his father called him Benjamin. Genesis 35:16–18
Benjamin was the only child of Jacob to be named by both his parents. He was, in fact, given two names. Jacob firmly chose the other meaning of Oni – not sorrow, but strength – and renamed him Benjamin, or “embodiment of strength.” (Alternatively, “son of days,” that he may live a long life unlike his mother (Midrash Aggadah, Numbers 1.4–14), or that he was the ben zekunim, the son of Jacob’s advanced age (Rashbam, Genesis 35:18).) The doubly named Benjamin was also the only son of Jacob to be born after the patriarch had been given his second name, undergoing the paradigm shift to Israel. He was born, as it were, into a new reality of a nascent nation, coming into its own power. (Simeon and Levi’s confident slaughter of Shechem (ויבאו על העיר בטח) (Genesis 34:25), and the brothers’ wholesale plundering of the city’s women, children, and spoils (27–29), illustrate the clan’s newfound strength.) This family was already a force that had proven itself on the battlefield with Esau and Shechem, and received from God the explicit blessing of nationhood. This first (and last) ben Yisrael to be born in the national homeland became the “embodiment of strength,” indeed.
Cahana said, just as they divide here, so they divide at the beginning of the second book of the Pentateuch (Ex. 1:2–3. There, the order is quite different: First the sons of the wives, then the sons of the handmaidens. In the Babli, 36a/b, the opinion is attributed to R. Ḥanina ben Gamliel.) . Some Tannaïm state: Just as they divide here, so they divide in the standards (This opinion is not found in the Babli. Cf. Num. 2. There the order is: Standard of Judah: Judah, Issachar, Zebulun. Standard of Reuben: Reuben, Simeon, Gad. Standard of Ephraim: Ephraim, Manasse, Benjamin. Standard of Dan: Dan, Asher, Naftali. This also is incompatible with the order given in Deut. 27:13–14: Simeon, Levi, Jehudah, Issachar, Joseph, Benjamin - Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, Naftali.) . The sons of Leah on one side, the sons of Rachel one on one side, the other one on the other side, and the sons of the handmaidens in the middle (The verse indicates which tribes were standing on which mountain but does not indicate how they were standing. The opinion here is that on Mount Gerizim the two Rachel tribes, Joseph and Benjamin, were standing at the right and left extremes and the Leah tribes in the middle; on Mount Ebal the two Leah tribes, Reuben and Zebulun were standing at the right and left extremes and the handmaidens’ tribes in the middle. (Explanation of Pene Moshe). In the Babli, 36b.) . Rebbi Mattania said, the reason of this Tanna is: “Hear me, Jacob my servant, Israel my roofed in (Jes. 48:12. The verse is misquoted; “my servant” is not written. The interpretation of this conceit is based on rabbinic Hebrew קוֹרָא “roof girder”; modern Hebrew קוֹרָה.) .” Just as on the roof the thick part of one [beam] is next to the slim part of the other [beam] (It seems that their roofs were made from wooden beams of a slightly conical shape so that they could be pressed together to protect against the rains. A similar picture Ex. rabba 1(6).) . Some Tannaïm state: Just as they are split here, so they are split on the stones of the ephod (Ex. 28:9–10. The order in which the names of the tribes were to be engraved on the Shoham stones is indicated only obliquely as כְּתוֹלְדֹתָם “in the order of their birth”; that would be Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Jehudah, Dan, Naftali; Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin. In the Babli, 36a, this is the opinion of Rav Cahana.) . “In their fulnesses”, that there should be 25 on one side and 25 on the other side (The word is written not for the Shoham stones of the ephod but for the stones representing the tribes on the ḥoshen(Ex. 28:20), on which the names of the tribes were engraved (v. 21) and which were set to fill the settings prepared for them.) . But they are only 49 (As written, the names of the Gerizim tribes add up to 27 letters, those of the Ebal tribes to 22. The same objection in the Babli, 36b.) ! Rebbi Joḥanan said, “Benjamin” of “and their births” is plene (On the stone, the name of Benjamin was written בנימין for a total of 28 letters. This opinion is not quoted in the Babli; it is dismissed in the Yerushalmi.) . Rebbi Judah bar Zabida said, Jehoseph is plene, “He put it up as a testimony in Jehoseph. (Ps. 81:6. In the Babli, 36b, this is the opinion of R. Isaac.) ” But they are only 23 on one side and 27 on the other (This questioner reads זבולון plene but בנימן defective and יוסף in its usual form.) ! Rebbi Joḥanan said, Benjamin was split, Ben on one side, Jamin on the other side (R. Joḥanan cannot follow his own opinion that Benjamin was spelled plene but must follow R. Judah bar Zabida. Then on the right hand side there were 27 + 1 - 3 = 25 letters and on the left hand side 22 + 3 = 25 letters.) . Rebbi Zabida said, this is fine. Does it say “their six names”? No, but, “of their names”, not their entire names (In Ex. 28:10, the group of the first six names is charaterized as מִשְּׁמֹתָם, “of their names”, taking the מ, as usual in rabbinic texts, as partitive. The other six names are “the six other names”, to be written in full (and, according to the Babli, 36a, in the order of their births.)) ! The first were written on the right hand side of the High Priest, to the left of the viewer. The last were written on the left hand side of the High Priest, to the right of the viewer. The first ones were not written in order, for Jehudah is king. The last ones were written in order (That means, not in the order in which they are enumerated in Deut. 27:14.) .
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak objects to this: We require the names to be written “according to their birth,” and Joseph was not called Yehosef from birth. Rather, the explanation is as follows: Throughout the entire Torah, the name of Benjamin is written without a second letter yod between the letters mem and nun, and here, where he is born, Benjamin is written in full, spelled with a second yod. As it is written: “But his father called him Benjamin” (Genesis 35:18). Therefore, his name was written on the ephod with a second yod, “according to his birth.”
As her soul was departing, for she died, she named him Ben Oni [son of my sorrow], but his father named him Binyomin.
But his father called him in the language of the sanctuary, Benjamin.
And it was in the going forth of her soul, for death came upon her, that she called his name The son of my woe: but his father called him Benjamin.
| וַתָּ֖מׇת רָחֵ֑ל וַתִּקָּבֵר֙ בְּדֶ֣רֶךְ אֶפְרָ֔תָה הִ֖וא בֵּ֥ית לָֽחֶם׃ | 19 E | Thus Rachel died. She was buried on the road to Ephrath—now Bethlehem. |
ותקבר בדרך אפרתה, “she was buried on the way to Efrat.” Rachel had lost so much blood during giving birth that Yaakov was not able to bring her to the cave of Machpelah.
ותמת רחל ותקבר בדרך אפרתה, “Rachel died and was buried on the way to Efrat.” Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah claim that the dignity of women requires that they be buried at the place they die. [not found in my edition of Bereshit Rabbah. Ed.] They use the example of Rachel being buried at the site she died as the precedent for their statement. We also find that Sarah was buried at the site she died as the Torah wrote: “Sarah died at Kiryat Arba which is presently called Hebron,” i.e. she died in Hebron and was buried in Hebron as the Torah reports in Genesis 23,19 “afterwards (after the purchase of the local burial ground) Avraham buried his wife Sarah.” We also find that Miriam was buried where she died (Numbers 20,1)
Rachel died, and she was buried on the path to Efrat, it is Bethlehem. Had Rachel given birth in a populated area, people might have been able to help her. However, she died on the road, and Jacob buried her there rather than in the city.
"And Sarah's life was" Of all the women in the world, why is Sarah the only one whose death is mentioned in Torah? Rabbi Chiya answered, This is not so, for it is written, "And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Efrat" (Gen. 35:19), "and Miriam died there" (Num. 20:1), "and Deborah, Rivkah's nurse, died" (Gen. 35:8) and "the daughter of Shua, Judah's wife died" (Gen. 38:12).
“Rachel and Leah answered and said to him: Is there still a share or inheritance for us in our father's house?” (Genesis 31:14). “Rachel and Leah answered and said to him” – why did Rachel die first? Rabbi Yudan and Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Yudan said: Because she spoke before her sister. Rabbi Yosei said to him: ‘Have you ever seen a person call Reuben, and Simeon answer him? Did he not call Rachel, and Rachel answered him?’ (Jacob called Rachel first, see Genesis 31:4.) According to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, (Rabbi Yudan.) it works out well. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, she died only from the curse of the elder [Jacob], as it is stated: “With whomever you find your gods, he shall not live” (Genesis 31:32); it was “like an error that emerges from the ruler” (Ecclesiastes 10:5). “Rachel stole [the household idols that were her father’s]” (Genesis 31:19); “Rachel died…” (Genesis 35:19). “Are we not considered foreigners by him, as he sold us, and he also consumed our silver?” (Genesis 31:15). “Are we not considered foreigners by him, as he sold us…[consumed our silver?]” – is that possible? (That he forcibly took their belongings.) Rather, if there was a fine sheep, he would take it. If there was a tasty dish, he would take it. (He was more subtle in taking their belongings.)
“And Jacob answered, and said to Laban: Because I was afraid, because I said that you might steal your daugters from me” (Genesis 31:31). “With whomever you find your gods, he shall not live; before our brethren, identify what is with me, and take them for yourself. And Jacob did not know that Rachel stole them” (Genesis 31:32). “With whomever you find your gods, he shall not live” – and so it was, “like an error that emerges from the ruler” (Ecclesiastes 10:5). “Rachel stole…” (Genesis 31:19); “Rachel died…” (Genesis 35:19). “Laban came into Jacob’s tent, and into Leah’s tent, and into the tent of the two maidservants, but he did not find; he emerged from Leah's tent, and came into Rachel’s tent” (Genesis 31:33). “Laban came into Jacob’s tent, and into Rachel’s tent” – “into Jacob’s tent,” which was Rachel’s tent; “and into Leah’s tent, and into the tent of the two maidservants…he emerged from Leah’s tent, and came into Rachel's tent.” Why into Rachel’s tent twice? It is because he was familiar with her, that she was a toucher. (She had a tendency to touch items that did not belong to her and take them.) “Rachel had taken the household idols, placed them in the cushion of the camel, and she sat upon them. Laban felt throughout the tent and did not find” (Genesis 31:34). “Rachel had taken the household idols, placed them in the cushion of the camel” – in the camel’s saddle. “She said to her father: Let my lord not be angry, as I cannot arise before you because the manner of women is upon me. He searched, but did not find the household idols” (Genesis 31:35). “And she sat upon them…she said to her father: Let my lord not be angry, as I cannot…” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He did not find household idols, but he found jugs. The household idols were transformed into jugs so as not to embarrass Rachel.
“Jacob established a monument upon her grave; it is the monument of Rachel's grave until today” (Genesis 35:20). “Jacob established a monument” – we learned there: The leftover [money] from the dead... (The leftovers of money collected for someone’s burial.) Rabbi Natan says: With the leftover [money] from the dead one builds a structure on his grave. (Mishna Shekalim 2:5. ) Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel taught: One does not craft structures for the righteous; their words are their memorials. We learned that Israel was called by Rachel’s name, as it is stated: “Is Ephraim a dear son to me?” (Jeremiah 31:20). (In this verse, all of Israel is referred to as Ephraim, a son of Rachel. For this reason Jacob built a monument on her grave, as a sign of honor for the fact that all of Israel is called by her grandson’s name, or so that people would be able to identify the spot and pray there (see Yefeh To’ar). ) Another matter, “Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Efrat” – what did Jacob see that led him to bury Rachel on the way to Efrat? It is because Jacob foresaw that the exiles were destined to pass there. This is why he buried her there, so she would ask for mercy upon them. That is what is written: “A voice is heard in Rama, wailing, bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children” (Jeremiah 31:15).
“It was with the departure of her soul, as she was dying, that she called his name Ben Oni, and his father called him Benjamin” (Genesis 35:18). “It was with the departure of her soul…that she called his name Ben-oni” – the son of my travail in the Aramaic language. “And his father called him Benjamin” – in the sacred tongue. (The word on in Aramaic means suffering. In Hebrew, it means strength. Jacob replaced on with yamin, the right hand, which symbolizes strength.) “Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Efrat, which is Bethlehem” (Genesis 35:19). “Rachel died and was buried” – immediately after death, burial. “On the way to Efrat, which is Bethlehem” – Rabbi Yanai and Rabbi Yonatan were sitting. A certain heretic came and asked them: ‘What is [the meaning of] that which is written: “Upon your departure from me today, [you will find two men by Rachel’s tomb, at the border of Benjamin at Tzeltzaḥ]”? (I Samuel 10:2). Is Tzeltzaḥ not on the border of Benjamin, and Rachel’s tomb on the border of Judah, as it is written: “On the way to Efrat,” and it is written: “[But you,] Bethlehem of Efrat, [young to be among the thousands of Judah]”?’ (Micah 5:1). Rabbi Yanai said: ‘Remove my disgrace.’ (He said to Rabbi Yonatan to answer the heretic, because, to his, dismay, he was unable to answer him.) Rabbi Yonatan] said to him: ‘“Upon your departure from me today” by Rachel’s tomb, you will find two men at the border of Benjamin in Tzeltzaḥ.’ Some say [that Rabbi Yonatan said]: ‘“Upon your departure from me today” at the border of Benjamin in Tzeltzaḥ, you will find two men by Rachel’s tomb.’ This one is accurate, and you thus learn that they were at the border of Benjamin. It is [similarly] written: “…And he passed through the land of Benjamin, but they did not find. They came to the land of Tzuf” (I Samuel 9:4–5). And it is written: “He said to him: Behold, now, a man of God is in this city” (I Samuel 9:6). (The city was called Tzuf because the prophet [hatzofeh] resided there. These verses demonstrate that Saul and Samuel were in the territory of Benjamin. )
[(Gen. 43:14:) AND MAY GOD ALMIGHTY (ShDY) GRANT YOU MERCY.] What was the reason for Jacob to bless them with < the formula > GOD ShDY? (Tanh., Gen. 10:10; below, 10:16.) To teach you that a lot of afflictions had come upon him. While he was in his mother's womb, Esau had contended with him, as stated (in Gen. 25:22): BUT THE CHILDREN STRUGGLED TOGETHER WITHIN HER. (Cf. PRK 3:1.) And so it says (in Amos 1:11): BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND DESTROYED HIS WOMB. "His womb" is < what is > written. (DESTROYED HIS WOMB would normally be read as a metaphor and translated by an expression such as “cast off all pity.”) Because of Esau he fled to Laban. See how many troubles there were! (Gen. 31:40:) THUS I WAS: BY DAY SCORCHING HEAT CONSUMED ME…. < Look at > how, when he left, < Laban > pursued after him to kill him, [as stated (in Gen. 31:23)]: AND PURSUED AFTER HIM FOR A JOURNEY OF {THREE} [SEVEN] DAYS. He escaped from him; Esau came with the intention of killing him. On account of him he lost all that gift (Gk.: doron.) (according to Gen. 32:15 [14]): TWO HUNDRED SHE-GOATS…. He went away from Esau; the trouble about Dinah came (in Gen. 34). Then after that, the trouble with Rachel < dying > (in Gen. 35:19). Then, after these troubles, he was intending to rest a bit, until there came the trouble about Joseph (in Gen. 37); and after that, the trouble with his father, Isaac, who died (in Gen. 35:29) ten years after the sale of Joseph. So the Scripture has cried out (in Job 3:26): I WAS NOT TRANQUIL, NOT QUIET, HAD NO REST; AND TROUBLE CAME. After that there came upon him the trouble with Simeon (in Gen. 42:24); and after that, the trouble with Benjamin (in Gen. 42:36; 43:3-15). He therefore prayed (in Genesis 43:14) AND MAY GOD ShDY. Now he says: The one who said: Enough (DY), to the heavens and to the earth should say: Enough (DY), to my afflictions. For, when the Holy One created the heavens and the earth, they continued expanding until the Holy One said to them: Enough (DY). (See above, 1:11; 3:25. below, 10:16.) It is therefore written (in Gen. 43:14): GOD WHO IS ENOUGH (ShDY).
We are hereby taught that the Temple is built in the portion of Benjamin and like the head of an ox extends from the portion of Benjamin to that of Judah, as it is written "and between his (Benjamin's) shoulders (in a slight depression on the highest part of Benjamin's land) does it (the Temple) rest." As to its being written (Bereshith 49:10) "The scepter shall not depart from Judah," that refers to the chamber of hewn stone (in the Temple), which is in the portion of Judah, viz. (Psalms 78:67-68) "And He rejected the tent of Joseph and did not choose the tent of Ephraim. He chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion, which He loves." But the Temple was in the portion of Benjamin, viz. (Bereshith 35:19) "And Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Efrath, which is Bethlehem."
AND THE LAND WAS DEFILED, THEREFORE DID I VISIT THE INIQUITY THEREOF UPON IT, AND THE LAND VOMITED OUT HER INHABITANTS. Scripture was very strict in forbidding these sexual relationships on account of the Land which becomes defiled by them, and which in turn will vomit out the people that do [these abominations]. Now forbidden sexual relationships are matters affecting personal conduct, and do not depend on the Land, [so why should the Land be affected by these personal immoral acts]? But the secret of the matter is in the verse which states, When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the children of men, He set the borders of the people, etc. For the portion of the Eternal is His people etc. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9.) The meaning thereof is as follows: The Glorious Name (Ibid., 28:58.) created everything and He placed the power of the lower creatures in the higher beings, giving over each and every nation in their lands, after their nations (Genesis 10:31.) some known star or constellation, as is known by means of astrological speculation. It is with reference to this that it is said, which the Eternal thy G-d hath allotted unto all the people, (Deuteronomy 4:19.) for He allotted to all nations constellations in the heavens, and higher above them are the angels of the Supreme One whom He placed as lords over them, as it is written, But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me, (Daniel 10:13.) and it is written, lo, the prince of Greece shall come. (Ibid., Verse 20.) They are called “kings,” as it is written [there], and I was left over there beside the kings of Persia. (Daniel 10:13.) Now the Glorious Name (Ibid., 28:58.) is G-d of gods, and Lord of lords (Deuteronomy 10:17.) over the whole world. But the Land of Israel, which is in the middle of the inhabited earth, (Aware of the fact that the earth is spherical [and not flat, as believed by most people in the Medieval Ages], Jewish sources being mindful of this fact speak of the Land of Israel as being in the middle of the “inhabited” earth, and not just “of the earth,” as there is no middle point in a spherical body.) is the inheritance of the Eternal designated to His Name. He has placed none of the angels as chief, observer, or ruler (Proverbs 6:7.) over it, since He gave it as a heritage to His people who declare the Unity of His Name, the seed of His beloved ones [i.e., the patriarchs]. It is with reference to this that He said, and ye shall be Mine own treasure from among all peoples; for all the earth is Mine, (Exodus 19:5.) and it is further written, so shall ye be My people, and I will be your G-d, (Jeremiah 11:4.) and you will not be subject to other powers at all. Now He [also] sanctified the people who dwell in His Land with the sanctity of observing the laws against forbidden sexual relationships, and with the abundant commandments, so that they [His people] would be dedicated to His Name. It is for this reason that He said, And ye shall keep all My statutes, and all Mine ordinances, and do them, that the Land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, vomit you not out, (Further, 20:22.) and it is further written, But I have said unto you: ‘Ye shall inherit their Land, and I will give it unto you to possess it’ … I am the Eternal your G-d, Who have set you apart from the peoples, (Ibid., Verse 24.) meaning to say, that He has set us apart from all the nations over whom He appointed princes and other celestial powers, by giving us the Land [of Israel] so that He, blessed be He, will be our G-d, and we will be dedicated to His Name. Thus the Land which is the inheritance of the Glorious Name, will vomit out all those who defile it and will not tolerate worshippers of idols, nor those who practise immorality. Now this section mentioned the Molech, (Above, Verse 21.) which is a form of idolatry, together with the forbidden sexual relationships, and with reference to all of them He said, Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things; for in all of these the nations are defiled, (Verse 24.) and the Land vomited out her inhabitants (In Verse 25 before us.) [thus showing that the Land is unable to contain idol worshippers or those who practise immorality]. And so also did He say in the second section [i.e., in Seder Kedoshim], and I have set you apart from the peoples, that ye should be Mine, (Further, 20:26.) which is [the basis for] the strict prohibition against idolatry. Therefore He stated that it is because they are dedicated to His Name that He gave them the Land, as it is said, And I have said unto you: ‘Ye shall inherit their Land, and I will give it unto you to possess it’ … I am the Eternal your G-d, Who have set you apart from the peoples. (Ibid., Verse 24.) Now outside the Land of Israel, although it all belongs to the Glorious Name, (Ibid., 28:58.) yet its purity is not perfect, because of “the servants” who hold sway there, and the nations go astray after their princes to worship them as well. It is for this reason that Scripture states, the G-d of the whole earth shall He be called, (Isaiah 54:5.) since He is the G-d of gods Who rules over all, and He will in the end punish the host of the high heaven on high, (Ibid., 24:21.) removing the celestial powers and demolishing the array of “the servants,” and afterwards He will punish the kings of the earth upon the earth. (Ibid., 24:21.) This is the meaning of the verse stating, The matter is by the decree of ‘irin’ (the wakeful ones), and ‘sh’elta’ (the sentence) by the word of the holy ones, (Daniel 4:14.) meaning, the matter that was decreed on Nebuchadnezzar [that he be driven from men and eat grass as oxen etc.] is the pronouncement of the guarding angels and the sentence of the word of the holy ones, who have ordained on the powers emanating from them that it be so. They [the angels] are called irin [literally: “the wakeful ones”], because from their emanations proceed all the powers that stir all activities, similar to that which it says, and behold ‘ir’ (a wakeful one) and a holy one came down from heaven. He cried aloud, and said thus: ‘Hew down the tree etc. (Ibid., Verse 10-11.) — [In the verse] And ‘sh’elta’ (the sentence) is by word of the holy ones, (Daniel 4:14.) [the word sh’elta] is like sha’alu, meaning first “they ask” what is the will of the Supreme One about it, and afterwards they decree that it be so done. It is with reference to this that Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar, it is the decree of the Most High, (Ibid., Verse 21.) for everything is from Him, blessed be He. Thus the Glorious Name, (Ibid., 28:58.) blessed be He, is G-d of gods, (Deuteronomy 10:17.) in the whole world, and G-d of the Land of Israel which is the inheritance of the Eternal. (I Samuel 26:19.) This is the meaning of the expression, and he will go astray after the foreign gods of the Land, (Deuteronomy 31:16.) for the gods are foreign to the Land of G-d and His inheritance. This is what Scripture means when it states [of the Cutheans who were settled by the king of Assyria in the cities of the kingdom of Israel], they knew not the manner of the G-d of the Land; therefore He hath sent lions among them, and, behold, they slay them, because they know not the manner of the G-d of the Land. (II Kings 17:26. The verse is thus stating that they did not live in the Land in a way befitting its special characteristic as G-d’s inheritance — hence the phrase “the G-d of the Land.”) Now the Cutheans were not punished in their own land when they worshipped their gods, by G-d sending lions among them, but only when they came into the Land of G-d and conducted themselves as before, did He send lions among them who slew them. And so the Rabbis taught in the Sifra: (Sifra Kedoshim 11:14.) “And the Land vomit not you out also etc. (Verse 28.) The Land of Israel is unlike other lands; it is unable to contain sinners.” And in the Sifre we find that the Rabbis taught: (Sifre Ha’azinu, 315.) “And there was no strange god with Him (Deuteronomy 32:12.) [when He took Israel out of Egypt, and protected them during their wandering through the wilderness], so that none of the princes of the nations should have power to come and exercise authority over you, something like that which it is said, and when I go forth, lo, the prince of Greece shall come, etc.” (Ibid., Verse 20.) This is the meaning of the saying of the Rabbis: (Kethuboth 110 b.) “Whoever lives outside the Land, is as if he had no G-d, for it is said, I am the Eternal your G-d, Who brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d, (Further, 25:38.) and it is further said, for they have driven me [David] out this day that I should not cleave unto the inheritance of the Eternal, saying: Go, serve other gods.” (I Samuel 26:19. “And who told David, ‘Go, serve other gods?’ This can only mean to teach you that he who lives outside the Land is like etc.’” (Kethuboth). Having been forced to leave the Land, David was thus justified in saying that those responsible for it had, as it were, said to him, “Go, etc.”) And in the Tosephta of Tractate Abodah Zarah the Rabbis have said: (Tosephta, Abodah Zarah 5:5. On the name Tosephta, see in Seder Tazria Note 124.) “Now it is said, And I [Jacob] will come back to my father’s house in peace, then shall the Eternal be my G-d, (Genesis 28:21.) and it is further said, to give you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d. (Further, 25:38.) When you are in the land of Canaan I am your G-d. When you are not in the land of Canaan, I am not your G-d if it were at all possible to say so [for He is our G-d under all circumstances and in all places]. Similarly it is said, about forty thousand ready armed for war passed on in the presence of the Eternal unto battle, (Joshua 4:13.) and it is further said, and the Land is subdued before the Eternal, and before His people. (I Chronicles 22:18.) But how could it enter one’s mind that Israel subdued the Land before the Eternal [as if to say that they captured it for His sake]? But [this teaches that] as long as they are upon the Land, it is as if it were subdued [before Him, since He is their G-d, as explained above], but when they are not upon it, it is not subdued.” It is on the basis of this matter that the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: (Sifre Eikev, 43.) “And ye perish quickly from off the good Land. (Deuteronomy 11:17. The following verse continues: And ye shall lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul etc. This clearly indicates even as the Sifre teaches, that after banishment from the Land they are to continue the observance of the commandments.) Although I banish you from the Land to outside the Land, make yourselves distinctive by the commandments, so that when you return they shall not be novelties to you. This can be compared to a master who was angry with his wife, and sent her back to her father’s house and told her, ‘Adorn yourself with precious things, so that when you come back they will not be novelties to you.’ And so did the prophet Jeremiah say [to the people in exile in Babylon], Set thee up waymarks. (Jeremiah 31:20.) These are the commandments, by which Israel is made distinctive.” Now the verses which state, and ye perish quickly … and ye shall lay up these My words etc. (Deuteronomy 11:17-18.) only make obligatory in the exile [the observance of those commandments] affecting personal conduct, such as the [wearing of] phylacteries and [placing of] Mezuzoth (A parchment on which is written Deuteronomy 6:4-9, and 11:13-21, and which is fastened to the right door-post. See further in Vol. II, p. 173.) [these being specifically mentioned there in the following words of Scripture], and concerning them the Rabbis [in the above text of the Sifre] explained [that we must observe them] so that they shall not be novelties to us when we return to the Land, for the main [fulfillment] of the commandments is [to be kept] when dwelling in the Land of G-d. Therefore the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: (Sifre R’eih, 80.) “And ye shall possess it, and dwell therein. And ye shall observe to do all the statutes etc. (Deuteronomy 11:31-32.) Dwelling in the Land of Israel is of equal importance to all the commandments of the Torah.” A similar statement is also found in the Tosephta of Tractate Abodah Zarah. (Tosephta, Abodah Zarah 5:3.) This in fact was the thought of the wicked ones who [misusing the intention of the above statement], said to the prophet Ezekiel [whose prophetic activity was in the Babylonian exile]: (Sanhedrin 105 a.) “Our master Ezekiel, if a servant is sold by his master, does the master still have any claim to him?” (In other words, “since G-d sold them to Nebuchadnezzar and banished them from before Him, does He still have any claim upon them?” (Rashi ibid.). The answer was that they were never “sold” since the exile was merely a form of temporary punishment for their sins, and therefore, and that which cometh into your mind etc. (see text).) For it is said, and that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all; in that ye say: We will be as the nations, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone. (Ezekiel 20:32.) And this was the command of our patriarch Jacob to his household, and to all that were with him, at the time that they came into the Land, Put away the strange gods that are among you, and purify yourselves. (Genesis 35:2.) And G-d, by Whom alone actions are weighed, (See I Samuel 2:3.) [brought it about] that Rachel died on the way when they started coming into the Land, (Genesis 35:16-19. See in Vol. I, pp. 330-332, where Ramban refers briefly to this problem, namely why Jacob married two sisters in their lifetime, and then concludes that “he married them only outside the Land.” Here Ramban completes the thought, by explaining that G-d, by Whom events are decided, therefore brought about the death of one of the sisters as soon as they came into the Land. The reason why Rachel had to die and not Leah, is explained in the text.) for on account of her own merit she did not die outside the Land, and for Jacob’s merit, he could not dwell in the Land with two sisters [in their lifetime, since this is forbidden in the Torah, and the laws of the Torah were observed by our ancestors in the Land of Israel even before the Torah was given on Sinai], and she [Rachel] was the one by whose marriage the prohibition against two sisters took effect [since Jacob was already married to Leah]. It would appear that Rachel became pregnant with Benjamin before they came to Shechem, and while in the Land Jacob did not touch her at all, for the reason that we have mentioned. And the prophet states, And first I will recompense their iniquity and their sin double; because they have profaned My Land; they have filled Mine inheritance with the carcasses of their detestable things and their abominations. (Jeremiah 16:18.) This matter [i.e., that the Land of Israel is the inheritance of the Eternal and thus cannot tolerate sinners] is found in many places in the Scriptures, and you will see it clearly after I have opened your eyes to it. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented in the section of Vayeilech: (Deuteronomy 31:16.) “We know that G-d is One, and changes arise because of those who receive [His beneficent deeds], but G-d does not change His deeds, as they are all done in wisdom. And included in the worship of G-d is to guard the ability to receive [His beneficence] according to the place [so that if a particular place is holier than others, one must observe there more strictly the laws of holiness]. Therefore it is written [of the Cutheans, that they did not know] the manner of the G-d of the Land, (II Kings 17:26. The Cutheans were thus punished for not being heedful of the holiness of the Land of Israel which is unable to retain worshippers of idols.) and of Jacob it is said [when he came into the Land he told his household], put away the strange gods, (Genesis 35:2.) and the extreme opposite of [the sanctity of] the place [i.e., the Land of Israel] is indulging in forbidden sexual relationships, as they are [sins of the] flesh. The student versed [in the mysteries of the Torah] will understand.” Thus are the words [of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra] of blessed memory. Now do not refute me [in what I have written above, that Israel is under the direct guidance of G-d alone, and no celestial power determines their fate], by citing the verse, Michael your prince, (Daniel 10:21.) for he is only a ministering angel who implores mercy for Israel, but is in no way a prince exercising any royalty or power. So was also the captain of the host (Joshua 5:14.) who appeared to Joshua at Jericho, showing him that G-d had sent him to fight their battles, similar to [that which happened in the days of] Hezekiah. (II Kings 19:35: And it came to pass at that night, that the angel of the Eternal went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians etc.) Besides, this matter [of Michael imploring mercy for Israel] was when we were already outside the Land of Israel. Now I do not have permission to explain on the subject of ha’aretz (“the earth” or “the Land”) more than this. (Ramban is alluding to the word ha’aretz, which is mentioned here repeatedly: vatitma ha’aretz … vataki ha’aretz (literally: “and the earth was defiled … and the earth vomited out”). This hints at the first ha’aretz, mentioned in the first verse of Creation, which Ramban has already explained in many places as referring to “the higher earth,” to which the souls finally return after their sojourn on the lower earth.) But if you will merit to understand the first “earth” mentioned in the verse of Bereshith (In the beginning G-d created the heaven and the earth), and also the one mentioned in the section of Im Bechukothai, (Further, 26:42. v’ha’aretz ezkor (literally: “and the earth I will remember”).) you will know a profound and sublime secret, and you will further understand what our Rabbis have said: (Tanchuma, Vayakheil 7.) “The Sanctuary on high is exactly opposite the Sanctuary below.” I have already alluded to this on the verse, for all the earth is Mine. (Exodus 19:5.) Now Scripture mentions that the people of the land of Canaan were punished on account of their immoral [sexual] deeds. And our Rabbis have said that they were warned about these matters from the time of creation, when these laws were declared to Adam (Sanhedrin 56 b. Rambam in the Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Melachim 9:1, puts it as follows: “The first man was commanded concerning six matters: idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, etc.”) and to Noah, (Incest is counted among the Seven Laws of the Noachides (see Vol. I, p. 417, Note 148).) for He does not punish unless He admonishes first. Scripture, however, did not state the admonition, but instead said that the Land would vomit them out, for the Land abhors all these abominations. (Verse 27.) Now the Canaanites were not the only ones who were admonished about these matters [for since these laws were declared to Adam and Noah, they applied to all mankind], and the Scriptural section mentions specifically, After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do, (Above, Verse 3.) which proves that the Egyptians also did all these abominations, and yet the land of Egypt did not vomit them out, nor did the lands of other nations vomit them out! Rather, this whole subject shows the distinction of the Land [of Israel] and its holiness [so that it alone is unable to retain sinners]. Scripture states, and the Land vomited out [using a past tense, although the Canaanites were still living there], for from the time that He was to punish [them] for the sins committed upon her [i.e. the Land], having decreed destruction upon the Canaanites, it is as if the Land had already vomited them out. Or it may be that the expression, and the Land vomited out is a reference to above, similar to what is said, their defense is removed from over them. (Numbers 14:9. See Ramban there.)
Ephrathite. Beis Lechem is located in the land of Ephros. (See Bereishis 35:19.)
Benjamin’s life began with Rachel’s death, so we begin our tour in Eretz Binyamin by exploring a popular contender for the site of Rachel’s burial. For many hundreds of years, tradition assigned a tomb south of Jerusalem, on the road passing Bethlehem and heading down to biblical Ephrath in the naĥalah of Judah, as the burial spot of Rachel. That site satisfies the descriptive verse in Genesis 35:17–19: (Also Genesis 48:7.)
Rochel died and was buried on the way to Ephros, which is Beis Lechem [Bethlehem].
And Rahel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem.
"As for the matter you mentioned (1 Samuel 10:2), 'When you leave me today, you will meet two men near Rachel's tomb, at Zelzah on the border of Benjamin.' But haven't we learned that Rachel was buried in Bethlehem (her portion) of Judah, as it says (Genesis 35:19), 'Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem).' And Ephrath is none other than Judah's portion, as it says (Micah 5:1), 'But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah...' Rather, Samuel told Saul, 'Now that I am speaking to you, you will go and find them near Rachel's tomb, and they will tell you that she is buried on the border of Benjamin, at Zelzah.' Similarly, it says (1 Samuel 22:6), 'Now Saul was sitting under a tamarisk tree on the hill at Gibeah, with his spear in his hand, and all his officials were standing around him.' If Saul was in Gibeah, then how could he be in Ramah, and if he was in Ramah, how could he be in Gibeah? Rather, it was the court of Samuel the Ramathite that made Saul's throne stable in Gibeah. Similarly, it says (Psalm 122:2), 'Our feet are standing in your gates, Jerusalem.' Can it really be said that our feet are only standing in the gates of Jerusalem? Rather, it is the courts of David that stand in the gates of Jerusalem. Similarly, it says (Zechariah 14:10), 'The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah.' But wasn't the area south of Jerusalem already a plain, and Geba and Rimmon hilly regions? Rather, just as Geba and Rimmon are destined to become a plain opposite Jerusalem, so too all lands are destined to become a plain opposite Jerusalem."
| וַיַּצֵּ֧ב יַעֲקֹ֛ב מַצֵּבָ֖ה עַל־קְבֻרָתָ֑הּ הִ֛וא מַצֶּ֥בֶת קְבֻֽרַת־רָחֵ֖ל עַד־הַיּֽוֹם׃ | 20 E | Over her grave Jacob set up a pillar; it is the pillar at Rachel’s grave to this day. |
HER GRAVE. Kevuratah (her grave) and kivrah (her grave) mean the same. (Kever means a grave, kevurah a burial, and kevuratah her burial. Thus our verse should have read kivrah (her grave) and not kevuratah (her burial) since Jacob erected a monument over Rachel’s grave. I.E. points out that kevuratah can also have the same meaning as kivrah (Krinsky).)
היא מצבת קבורת רחל, the one Samuel referred to after the latter departed from him, having been anointed king over Israel. (Samuel I 10,2)
מצבה על קבורתה, this was for protection against the grave being damaged or exhumed by people doing this for nefarious purposes, as it was located at the crossroads where there is a lot of traffic. [I presume it could not be in a field as Yaakov would not violate private property to bury his dead. Ed.]
Jacob established a monument upon her grave; it is the monument of Rachel’s grave until today. This monument lasted for many generations. Although its appearance possibly changed over the course of time, it remained standing and is mentioned elsewhere. 24
“Jacob established a monument upon her grave; it is the monument of Rachel's grave until today” (Genesis 35:20). “Jacob established a monument” – we learned there: The leftover [money] from the dead... (The leftovers of money collected for someone’s burial.) Rabbi Natan says: With the leftover [money] from the dead one builds a structure on his grave. (Mishna Shekalim 2:5. ) Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel taught: One does not craft structures for the righteous; their words are their memorials. We learned that Israel was called by Rachel’s name, as it is stated: “Is Ephraim a dear son to me?” (Jeremiah 31:20). (In this verse, all of Israel is referred to as Ephraim, a son of Rachel. For this reason Jacob built a monument on her grave, as a sign of honor for the fact that all of Israel is called by her grandson’s name, or so that people would be able to identify the spot and pray there (see Yefeh To’ar). ) Another matter, “Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Efrat” – what did Jacob see that led him to bury Rachel on the way to Efrat? It is because Jacob foresaw that the exiles were destined to pass there. This is why he buried her there, so she would ask for mercy upon them. That is what is written: “A voice is heard in Rama, wailing, bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children” (Jeremiah 31:15).
Yaakov set up a monument on her grave. This monument is on Rochel’s grave to this very day.
And Jakob erected a pillar over the house of burying: which is the pillar of the tomb of Rahel unto this day.
| וַיִּסַּ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַיֵּ֣ט אׇֽהֳלֹ֔ה מֵהָ֖לְאָה לְמִגְדַּל־עֵֽדֶר׃ | 21 J | Israel journeyed on, and pitched his tent beyond Migdal-eder. |
Migdal Eder: A place in Israel, mentioned in Gen. 35:21. It seems from Scripture that it is the vicinity of Bethlehem. Our forefather Jacob camped in the environs of Migdal Eder after he lost his wife Rachel, who was buried in Bethlehem. According to the translation of the second-century sage Yonasan ben Uziel, Migdal Eder is the place of the Messiah, as well as his name.
“And Yisroel journeyed, and spread his tent beyond the tower of Eider.” (Bereshit, 35:21) This concerns what is written in the Midrash (Ruth Rabba, 2:7), “even after all the tribulations and adventures of Yaakov Avinu, the death of Rachel was more difficult on him than all of them.” It is the way of the Tsaddikim, and especially Yaakov Avinu, to strengthen himself and not to question the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He, for certainly everything is for the good. This is why it says here after the death of Rachel, “and he pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eider,” meaning that he strengthened himself and did not question the ways of the Holy One, blessed be He. Both “tower” and eider (a heard) are terms denoting tekifut (unbridled strength), and truly God had a deep intent with the death of Rachel, as mentioned in the holy Zohar (Bereshit, 175a). This is as it said (Bereshit, 35:22), “and it was, when Yisroel dwelt in the land …” “Dwelling” signifies acceptance, as he accepted it and did not at all question God’s attributes, for surely God intended a depth in this that was above his apprehension. Then afterwards, God showed him that it was proper to ask for the depth to be revealed, for a man needs to ask for this. Even though questioning His attributes is forbidden, nevertheless he must ask God to show him what He wanted to effect with this depth, for it is the way of God not to conceal anything for those who long for His mercy. He showed him this in the incident with Reuven, and after (in the same verse), “and the sons of Yisrael were twelve.” (The holy Isbitser does not reveal this depth, only pointing where to look. We have all in verse 22, first the ready acceptance of the stern judgments of God in the word “dwell.” Second, an answer to the meaning of the depth of God’s decision in, “and Reuven lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine, and Israel heard it,” for hearing always means understanding; so Israel understood why this happened, and from this, the reason for Rachel’s death. Third, there is an empty space in the middle of the verse as written in the Torah, between “and Yisroel heard” and “the son’s of Jacob were twelve,” for this is the landscape of silence through which the secrets of the Torah are transmitted. Whosoever can understand this silence in relation to Yisroel’s hearing and the tribes will truly know something of the secrets of the Torah.) This means that God opened for him the meaning of the order of the enumeration of the tribes, for every time the twelve tribes are mentioned they are enumerated in a different order, and each order is a study in itself for those who turn themselves to words of Torah. Therefore we come to this order now, after the death of Rachel. This is the order of the tribes according to its various enumerations in sixteen places. 1. Order of their births in Parshat Vayetze: Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehuda, Dan, Naftali, Gad, and Asher, Yissachar, Zevulun, Yosef, and Binyamin. 2. The order of coming to their father in Parshat Vayishlach; Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Yosef, Binyamin, Dan, Naftali, Gad, Asher. 3. The order of their coming to Egypt in Parshat Vayigash; Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Gad, Asher, Yosef, Binyamin, Dan, Naftali. 4. The order in which their father blessed them in Parshat Vayechi: Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehuda, Zevulun, Yissachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naftali, Yosef, Binyamin. 5. The order in Parshat VeEle Shemot; Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, and Binyamin, Dan, Naftali, Gad, Asher, and Yosef was … 6. In Parshat Vayera; Reuven, Shimon, Levi. 7. Those who were assigned to count Israel in Parshat Bamidbar; Reuven, Shimon, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Efriam, Menashe, Binyamin, Dan, Asher, Gad, Naftali. 8. The order of their numbers in Parshat Bamidbar; Reuven, Shimon, Gad, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Efriam, Menashe, Binyamin, Dan, Asher, Naftali. 9. The order of the banners; Banner of Yehuda Yissachar Zevulun—East. Banner of Reuven Shimon Gad—South. Banner of Efriam Menashe Binyamin—West. Banner of Dan Asher Naftali—North. 10 The order of the princes with their offerings in Parshat Nasso; Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Reuven, Shimon, Gad, Efriam, Menashe, Binyamin, Dan, Asher, Naftali. 11. The order of the journeying of the banners in Parshat Beha’aloteicha; Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, and the sons of Gershon went … Reuven, Shimon, Gad, and the Kehatites went … Efriam, Menashe, Binyamin, Dan, Asher, Naftali. 12. The order in Parshat Shlach, that Moshe sent (to spy the land); Reuven, Shimon, Yehuda, Yissachar, Efriam, and Binyamin, Zevulun, Menashe, Dan, Asher, Naftali, Gad. 13. According to the order of the allotment of the land, Parshat Pinchas; Reuven, Shimon, Gad, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Menashe, Efriam, Binyamin, Dan, Asher, Naftali. 14. “A prince of each tribe shall inherit the land,” Parshat Maasei; Yehuda, Shimon, Binyamin, Dan, Menashe, Efriam, Zevulun, Yissachar, Asher, Naftali 15. In Parshat Tavo, “these shall stand to bless”; Shimon, and Levi, Yehuda, Yissachar, Yosef and Binyamin, and these … Reuven, Gad, Asher, Zevulun, Dan, Naftali. 16. The order in which Moshe blessed them in Parshat Ve’Zot HaBracha; Reuven, Yehuda, Levi, Binyamin, Yosef, Zevulun, Yissachar, Gad, Dan, Naftali, Asher. Here the tribes are enumerated sixteen times, with various changes in their places, and each one is a study in itself. According to this the members of the great assembly codified the sixteen praised (in the blessing immediately following the morning recitation of Shema) of Emet v’yatsiv, “true and upright,” and the initiated will understand.
למגדל עדר, a tower not far from Efrat. We find a reference to this place in Micah 5,1: ואתה בית לחם אפרתה, and immediately afterwards: ואתה מגדל עדר. An alternate interpretation: the reason why Yaakov did not bury Rachel in that cave was that Esau had still not given up his claim that he would be buried there. After the reconciliation between the brothers, Esau not only renounced this claim but eventually moved out of the land of Canaan altogether, leaving it for the descendants of Yaakov.
ויט אהלו ההלאה למגדל עדר, “and he pitched his tent to beyond Migdal Eder.” The meaning of the word מהלאה is “close to.” The same word occurs in the same sense in Genesis 19,9 where it means “come closer.” We also find the word having this meaning when Jonathan told his lad in Samuel I 20,22 החצים ממך והלאה, “the arrows are closer to you.” So here too the meaning of the word is that Yaakov pitched his tent opposite the place called Migdal Eder. This was the place where the number of the twelve tribes had become complete with the birth of Binyamin. In commemoration of that event we read in Micah 4,8: “and you O Migdal-Eder, outpost of Fair Zion.”
ויסע, on his way to his father’s house.
למגדל העדר, close to Bethlehem as mentioned in Michah 5,1 as well as in chapter 4,8 there.
(21-22) Wir haben bereits wiederholt (Kap.9, 21; 12, 8; 13, 3) die Schreibweise אהלהֹ als Bezeichnung des von Mann und Frau geteilten Zeltes gefunden, in welchem sogar die Frau als die eigentliche Herrin und Walterin des Hauses in den Vordergrund tritt. Möglich wäre es daher, daß auch hier אהלה das Zelt bezeichnet, das Jakob bis dahin mit Rahel geteilt, und daß der Sinn dieser Stelle wäre: er schlug sein Zelt, das er nunmehr nicht mehr mit Rahel teilen konnte, fern von dem Herdenturm auf, um welchen die Familie und somit auch Lea und die anderen Frauen lagerten. So lange Rahel lebte, lebte Jakob auch mit Lea und den anderen Frauen; seit dem Tode Rahels trennte er sich auch von ihnen. Möglich sodann, daß daher Reuben, um Jakob zur Wiederannäherung an seine Mutter Lea zu veranlassen, sein Lager im Zelte der Bilha nahm, damit der Vater erfahre, wie seine Trennung von der Familie den Söhnen auffalle. Er erreichte jedoch nicht seinen Zweck. Jakob blieb getrennt, und eine Folge davon war, daß die Familie mit den bereits vorhandenen Zwölfen abgeschlossen blieb: ויהיו בני ויקב י"ב
Israel traveled, and pitched his tent beyond Migdal Eder, south of Bethlehem. 25
Jacob took his sons and his grandsons, and his wives, and he went to Kirjath Arba (so as to be) near Isaac his father. And he found there Esau and his sons and his wives dwelling in the tents of Isaac. And he spread his tent apart from him; and Isaac saw Jacob, his wives, his daughters, and all that belonged to him, and he rejoiced in his heart exceedingly. Concerning him the Scripture saith, "Yea, thou shalt see thy children's children, peace be upon Israel" (Ps. 128:6).
Beasts which were found in Jerusalem as far as Migdal Eder and within the same distance in any direction: The exact location of Migdal Eder is no longer known. It is mentioned in Genesis 35:21 and in Micah 4:8. It is very close to Jerusalem.
Rabbi Shimon would say: There are three crowns: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, the crown of kingship – and the crown of a good name is the greater than all of them. How does the crown of priesthood work? Even if someone paid all the silver and gold in the world, we could not give him the crown of priesthood, as it says (Numbers 25:15), “It will be for him and his descendants after him an eternal covenant of priesthood.” For the crown of kingship as well; even if someone paid all silver and gold in the world, we could not give him the crown of kingship, as it says (Ezekiel 37:24), “My servant David shall be their prince for all time.” But the crown of Torah is different. For anyone who wishes to partake in the work of Torah may come and partake, as it says (Isaiah 55:1), “Ho, all who are thirsty, go to the water!” That is, go and labor in words of Torah and do not occupy yourself with meaningless things. There is a story of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai: He would regularly go and visit the sick. He once came upon somebody who was bloated due to intestinal illness, and was cursing God. Rabbi Shimon said: Empty one! You ought to be begging for mercy, and instead you are cursing? The man replied: ‘May the Holy One, blessed be He, remove [these sufferings] from me and lay them on you!’ And then he said: The Holy Blessed One has done properly by me, for I have left aside words of Torah and occupied myself with meaningless things. There is a story of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar: He was once coming from Migdal Eder, from his teacher’s house, and he was riding on a donkey. He was traveling along the coast, and he spotted somebody who was quite ugly. He said: Empty one, how ugly you are! Are all the people in your city as ugly as you? The man replied: What can I do about it? Go to the Artisan who made me and say to Him, How ugly is this vessel You made! When Rabbi Shimon realized that he had sinned, he got off his donkey and prostrated himself before the man. And he said: I have sinned against you. Forgive me. But the man replied: I will not forgive you until you go to the Artisan who made me and say, How ugly is this vessel You made! Rabbi Shimon followed after him for three mil. All the people in the city came out to greet him, and then said: Peace be upon you, Rabbi! The man said: Whom are you calling Rabbi? They said: The one who is traveling behind you. He said to them: If that is a rabbi, may there be no more like him in Israel! They said to him: God forbid! What did he do to you? He told them: Such-and-such he did to me. They said to him: Even so, forgive him! He said: I hereby forgive [him], but only if he does not continue doing this. On that day, Rabbi Shimon went to his great study hall and taught: A person should always be soft like a reed, and not rigid like a cedar. For the reed, when all the winds come and blow against it, moves in their direction. But when the winds quiet down, the reed returns to its place. That is why the reed merited to be made into a quill that is used to write a Torah scroll. But the cedar does not stay in its place; when the southern wind comes and blows against it, it uproots the tree and flips it over. And then what happens to the cedar? [Woodcutters come along and chop it up, and take from it to build houses and then] throw the rest into the fire. And that is why they say: A person should always be soft like a reed, and not rigid like a cedar.
And you, O Migdal-eder, (Migdal-eder Apparently near Bethlehem; see Gen. 35.19–21.) Outpost of Fair Zion, It shall come to you: (Outpost of Fair Zion, / It shall come to you Meaning of Heb. uncertain.) The former monarchy shall return— The kingship of Fair Jerusalem. (Fair Jerusalem Emendation yields “the House of Israel”; cf. 5.1–2.)
Yisrael traveled on, and set up [spread] his tent beyond Migdal Eider [Tower of the herds].
And Jakob proceeded and spread his tent beyond the tower of Eder, the place from whence, it is to be, the King Meshiha will be revealed at the end of the days.
| וַיְהִ֗י בִּשְׁכֹּ֤ן יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ בָּאָ֣רֶץ הַהִ֔וא וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ רְאוּבֵ֗֔ן וַיִּשְׁכַּ֕ב֙ אֶת־בִּלְהָ֖ה֙ פִּילֶ֣גֶשׁ אָבִ֑֔יו וַיִּשְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑͏ֽל וַיִּֽהְי֥וּ בְנֵֽי־יַעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁנֵ֥ים עָשָֽׂר׃ | 22 J | While Israel stayed in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine; and Israel found out. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve in number. |
Genesis 30,14. “Reuven went and found mandrakes in the field, etc.;” ותאמר אלי תבא כי שכר שכרתיך בדודאי בני, “Leah said to her husband come to me for I have hired you in exchange for my son’s mandrakes.” After reporting this strange sounding incident, the Torah continues with: וישמע אלוקים אל לאה, “G’d listened to Leah’s prayer” (and gave her another son) as a result of which Leah exclaimed: נתן אלוקים שכרי אשר נתתי שפחתי לאישי ותקרא שמו יששכר, “G’d has given me a reward for having given my maid-servant to my husband; she called her son Issachar.” It is somewhat puzzling why Leah called this son of hers Issachar, if she saw it as a reward not for having slept with Yaakov as a reward for allowing Reuven to give Rachel the mandrakes, but for having given her maid-servant to Yaakov (previously). When we look at Rashi’s comment on this verse, (17) he attributes G’d’s listening to Leah’s prayer as reward for her having demonstrated by giving her maid-servant to Yaakov that she wanted him to father more founding fathers of the Jewish people, even if she was not going to be the mother of them. She had proven thereby that when she “hired” Yaakov in exchange for the mandrakes, she had not been motivated by the desire to satisfy her libido. Our author wonders how we can be sure of this as even assuming that Leah, who at any rate had to share her husband with other women, something that no doubt caused her much heartache, would have been fully justified in wanting more of her husband’s company than she appeared to enjoy. Our author answers that while it is true that ordinary women whose husbands also have another wife do suffer such heartache and jealousy, so that the name for such a wife who has to share her husband is always called צרה, “rival wife,” if Leah had entertained the type of motivation common to other “rival wives,” she most certainly would not have seen in her bearing Issachar a “reward” from G’d, but as fulfillment of her personal desire. This is why Rashi draws our attention to this psychological insight which many a reader might have overlooked otherwise.
וישכב את בלהה, “he slept with Bilhah.” This is not to be understood literally, but he invaded her privacy and messed up the linen on her bedstead, or simply moved her bed from its normal position. This was a protest against her trying to replace Rachel. Reuven, Leah’s oldest son, felt that now that Rachel had died, his mother should outrank any of the other wives of his father. Rashi points out that this is not the only instance when the Torah to make its point exaggerates the indiscretion committed by some people, or when it rounds up numbers. An example of such an exaggeration quoted is the injury that the angel had caused Yaakov in their nocturnal struggle. He had not made Yaakov’s hip joint useless, but had only dislocated it. (32,26) וישמע ישראל, “Israel heard about this;” about Reuven’s indiscretion. ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר, “the sons of Yaakov remained 12.” Yaakov had no more sons after this. The reason was that he no longer carried on marital relations with any of his wives. Our sages derive this from the line: אז חללת יצועי עלה, “then you desecrated Him who abode on my bed.” (Genesis 49,4) Yaakov meant that ever since the sanctity which had distinguished his marital bed had ceased to exist and been profaned. (Compare Rash’bam on that verse) The reason why here we have the words: וישמע ישראל, “Israel heard,” (instead of “Yaakov” heard) is so that when you read that verse in chapter 49 you will not ask: ‘how did Yaakov ever find out about Reuven’s indiscretion?’An alternate interpretation: the reason why the line that Yaakov’s sons were and remained 12, is inserted here where reference is made to Reuven’s indiscretion, is in order not to allow anyone to think that possibly some of Yaakov’s sons might not have been his but Reuven’s, but it refers to the most recently born son born for him by Rachel. Yaakov together with all of his twelve sons returned to their father’s home.
וישכב את בלהה פלגש אביו, “he lay with Bilhah, the concubine of his father.” According to some commentators (Talmud tractate Shabbat folio 55,) all he did was that he removed her couch from his father’s tent. This occurred before Yaakov had returned to his father’s house. The Torah treats the deed as if Reuben had committed incest with his aunt. Our author points to Job 31,12, [he could have used the entire sequence from verse 1 to there Ed.] as proof that harbouring incestuous thoughts may be considered as if one had carried out what one had fantasized about. Ed.
THAT REUBEN WENT. Our sages explained this beautifully; (According to the rabbis Reuben did not actually lay with Billah but rather removed his father’s couch from her tent and placed it in the tent of his mother Leah. Scripture considers this act of audacity as if he had actually slept with her. Cf. Sabbath 55b.) for a prudent man concealeth shame (Prov. 12:16).
וישכב את בלהה, “he slept with Bilhah.” Our sages in Shabbat 55, describe this act as בלבל מצעו של אביו, “he disturbed the couch of his father.” When his father referred to the incident on his deathbed (Genesis 49,4), he too used the same expression, saying אז חללת יצועי עלה, “then you desecrated Him who mounted my couch.” Yaakov did not criticize Reuven for sleeping with Bilhah but for mounting the couch on which his father used to sleep with. her. You find something similar in Samuel I 2,22 where the sons of the High Priest Eli are accused of sleeping with the women (married women) who performed certain tasks at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. Eli reprimanded his sons after the rumors had come to his attention. The Talmud in Shabbat there also explains that this verse is not to be taken at face value but that what the sons of Eli did made them subject to such accusations being leveled against them. What is described there as the severe sin of the sons of Eli is the fact that they delayed offering the bird-offerings of women who had either been ritually impure through having given birth or had suffered the disease known as זבה. By delaying these offerings, these women’s husbands were effectively prevented from sleeping with their wives until the matter of the offerings had been taken care of. The prophet Samuel accounts this for the sons of Eli as if they had prevented these husbands from sleeping with their wives because they themselves had slept with these wives. If you will count the words from ויסע ישראל until שנים עשר, you will find that the number of words in this verse amounts to 26, the numerical value of the four-lettered name of G’d י-ה-ו-ה. Perhaps this is the way of the Torah hinting that Reuven did not in fact commit a culpable offense as otherwise G’d would not have associated His Holy Name with him by including him in the twelve sons of Yaakov, [a reference to their loyalty to their father’s religious principles, Ed.] We have mentioned elsewhere that when he tribes were counted in Numbers 26,7 the ancestor of the tribe of Reuven is described as הראובני, a description which is the same as that of Shimon. In both of these instances the addition of the letters ה-י in the case of these two tribes was meant to stress that they (the tribal ancestors) were not considered morally or religiously inferior to their brothers of whom no negative deeds are recorded in the Torah. Nachmanides writes that the reason the Torah stated “the sons of Yaakov were twelve,” is meant to tell us that Yaakov did not later beget any other sons. Reuven disturbed the couch of his father precisely because he was afraid that his father wanted to sire more children with Bilhah as their mother. The Torah therefore saw fit to inform us that Yaakov did not beget any more children at all after this episode. An additional reason for the Torah making this statement at this point was to reassure us that all of his sons were equally worthy of being sons of their illustrious father. Just as the other sons were not guilty of culpable sins neither was Reuven.
ויהי בשכון, Yaakov did not reside anywhere until he came to his father; however, seeing that he had so many animals and possessions that he moved extremely slowly, it appeared as if he was actually settling down.
וילך ראובן, he went to Bilhah’s tent and slept with her.
פלגש אביו, his father’s concubine. Actually, she was his father’s wife, but in Reuven’s view she was no better than a concubine. Reuven did not consider her as out of bounds to him as she had been a slave woman originally, and his father had subsequently taken her to be his concubine. The Torah clearly states that she had become Yaakov’s proper wife in all matters legal. (30,4) As such Bilhah was totally out of bounds to him. Even before the giving of the Torah, the laws of incest governing all of mankind (Noachide laws) included the prohibition of sleeping with one’s father’s wife. (compare our commentary on 20,24) If such legislation applied to all of mankind, how much more so did it apply to the sons of Yaakov. As a result of this trespass Reuven’s status as Yaakov’s legal firstborn was revoked on Yaakov’s deathbed when he publicly announced his unfitness for the title as we also know from Chronicles I 5,1, and his position was given to Joseph instead.
וישמע ישראל, he stopped living with Bilhah as a result of this. The meaning of the line ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר, is that from that time on Yisrael had no further children. He no longer slept with any woman for the remainder of his life. In fact, he basically became a recluse, not attending to mundane activities but concentrating on serving G’d directly. This is what he had meant when he said in his vow, that once he would return safely to his father’s house, והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, “the Lord will be my G’d.” According to the Talmud Shabbat 55 Reuven had not actually slept with Bilhah at all, but had only made her bed look slept in, disturbed, to give the impression that intimacy had taken place there. This was a protest against his father not only having spent most of his married life with Rachel, but even now after her death spending his time with Rachel’s maidservant instead of with his mother, with Leah.
AND ISRAEL HEARD OF IT. Scripture relates Jacob’s humility. He heard that his son had profaned his couch, but yet he did not command them to remove him from his house and from inclusion among his sons so that he should not inherit with them. Instead, he is counted among them, as it is written, And the sons of Jacob, were twelve, and he is counted first. It is for this reason that Scripture has combined the two sections of the Torah (In the written Torah the upper section concludes with the words, And Israel heard of it. Then a new section begins, And the sons of Jacob were twelve. Ramban explains why the Masorah combines them into one verse.) through one verse. For although this is the beginning of a subject wherein Scripture commences to count the tribes now that they were all born, it hints that Reuben was not rejected on account of his deed. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is possible that Reuben disturbed the couch of Bilhah [Rachel’s handmaid] because he feared that she might give birth again from Jacob, for he, being the first-born and thinking of taking two portions of the inheritance, would thus lose more than all the brothers. He had no fear of his mother for she was elderly. Zilpah had perhaps died, or it may be that he had concern for his mother’s honor, and since Zilpah was her handmaid, he did not disturb her. It was for this reason that the right of the first-born was taken away from Reuben, measure for measure. And this is the purport of the verse, And the sons of Jacob were twelve, meaning that he did not beget children after that.
וישמע ישראל, this matter has been reported only so that we can understand why Yaakov passed over his firstborn son Reuven when in his blessings before his death he referred to him as פחז כמים אל תותר כי עלית על משכבי אביך (49,4). “the one who was as unrestrained as water when you mounted the bed of your father, does not deserve the privileges associated with the birthright.” [These privileges were allocated by Yaakov in part to Yehudah, commencing with the reign of David, and in part to Joseph, as the firstborn son of Rachel. The latter was accorded two tribal heads, (Ephrayim and Menashe) among the twelve tribes. Ed.]
בשכן ישראל בארץ ההוא WHEN ISRAEL DWELT IN THAT LAND — before he came to Isaac at Hebron, all these troubles happened to him.
וישכב AND HE LAY — Because he had disturbed his couch Scripture accounts it to him as though he had actually sinned in this manner. But why did he disturb his couch? When Rachel died Jacob removed to Bilhah’s tent and Reuben came and protested against the slight thus inflicted on his mother (Leah). He said: “If my mother’s sister was her rival, is that any reason why the handmaid of my mother’s sister should become a rival to her!” On this account he disturbed the couch (Shabbat 55b).
ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר NOW THE SONS OF JACOB WERE TWELVE — Scripture begins again where it left off the previous narrative (i.e. the birth of Benjamin): when Benjamin was born the destined number of his sons was complete and it was proper that they should then be enumerated; and therefore it enumerates them. Our Rabbis explained that these words are intended to tell us that Jacob’s twelve sons were all equal — they were all equally righteous, for Reuben had committed no actual sin (Shabbat 55b).
And Yisrael heard. Nevertheless, he did not cease to count Reuvein among his sons because he had no doubt that he repented immediately.
Prior to his coming to Chevron to Yitzchok... I.e., all this happened to him because he delayed coming to his father Yitzchok.
Yaakov took his bed... and placed it in Bilhah’s tent... This was because Bilhah was Rachel’s handmaiden. You might ask: Why did Yaakov do this? Why did he not place it in Leah’s tent? The answer is: Yaakov did not place his bed in Leah’s tent when Rachel was alive, so he reasoned that Leah would not want to accept it now. But Reuven, who regularly spent time with his mother, knew she would accept it. Therefore he went and disturbed the sleeping arrangement. (Maharshal)
It was when Israel dwelled in that land, Canaan, on his way to his father’s home, that Reuben went and lay with Bilha, his father’s concubine. The fact that the verse calls her a concubine might be a reflection of Reuben’s opinion, as he perhaps did not consider Bilha, who was presumably younger than his mother, his father’s legal wife. And Israel heard. Although he was clearly distressed and humiliated by this deed, Jacob chose not to react immediately. Only on his deathbed did he respond by cursing Reuben (49:3–4). The verse concludes: The sons of Jacob were twelve. Jacob did not banish his sinful son; he continued to be counted among his sons.
וישמע ישראל, “Israel heard about this.” According to Nachmanides, the phrasing of Yaakov’s reaction to the manner in which he reacted to his first born son’s defiling his bedroom is an example of Yaakov’s extreme humility. He could easily have banned Reuven from his house for having been guilty of such a misdemeanour, as well as having disinherited him. Instead, the Torah reports that Reuven continued to be a full member of the 12 sons, as we have been told in verse 23. In fact, the Torah goes further by writing immediately that Reuven ranked first among all his sons. (verse 24) The Torah draws our attention to this by making a single paragraph out of what normally should have been two separate paragraphs. Looking at the plain meaning of the text, it is possible that Reuven’s intention in invading his father’s private bedroom which he shared with Bilhah, was to prevent Yaakov siring more children with Bilhah, seeing that as the firstborn, he would receive 2 shares of the eventual inheritance, any additional children Yaakov would sire would result in his share of the inheritance becoming diminished. At the same time, he did not have similar worries about his own mother giving birth to more children, as she was beyond child-bearing age, and Zilpah might have died already. It is also possible that he was simply concerned about the insult endured by his mother who had to now take a back seat not only to her deceased sister Rachel, but even to her maidservant, when he observed that his father made Bilhah’s tent his principal bedroom. It is possible that the verse “Yaakov’s sons were 12,” was meant to alert us to the fact that he sired no more children after this episode. Some commentators interpret the line “Reuven went and slept with Bilhah,” to mean that now that Yaakov had lost both Rachel and Bilhah, there was no cause to worry since the twelve sons who were to make up the Jewish people had been born already. Yet another explanation is that the line “Yaakov’s sons numbered 12, etc.,” means that originally there had been 13, seeing that Reuven being the firstborn had been considered equivalent to two sons. Now, in view of his indiscretion, he had lost his superiority vis-à-vis the other brothers. Rabbi Yehudah the pious, explains the episode as follows: at the time when Yaakov had settled in that region, Reuven left that region and set up house by himself, the reason being that he had been guilty of the above-mentioned indiscretion in Bilhah’s tent, where he had been presumed to have had relations with Yaakov’s concubine. He had done so, in order to forestall his father from doing so, now that Rachel had died. When Yaakov heard about the reason why Reuven had fled the scene, he moved his tent to Leah. As soon as Reuven heard this, he returned to the fold, i.e. “the sons of Yaakov were12.” Some commentators point to the wording of וישכב את בלהה instead of וישכב עם בלהה, as meaning that all Reuven had done was to put his bed next to that of Bilhah. [the expression את always denotes a lesser degree of intimacy than the expression עם. (compare Genesis 30,16,Samuel II 11,4; ) Ed.] Further proof that Reuven did not actually sleep with Bilhah, is provided by Yaakov himself in Genesis 49,4 when he describes Reuven’s indiscretion with the words: כי עלית משכבי אביך, אז חללת יצועי עלה, “for when you entered your father’s bedroom you desecrated him who ascended the bed that had been made for me.” All Reuven had been guilty of was to disarray the bedclothes, not to lie in them. He spoke about the person lying in the bed in the third person, instead of saying: “you lay in my bed.”
“The sons of Jacob were twelve in number” [35:22]. That is to say, one should not say that Reuben committed a transgression with throwing the bed out and was not as good and pious as the other children. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:22.) Therefore, the verse counts that Jacob had twelve children, that he had no more children, but he had twelve children. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 35:22.)
“Reuben went and lay with Bilhah” [35:22]. Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, since after Rachel died Jacob placed his bed in the tent of Bilhah. That is to say, the bed on which Jacob used to sleep with Rachel. Jacob placed that bed in Bilhah’s tent. Therefore, Reuben came and threw the bed out and said to Bilhah. You are a maidservant and don’t equate yourself to Rachel, my aunt, who was a noble lady. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:22.) Nonetheless, the verse wrote as if Reuben had lain with Bilhah, because he had disturbed the sleeping of his father with Bilhah. (Bahya, Genesis, 35:22.) Ramban writes. Reuben disturbed Bilhah’s bed because Reuben thought to himself. I am the firstborn and will take two parts of the goods of my father. Perhaps he will have more children with Bilhah. They will take away my inheritance. That is to say, I will inherit less if my father will have more children. He also thought, my mother Leah is too old to have children and Zilpah may have died by that time. Therefore, Reuben disturbed the bed of his father. (Ramban, Genesis, 35:22.)
“Israel heard” [35:22]. Jacob heard that Reuben had thrown out the bed and was not very angry with his son, Reuben. He counted him first among his children, called him firstborn, and honored him that he should be firstborn to inherit and also first born to perform the worship at the sacrifices, and firstborn to be counted among his children. The birthright was given to Joseph so that the children of Joseph should be counted as two tribes of Jacob. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:23.)
From the time of Ezra, (when the Jews who returned from the Babylonian exile did not speak Hebrew fluently. (See Chapter 1, Halachah 4.)) it was customary that a translator would translate to the people the [passages] read by the reader from the Torah, so that they would understand the subject matter. (The Book of Nechemiah, Chapter 8, describes Ezra's reading of the Torah to the people on Rosh HaShanah. Verses 7 and 8 explain that "they caused the people to understand the reading." Megillah 3a explains that this refers to the translation of the Torah.) The reader should read one verse alone and remain silent while the translator translates it. (For the two voices will prevent the people from hearing either of them.) Afterwards, he should read a second verse. The reader is not permitted to read to the translator more than one verse [at a time]. (lest the translator become confused. The Tur (Orach Chayim 145) writes that even in Talmudic times, it was not customary to translate the Torah in all communities. He explains that, in his age, the custom of translating the Torah had already been ceased because the people did not understand the Aramaic translation traditionally used. The rabbis did not want to translate the Torah into the languages which the people did understand, because of the possibility of error and misinterpretation. Such fears had not existed in regard to the Aramaic translation, since it had been composed with Ruach Hakodesh (Divine inspiration). [The Tur, however, also mentions the opinion of Rav Natrunai Gaon, who maintains that the translation should be done freely, so that the people can understand, without referring to the traditional text.] The Tur's opinion is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 145:3) and in nearly all contemporary Jewish communities, the custom of using a translator during the Torah reading is no longer practiced. For this reason, rather than present a running commentary on Halachot 11 and 12, we have limited our comments to short footnotes.1. Berachot 45a states that this principle is derived from the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai. God, "the Reader," did not lift his voice over that of Moses, "the translator." It was also customary to use a מתורגמן in teaching the oral law. Hence, parallels to many of the laws mentioned in this halachah can also be found in Hilchot Talmud Torah 4:3.2. The Jerusalem Talmud (Megillah 4:1) mentions that we should approach the Torah reading with awe, reflecting the awe experienced by the Jews at Mount Sinai.3. Rabbenu Nissim maintains that this prohibition only applied before Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi permitted the oral tradition to be recorded. Afterwards, it was permitted for the translator to use a written text. Rabbenu Nissim's position is somewhat difficult to accept, since the Jerusalem Talmud (Megillah, loc. cit.), the source for this law, was written several hundred years after Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi granted this leniency. Nevertheless, Rabbenu Nissim's view was widely accepted.4. The Tosefta, Megillah 3:21, cites the example of Aharon, who served as a spokesman for Moses. See also Kessef Mishneh.5. Genesis 35:22. The direct translation of this verse would be unbecoming to both Reuven and Jacob (Rashi, Megillah 25a).6. The third of the priestly blessings states: "May God turn His countenance to you...." This appears to be a direct contradiction to the description of God (Deuteronomy 10:17 as "not turning His face...." Though our Sages resolved that difficulty (Berachot 20b), a problem might come up in a simple translation of the verse. Rav Kapach notes that the Yemenite texts of Targum Onkelos lack a translation for the three verses of the priestly benediction.7. Were the common people given the opportunity of hearing the full story of the golden calf, they might believe that it had spiritual power (Rashi, loc. cit.). Alternatively, the narrative places a major burden of responsibility on Aharon (Tosafot, Megillah, loc. cit.).8. The commentaries note that this passage is not read as a haftarah at present. Rav Kapach states that the need to make this statement indicates that in Talmudic times, the passages that were read as haftarot were not fixed and there was some room for choice.9. Verses from the Torah cannot be skipped in a public Torah reading. However, it is permitted to skip verses from the prophets while reading the haftarah (Tos'fot Yom Tov, Megillah 10:3).)
Not all passages from the Torah are translated in public. All [of the following passages] should be read, but not translated: the incident involving Reuven, the priestly benediction, [the passage describing the sin] of the golden calf from "And Moses told Aharon" (Exodus 32:21 until "And Moses saw the people" (Exodus 32:25 and one other verse, "And God set a plague upon the people" (Exodus 32:35 . In the [description of] the incident concerning Amnon (II Samuel, Chapter 13), the verse which states, "Amnon, the son of David" (13:1) should be neither read nor translated.
When they arrive in Jerusalem, the High Court has her sit in its presence while her husband is not present, (Some commentaries explain that if her husband is present, she will be motivated to uphold her previous statements and will not admit her guilt. Others explain that if her husband is present, she might be embarrassed to admit that she committed adultery.) and they alarm her, frighten her and bring upon her great dread so that she will not [desire to] drink [the bitter water. (And thus cause God's name to be blotted out.) They tell her: "My daughter, [we know] that wine has a powerful influence, frivolity has a powerful influence, immaturity has a powerful influence, bad neighbors have a powerful influence. (I.e., a candid admission of guilt is nothing to be ashamed of, because we understand the extenuating circumstances.) Do not cause [God's] great name, which is written in holiness, to be blotted out in the water." And they tell her: "There are many who preceded you and were swept away [from the world]. (I.e., you are not the first woman to have committed adultery. Many women have done so and they have been swept away from the world in punishment via the medium of the bitter water. Why follow in the same pattern? Admit your guilt.) Men of greater and more honorable stature have been overcome by their natural inclination and have faltered." [To emphasize this,] they tell her the story of Judah and Tamar, his daughter-in-law, (Genesis, Chapter 38. The Bible relates how Tamar dressed up like a prostitute and seduced Judah. The story is significant not only because it shows how a person can be lured into sexual misconduct, but it also relates how Judah was not embarrassed to admit his guilt publicly.) the simple meaning of the episode concerning Reuben and [Bilhah], his father's concubine, (Genesis 35:22 states that Reuben had relations with Bilhah, his father's concubine. According to Shabbat 55b, the verse is not meant to be interpreted literally, for actually he did not commit a sin of this nature. Nevertheless, to encourage the woman to admit her guilt, she is told the simple meaning of the narrative.) and the story of Amnon and his sister, (II Samuel, Chapter 13, describes how Amnon, King David's firstborn, raped his half-sister Tamar.) to make it easier for her to admit [her guilt]. (I.e., hearing the example of these distinguished individuals' conduct will motivate her to admit her own shortcomings.) If she says: "I committed adultery," or "I will not drink [the water]," (Although she does not admit her guilt explicitly, this statement is equivalent to an admission of guilt.) she is to be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, and the matter is dismissed.
It is in this context that we must understand the repeated references Moses made to the Jewish people at the burning bush, when he said to G-d that the Jewish people would not believe in him or his mission. Moses expected the same reaction from his own people that he had expected from Pharaoh. This is why he said "when they ask me for Your name, what shall I say?" (Exodus 3, 13) The miracle had been needed to demonstrate the existence of such a G-d. Whenever things went well, the people believed in G-d, Moses and his mission. Whenever difficulties arose, they saw in this proof that there was no free G-d, no Personal Providence, only superior showmanship by Moses, presently revealed as inadequate. Proof of all this lies in the fact that whenever they refer to the Exodus from Egypt, they ascribe it to Moses the man, not to G-d. (compare Exodus 14, 12; 16,3; Numbers 16, 12) Their admiration of Moses was based on Moses being an outstanding man rather than Moses as an instrument of G-d. (1) As soon as Moses was out of sight, not having announced when he would return, (possibly he had not known when he would return) the people wanted to see if they themselves could do what Moses had been doing all the time. Therefore, they had lots of time at their disposal to urge Aaron. The fortieth day was in fact only the last of many days that Aaron had been under pressure. (2) These people believed that the configuration of the ox might hold the secret of Moses’s power. Therefore they traded their own horoscope (that of the lamb) for that of the ox. This is the meaning of Psalms 106,20 "they themselves chose this trade, exchange." It was not Aaron's doing. No doubt, during those forty days the pressure on Aaron had been increasing steadily, the murder of Chur being part of that pressure. Had the Torah reported all this in detail, the impression that Aaron co-operated reluctantly would have been created, and the golden calf would have been viewed as the triumph of the belief in witchcraft over those who believed in G-d and His leadership. Now, that the text seems to suggest Aaron's enthusiastic co-operation, the whole episode can be seen as the creation of a symbol representing the ultimate that human art was capable of. (3+4) In this way, once the impotence of that symbol would become evident to one and all, the illusion that man could fashion a deity would be debunked once and for all. This was Aaron's reasoning when he decided to co-operate. He had no way of knowing that as soon as the calf would emerge, some Jewish lowbrows would commence dancing around it and proclaiming it as their new deity. When that happened, Aaron quickly built an altar for G-d, and tried to allow reason to prevail by postponing the celebration until the morrow, and by dedicating the altar to the Lord. He hoped all the time, of course, that in the interval remaining, G-d would tell Moses to return to the people in order to forestall tragic consequences. Even so, only three thousand people were enthusiastic enough to actually worship this idol before it had demonstrated powers equal or superior to those demonstrated by Moses. (This is why the rest of the nation was not punished by death) We see from all this, that far from precipitating or even participating in the sin, Aaron had used his best efforts to teach the people a lesson of faith in the Lord. This is why, at a later stage, G-d was able to say to Moses "You shall cause your brother Aaron to come close to Me, to be My priest" (Exodus 28, 1) (5) G-d indicated to Moses that if the latter were to pray, He would not then become angry, since the action of a fool acting out of foolishness does not warrant his master's anger. Nonetheless, even fools must repent and confess their errors. Psalms 25,8, and Hoseah 14,2 are some of the sources in scripture for the need to expiate. Sieverity of a sin is measured by three criteria. 1) The manner in which the Torah describes a sin, is a good indication of the view the Torah holds concerning such sin. Expressions such as "abomination, immorality" are used for acts which are especially serious. 2) Any kind of misdemeanour when committed by a person of high rank, becomes more serious, since the sinner's stature should have precluded such conduct on his part. 3) When the disobedience is directed against a supreme lawgiver, it is more serious than disobedience against a man made law. (10) Moses, admits in his confession, that "this nation" had come closer to G-d than any of its predecessors, and should therefore have known better. When he refers to "this great sin," he confesses that due to the people's elevated stature their sin had assumed an added degree of severity. He confesses the heinous nature of the sin when viewed objectively, when he refers to "the golden deity" that this nation had made. While confessing all this, Moses manages to inject powerful arguments about the extenuating circumstances surrounding this crime. Shemot Rabbah 28, clothes Moses’s arguments in the following words: (6) Moses to G-d "Your children have made an assistant for You, and You are angry? Did You not Yourself make the sun shine, and the latter bestows some of its light on the moon? (making it an assistant) Did You not make rain, which in turn promotes the growth of plants etc?" To this G-d replied: "You too are in error, since the golden calf is not capable of doing anything." To this, Moses replied: "in that case why do You get angry over a mere nothing?" Philosophically speaking, Moses presents the golden calf as incapable of offering competition to G-d, and therefore not deserving His concern. Concerning the second criterion for measuring the severity of a sin which we have mentioned, Moses refers to "this people." He refers to their having come out of Egypt. He implies that it is unreasonable to expect high standards of faith from a nation that had just left a country in which it had absorbed a totally wrong way of looking at the world for several hundred years. The Midrash describes it in this way. A father put his son in charge of a perfumery situated in a red light district. Naturally, both the location of the store and the type of customers he dealt with, combined with the son's personal character weakness to corrupt him. When the father finds out and is enraged and threatens to kill his son, the father's friend has to intervene. This friend berates the father, saying: "you have lost him because you have failed to teach him a trade that would bring him into contact with the upper classes of society. Not only that, but you have made him reside amongst harlots. How can you be surprised at the outcome?" Finally, since it was G-d’s declared purpose to use the Jewish people to aggrandize His name, and to make Egypt aware of this, (Exodus 9, 16) what would the Egyptians say when they hear that You have wiped out this nation?" We read in Joshua 7, 10 that G-d told Joshua that Israel's defeat at Ai was due to the nation having sinned, having transgressed the injunction not to appropriate any of the loot of Jericho etc. Actually, only one man, Achan ben Karmi, had committed those acts. (7) When G-d told Moses that the Jewish people had made themselves a cast calf, worshipped it etc, Moses may have thought that this could have been the act of a single individual, and that G-d had referred to the collective responsibility every Jew bears for the actions of another Jew. It had not occurred to Moses that the nation as a whole had been involved in this act.
(2) Concerning the twelve mitzvot singled out for emphasis at the Mount Gerizim assembly, the following is worth noting. Whenever something is accorded special attention or protection, this may be due to either of two causes. A) the subject matter is so vital that its loss is irretrievable; therefore every effort must be made to protect it against loss or damage. Examples are vital human organs such as the heart, lung, liver all of which are surrounded by a protective ribcage as additional protection. B) The subject matter is so fragile and exposed, devoid of defenses that is must be defended from the outside. Examples are the fingers or toes which need nails and gloves to protect them against the cold; the heel has a tough skin to protect it where it treads. Similarly, the Torah has emphasized the protection of the weak, i.e. the stranger, the widow, the orphan. The Torah warns no less than thirty six times against abusing these weaker members of society. The selection of the twelve commandments in question seems to be motivated by similar considerations. 1) The severity of the sin itself. 2) The ease with which one falls victim to the lure to commit this sin. In the latter instance, there may be three immediate causes for a person to commit such a sin. A) The victim is defenseless; B) the sin is so commonly practiced that one does not feel embarassed when committing it. C) lack of self restraint on the part of the sinner. Each of these "groupings" is represented by three "curses." Category one comprises the making of idols, physical violence against one's parents, violating other people's property rights, in other words violating the principle of "love your fellow man as you love yourself." Murder is not mentioned, since it is not a crime that the average person is ever guilty of. The second category, -the naturally weak,- are represented by A) misleading the blind; B) depriving widows and orphans of their just deserts; C) taking advantage of the widow of one's father, who may not protest the rape, since for financial reasons she may be dependent on the very step-son who forces his attentions on her. Category three are three examples of sexual licentiousness due to proximity, i.e. easy availability or easily obtained consent by the partner. One example is sleeping with one's sister, the second one is sleeping with one's mother-in-law. The third one is sleeping with one's livestock. (3) The reason the latter example is positioned between the other examples of incest, is to indicate that the Torah assumes a different motive for sleeping with one's mother-in-law than for sleeping with one's widowed step mother. The last category that of 1) hitting a fellow human being when there are no witnesses, 2) accepting bribes to murder the innocent, and 3) failing to see to it that Torah legislation is observed, can be viewed in the following manner. The first two sins appeared inconsequential to the sinner since he feels protected by the secrecy surrounding his deed. Our sages even regard the instance of "hitting someone in a secret place" as referring to lashon hara, evil tongue. (Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer 53) In such a case, the perpetrator certainly does not realise the impact of what he has done. (4) At any rate, the perpetrator hides behind a facade of piety, wishes to be known as a pillar of society. Concerning all such people, the Torah comes out and says "cursed all those who do not maintain and support the words of this Torah." Whosoever occupies a position that enables him to strengthen Torah must do so personally, first and foremost. When we turn to the list of blessings promised for observing the commandments, we find three apparently superfluous comments by Moses, interspersed in the blessings cited. A) 28,2, "all these blessings will reach you as a result of listening to Me." B) 28,9, "G'd will establish you as a holy nation when you observe the mitzvot and walk in all His ways." C) 28,13, "G'd will make you top not bottom, when you listen." In view of the fact that verse one had already included all that is repeated in the three quotations just listed, the repetition may reflect that at that point a certain collective moral progress had been successfully completed. It is possible to absorb Torah teachings, live accordingly, without acting out of any deep seated conviction of the truth and validity of these teachings. This stage is concluded by what is said in verse two "having listened to the voice etc." Once one has adopted the Torah way of life, and the performance of good deeds has become habitual, such a lifestyle begins to influence the person living it, beneficially. This stage is concluded and rewarded by verse nine "as a result of your observing etc." The final stage in the progression towards becoming the personality the Torah wishes to shape, is when the student's personality is the result of having assimilated all the teachings and following same to elevate him to a level of perception of his purpose in life that he had not previously even dreamed of. At that point, as per verse thirteen, "G'd will make you head etc." When this development has been completed, Moses is able to say with confidence (verse 14) "you will not depart from all the things that I command you." The message of the blessing stands out clearly. A Torah personality does not mature overnight. It develops gradually. The help extended by Heaven along the way is roughly proportionate to the distance towards the objective one has already travelled. The way is paved initially by an easing of one's financial problems. (Verse two, the blessings that will be conferred are material) The second stage will be attended by spiritual blessings, (i.e. verse nine "a holy nation") The third and last stage will be reached when G'd fulfils the promise in verse twelve, "He will open all His store of goodness to you." When the nations of the world will witness the ongoing "boom" conditions in Israel, this will testify that the Jewish nation is "a great and wise nation," (Deut. 4,6) something that Torah quotes the gentiles as saying. The gentiles are impressed by an ongoing economic miracle, ascribe it to Israel's sagacity.
Lest you contend that though the reason suffices, whence do our sages derive this death penalty, it not being found in the negative commandment of "Do not turn aside," the answer lies in several other questions which follow in the wake of the first. For we find many individuals to have incurred great punishments for a single transgression the severity of which is not made manifest in the Torah, viz. (Sotah 5a): "Why was Asa punished? Because he conscripted sages for palace duties," (Sotah 35a): "'And the anger of the L-rd burned against Uzzah and G-d smote him there for his error' (II Samuel 6:7) — R. Yochanan and R. Elazar differ here, one saying: 'for his forgetfulness…'" That is, he did not stop to consider: "If the ark supports its supporters, is it not capable of supporting itself!" And so with the men of Beth Shemesh (Sotah 35a): "'…because they looked at the ark of the L-rd' (I Samuel 6:19) — Because they looked, He smote them? R. Avahu and R. Elazar differ here, one saying that they continued harvesting as they bowed, and the other, that they also added words: "Who angered you [that you did not rescue yourself from captivity], and who appeased you [that you decided to return]?" Now we find no allusion for the death penalty in these instances in all the ways of the Torah as we find no allusion for it in the instance of one's transgressing the words of the sages. We find Reuven, too, to have incurred a great penalty for a minor transgression, viz. (Shabbath 55b): "R. Shmuel b. Nachmani said in the name of R. Yonatan: 'All who say that Reuven sinned are mistaken, for it is written (Genesis 35:22): "And the sons of Israel were twelve" — this teaches us that they were all equal in saintliness,'" and (Ibid): "R. Shimon b. Elazar said: 'Spared was that righteous one from that sin and he never came close to doing that deed. Is it possible that his children would stand on Mount Eval and declare (Deuteronomy 27:20): "Cursed be he that lives with his father's wife" if he himself had been guilty of that sin! How, then, am I to understand (Genesis 35:22): "And he lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine"? He protested the shaming of his mother, saying: "If my mother's sister [Rachel] was my mother's rival, should the maidservant of my mother's sister [Bilhah] be my mother's rival!" — at which he arose and transferred her bed [to the tent of his mother, Leah].'" Now if this was the case — that he did not sin and all who say that he did sin are mistaken — then how could this "sin" have caused him to lose three crowns? That of the first-born, that of the priesthood, and that of royalty?
THE Hebrew shakan, as is well known, signifies “to dwell,” as, “And he was dwelling (shoken) in the plains of Mamre” (Gen. 14:13); “And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt (bishekon)” (Gen. 35:22). This is the most common meaning of the word. But “dwelling in a place” consists in the continued stay in a place, general or special; when a living being dwells long in a place, we say that it stays in that place, although it unquestionably moves about in it, comp. “And he was staying in the plains of Mamre” (Gen. 14:13), and, “And it came to pass, when Israel stayed” (Gen. xxxv 22).
[2] Another explanation According to our father Jacob, he exclaimed and said, "Greatly have I been afflicted from my youth, let Israel now say" (Psalms 129:1). The Holy One, blessed be He, responded and said, "But in every trouble that entered upon you, was I not with you and saved you? I redeemed you from death in famine (Job 5:20), when Jacob saw that there was grain in Egypt and said, 'Why do you just keep looking at each other?' (Genesis 42:1), and in war from the hand of the sword (Job 5:20), when Esau came with four hundred men, "You will hide from the sword of the tongue" (Job 5:21). When did Jacob hear the words of Laban's sons, etc.? (Genesis 31:1), and "Do not be afraid of sudden terror, nor of trouble from the wicked when it comes" (Proverbs 3:25). When did the people of Shechem come and depart and a terror from God fell upon them? (Genesis 35:5), "You shall laugh at destruction and famine" (Job 5:22). When did he leave his father's house and Esau took his blessings from him? (It seems to be different opinions regarding the interpretation of the beginning of Parshat Vayetze) Nevertheless, the Holy One, blessed be He, did not abandon him, as it is written, "With my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps" (Genesis 32:11), "Do not be afraid of the beasts of the earth" (Job 5:22), for as long as he was a shepherd, not one of the animals touched the flock, as it is written, "I did not bring you animals torn by wild beasts" (Genesis 31:39). "For you have made a covenant with the stones of the field" (Job 5:23). When did he take stones from the place and set them up as a pillar? (Genesis 28:18). "And the wild beast of the field shall be at peace with thee" (Job 5:23), "And Esau ran to meet him" (Genesis 33:4), which is called a "Chayah" (wild animal), as it says, "Shout down the beast of the reeds" [(Yishmael, who is like a swine living among the reeds)] (Psalms 68:31). "And you will know that your tent is in peace" (Job 5:24), "When was it that Israel settled?" (Genesis 33:22), and what is written after that? "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (Genesis 35:22). "And you will lie down, and none shall make you afraid" (Job 11:19), "And Israel shall dwell in safety, alone" (Deuteronomy 33:28), "Many faces have been humbled before you" (Job 40:14), "And many nations shall come" (Isaiah 2:3). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob: "After all these things that I have done for you, you will call me your adversary" (Hosea 12:14). Jacob also said, "Many have been my afflictions from my youth" (Psalms 129:1), and also said, "They have not prevailed against me" (Psalms 129:2). David said to him, "For all these things, I will give you praise," as it says, "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him from them all" (Psalms 34:19).
Chapter (72) 73: Torah [1] "And the El Shaddai grant you mercy" (Genesis 43:14). As it is written in scriptures: Knowledge [of escape from You] is concealed from me. It is too formidable. I cannot know it. (Psalm 139:6). What is the meaning of "extraordinary level of understanding beyond my grasp"? It refers to something that is difficult for a person to comprehend, as it says, "If there arise among you a matter too hard for judgment" (Deuteronomy 17:8). Jacob said, "I cannot understand this matter." God promised Abraham that he would have twelve tribes, as it says, "Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them...So shall thy seed be" (Genesis 15:5). Just as there are twelve constellations in the heavens that govern the world, so too I will establish twelve tribes from you that will govern the world, as it is said, "Thus shall your seed be" (Genesis 15:5). When Ishmael was born and he begot twelve princes, as it is said, "And he shall be a wild ass of a man: his hand shall be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the face of all his brethren" (Genesis 16:12), Abraham thought that these were the twelve tribes. But God said to him, "No, not those that you think. Sarah will bear a son for you" (Genesis 17:19), as it is said, "And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac" (Genesis 21:12). It is through Isaac that your seed will be called (Genesis 21:12), as I said to you, "Thus shall your seed be" (Genesis 15:5). When Isaac married Rebecca and she was found to be barren, he began to question how the promise that God made to Abraham could be fulfilled, as she was barren, as it is said, "And Isaac entreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren" (Genesis 25:21), and the children struggled within her (Genesis 25:22). "I'm sorry," she began, "if that's the case, I apologize to one another and "She went to inquire of יהוה," (Genesis 25:22), went to the study hall of Shem, and the Lord said to her, 'Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples shall be separated from your body' (Genesis 25:23). Why did she say why is it? (Genesis 25:22), "this" is numerically equivalent to 12. And God said to her [Sarah], "What you think is not so, but there are two nations in your womb." When Jacob stood up and went out to Laban, Isaac called him and said to him, "Let it be known that the Lord is establishing twelve tribes from you," as it is said, "Isaac called Jacob and blessed him, and commanded him, and said to him, 'Do not marry a Canaanite woman. Arise, go to Padan Aram, to the house of Bethuel, your mother's father, and take a wife from there of the daughters of Laban, your mother's brother. And may God Almighty bless you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, that you may be a congregation of peoples; and give you the blessing of Abraham, to you and your descendants with you" (Genesis 28:1-4). The blessing that He blessed Abraham with, saying, "Look up now" (Genesis 15:5), is fulfilled through you. And once Jacob went and took wives and fathered twelve tribes, as it says, "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (Genesis 35:22), Joseph began to see hints of it in his dream, saying, "Behold, I have dreamed a dream" (Genesis 37:9). Jacob began to keep watch over his father's words, and his father kept the matter (Genesis 37:11). And when Joseph was sold and Simeon was bound and Benjamin was brought to take revenge, Jacob began to cry out, "Me? What do I know? I thought that from my fathers I would establish twelve tribes, but I am dwindling and going down," as it says, "Joseph is gone" (Genesis 42:36). Everything that the old man promised was fulfilled, and yet I am decreasing and going down. "How incomprehensible is this to me," as it says, "I do not know what to say to you, but one thing remains in my hand, the blessing that my father blessed me with, saying, 'And Almighty God bless you'" (Genesis 28:3).
“On the fourth day, prince of the children of Reuben, Elitzur son of Shedeur” (Numbers 7:30). “On the fourth day, prince of the children of Reuben…” – once the banner of Judah (See Numbers 2:1–9.) finished, the prince of Reuben began presenting his offering, because he was the firstborn, and he presented the offering regarding his tribe of Reuben. “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:31). “One gold ladle, ten shekels, full of incense” (Numbers 7:32). “His offering was one silver dish [ke’arat]” (Numbers 7:31), do not read it as ke’arat, but rather, as akeret; this is Reuben, who played the main [ikar] role in the rescue [of Joseph]. It was he who first initiated the rescue. That is what is written: “Reuben heard and rescued him from their hand” (Genesis 37:21). Alternatively, that he uprooted [akar] the thought of his brothers, who wanted to kill him, just as it says: “Now let us go and kill him…” (Genesis 37:20). “Silver,” in the sense of: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20). ”Its weight one hundred and thirty,” this is because the first three letters of the first three words that he said to them, their numerical value totals one hundred and thirty. “Let us not smite him mortally [lo nakenu nafesh]” (Genesis 37:21); take lamed from lo, nun from nakenu, and nun from nafesh; that is one hundred and thirty. (Lamed is thirty and nun is fifty, so 30 + 50 + 50 = 130.) “One silver basin [mizrak],” (Numbers 7:31), corresponding to the counsel he gave them that they should cast [sheyizreku] him into the pit, just as it says: “Reuben said to them: Do not shed blood; cast him into [this] pit…” (Genesis 37:22). “Silver,” in the sense of: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20). “Of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” (Numbers 7:31), corresponding to the secret [sod] that was in his heart to save him [Joseph]. The numerical value of sod is seventy. (Samekh is sixty, vav is 6 and dalet is 4 = 70.) “Both of them full of high quality flour…” (Numbers 7:31), as what he said to them: “Let us not smite him mortally” and “cast him,” he intended only to rescue him, as in both matters, (His statement not to kill Joseph, and his proposal to throw Joseph into the pit.) rescue is written: Initially, it is written: “Reuben heard and rescued him from their hand” (Genesis 37:21), and ultimately, it is written: “In order to rescue him from their hand” (Genesis 37:22). “One gold ladle [kaf], ten shekels…” (Numbers 7:32), kaf, (Kaf also means palm or hand.) corresponding to what he said to his brothers: “Do not lay a hand on him” (Genesis 37:22). “Gold…ten shekels,” because he saved himself by admonishing them, and he saved nine brothers from bloodshed. That is why “gold” is written, as there is one type of gold that resembles blood, and that is parvayim gold. “Full of incense” (Numbers 7:32), although it happened to the tribes that Joseph’s sale befell them, you presume that this act would not have befallen them unless they had been wicked in performing other acts. No, but rather they were full-fledged righteous men, and no sin had ever befallen them other than this one: That is what is written: “They said one to another: But we are guilty [regarding our brother]” (Genesis 42:21). They were engaged in self-reflection as to why their detention in Egypt befell them, but found only this. From their disgrace, the verse relates their praise, that they had only this iniquity alone attributable to them. And because Joseph’s sale was fortuitous for him, as it led him to rule, and it was fortuitous for his brothers and his father’s entire household, as he provided them with food during the famine years, that is why he was sold by them, because merit is engendered by means of the meritorious. That is “full of incense.” Another matter, “full of incense,” as, at that time, Reuben was a penitent, donning sackcloth, fasting, and praying before the Holy One blessed be He, that He grant him atonement for the iniquity of the act with Bilha. (See Genesis 35:22.) Prayer is likened to incense, just as it says: “Let my prayer stand as incense before You…” (Psalms 141:2). That is, “full of incense.” “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:33). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:34). “And for the peace offering, two cattle, five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year. This was the offering of Elitzur son of Shedeur” (Numbers 7:35). “One young bull…” (Numbers 7:33), these are the offerings that he sacrificed, corresponding to the penitence in which he was engaged when Joseph was sold. Penitence is likened to all the offerings of a sinner, as it is written: “Offerings to God are a broken spirit” (Psalms 51:19). Just as the sinner brings a burnt offering and a sin offering for his sin, that is why he brought here a burnt offering and a sin offering, corresponding to them. And because the burnt offering is more cherished (By the Holy One blessed be He.) than the sin offering, that is why he sacrificed a burnt offering from all the species with the exception of the goat, as we do not find the goat as a burnt offering throughout the Torah. “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:34), this is to atone for the act with Bilha. “And for the peace offering, two cattle” (Numbers 7:35), because he was [going to be] excluded from being enumerated with his brothers because of the act with Bilha, as it is written: “Reuben went and lay with Bilha, his father's concubine, and Israel heard” (Genesis 35:22), the matter was interrupted, (Genesis 35:22 is written in the Torah with an empty space in the middle of the verse following the phrase "and Israel heard," before the continuation “the sons of Jacob were twelve.”) as it placed the end of the portion there, alluding that he was banished. This is why that portion is an open portion, as even though he was banished, the arms of the Holy One blessed be He are open to receive penitents. Because he sought to perform two good deeds, Joseph’s rescue and repentance, he was restored to be part of them, and was included in their tally. That is what is written: “The sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). Due to these two acts that Reuben performed, Moses found an opportunity to pray on behalf of Reuben so that he would not be excluded from his brothers. That is what is written: “May Reuben live [and not die, and may his people be counted]” (Deuteronomy 33:6). “May Reuben live,” because he gave life to Joseph; “and not die,” due to the act of Bilha, because he repented; “and may his people be counted,” may his descendants be included in the tally of the other tribes in every sense. That is why it is stated: “And for the peace offering, two cattle [bakar]” (Numbers 7:35), corresponding to the two good deeds that he sought out [shebiker], Joseph’s rescue and the repentance, he was restored and was enumerated with his brothers. “Five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year” (Numbers 7:35), why three species? It is corresponding to the three times Reuben is mentioned in the portion of Joseph’s rescue and corresponding to the three “vayomer” that are written there. (Genesis 37:21, 22, 30.) Why were there five of each? They correspond to the five words through which Reuben was drawn near. That is what is written: “The sons of Jacob were twelve.” (There are five words in the Hebrew phrase.) “This was the offering of Elitzur…” (Numbers 7:35), when the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented his offering in this order, He began lauding his offering; “this was the offering…”
“Jacob arrived intact to the city of Shekhem, which is in the land of Canaan, upon his arrival from Padan Aram, and he encamped before the city” (Genesis 33:18). “Jacob arrived intact.” “In six troubles He will deliver you, and in seven, no harm will touch you” (Job 5:19); if they are six, I will withstand them, if they are seven, I will withstand them. “In famine, He redeems you from death” (Job 5:20) – “For these two years the famine is in the midst of the land” (Genesis 45:6). “And in war, from the sword” (Job 5:20) – “It is in my power to do you harm” (Genesis 31:29). “From the scourge of the tongue you will be hidden” (Job 5:21) – Rav Aḥa said: Evil speech is so egregious that the One who created it created a place in which it could be hidden. “And you will not fear pillage when it comes” (Job 5:21) – this is Esau and his chieftains. “At pillage and hunger you will laugh” (Job 5:22) – this is Laban, who came hungry for his [Jacob’s] wealth, to rob him. “For your covenant will be with the rocks of the field…” (Job 5:23) – “he took one of the stones from the place, and placed it beneath his head” (Genesis 28:11). “You will know that your tent is at peace” (Job 5:24) – the incident of Reuben and Bilha, (See Genesis 35:22.) the incident (See Genesis 38:1–30.) of Judah and Tamar. (See Sifrei Devarim ch. 31 which states that God told Jacob that Reuben had repented. In the case of Judah and Tamar, it is explicit in the verse that Judah admitted that he was at fault. Thus, despite the falls, Jacob's tent remained at peace (see the Peirush Maharzu on the midrash here).) “When you visit your abode, you will not be lacking” (Job 5:24) – our patriarch Jacob was eighty-four years old and had never seen a drop of seminal emission. (Even unintentionally.) “You shall know also that your descendants will be many, and your offspring like the grass of the earth” (Job 5:25) – Rabbi Yudan said: Our patriarch Jacob did not pass from the world until he saw six hundred thousand of his sons’ descendants. “You will come to the grave at the right time [bakelaḥ], like a grain pile at its time” (Job 5:26). Rabbi Yitzḥak and the Rabbis, Rabbi Yitzḥak said: You will come moist [laḥ] (This means full of vitality.) to your grave. The Rabbis say: You will come complete [bekhola] to the grave, full, lacking nothing, as it is stated: “Jacob arrived intact.”
“It was when Israel dwelled in that land that Reuben went and lay with Bilha, his father's concubine, and Israel heard. The sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). “It was when Israel dwelled” – Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: Uprooting a [person from his place on his] family tree is severe in the eyes of the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “It was when Israel dwelled,” and it is written: “The sons of Jacob were twelve.” (Despite Reuben’s misconduct, Jacob is still referred to as having twelve sons, as Reuben’s place in the family was not uprooted (Yefeh To’ar). ) “The sons of Reuben, firstborn of Israel; [for he was the firstborn, but when he desecrated his father's couch, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel, but not to be reckoned as the firstborn]” (I Chronicles 5:1). Say from here that the firstborn status in respect to monetary rights were taken from him, but the firstborn status in respect to genealogy was not taken from him. (Joseph became the firstborn regarding inheriting a double portion of the estate, and similarly, Joseph is considered two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim. However, Reuben is still accorded the honor of being listed first among the sons, and called the firstborn. ) Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Simon, one of them said: It is not for Reuben to be reckoned as the firstborn. The other said: One does not reckon Joseph as the firstborn, but only for Reuben. (The argument is whether the phrase “but not to be reckoned as the firstborn” indicates that Reuben is still listed as the firstborn, or not. ) Rabbi Ḥagai said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak: Even at the moment of corruption, one reckons only Reuben as the firstborn. That is what is written: “It was when [Israel] dwelled.” “The sons of Leah: Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, and Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Zebulun” (Genesis 35:23). “The sons of Leah: Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn” – Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: Reuben was the first in conception, first in birth, first in birthright, first in inheritance, first in Temple service, first in repentance. Rabbi Azarya said: First for prophecy as well, as it is stated: “The Lord spoke first to Hosea” (Hosea 1:2). (Hosea was the first of four prophets who were active in the same time period, and the Sages had a tradition that he was from the tribe of Reuben (Yefeh To’ar). )
“Reuben heard, and delivered him from their hand and said: Let us not smite him mortally” (Genesis 37:21). “Reuben heard, and delivered him” – where had he been? (The fact that he heard implies that he was not there during the initial discussion and heard about it after the fact (Etz Yosef). ) Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis: Rabbi Yosei said: Each one of them would serve his father on his day, and that day was Reuben’s day. Rabbi Neḥemya said: Reuben said: I am the firstborn, and the blame will be attributed only to me. The Rabbis say: Reuben said: He enumerates me with my brothers; shall I not rescue him? I was under the impression that I had been banished because of that incident, (The incident of Reuben and Bilha; see Genesis 35:22. ) and he enumerates me with my brothers, As it is stated: “And eleven stars prostrated themselves to me” (Genesis 37:9) – shall I not rescue him? The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘You were the first to engage in the saving of lives; as you live, they will designate cities of refuge first only within your boundaries.’ That is what is written: “Betzer in the wilderness…[for the Reubenites]” (Deuteronomy 4:43).
“Reuben returned to the pit, and behold, Joseph was not in the pit, and he rent his garments” (Genesis 37:29). “Reuben returned to the pit” – where had he been? Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer said: In his sackcloth and his fasting. (He was preoccupied with his repentance for his action involving Bilha (Genesis 35:22).) When he was free, he went and peered into that pit. That is what is written: “Reuben returned to the pit.” The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘A person has never sinned before Me and repented, and you are the first to initiate repentance. As you live, your descendant will arise and be the first to initiate repentance.’ (He will be the first to teach about the full power of repentance, such as the fact that repentance out of love can cause one’s sins to be considered as merits (Yefe To’ar). ) Who is that? It is Hosea, as it is stated: “Return, Israel, to the Lord your God” (Hosea 14:2). “They took Joseph’s tunic, and slaughtered a goat, and dipped the tunic in the blood” (Genesis 37:31). “They took Joseph’s tunic, and slaughtered a goat” – why a goat? Because its blood is similar to that of man. “They sent the fine tunic, and they brought it to their father and said: We found this. Identify, please: Is it your son’s tunic or not” (Genesis 37:32). “They sent the fine tunic…” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The Holy One blessed be He said to Judah: ‘You said: “Identify, please”; as you live, Tamar will say to you: “Identify, please”’ (Genesis 38:25). “He identified it and said: My son’s tunic! A savage beast devoured him; Joseph has been mauled” (Genesis 37:33). “He identified it and said: My son’s tunic” – he said: I do not know what I am seeing. (Jacob was used to a high level of perception, fueled by the Divine Spirit. But from this incident until he reunited with Joseph, that clarity left him, and he was unsure of the exact facts or full ramifications of what he was seeing (Maharzu). ) “My son’s tunic! A savage beast devoured him…” – Rav Huna said: The Divine Spirit flashed in him: “A savage beast devoured him” – this is Potifar’s wife. (Rav Huna explains that although Jacob himself was unsure what had occurred, he said something that alluded to future events (Maharzu). )
“He refused, and he said to his master's wife: Behold, my master, having me, does not know what is in the house, and he has placed everything that he has in my charge” (Genesis 39:8). “He refused, and he said to his master's wife” – Yehuda ben Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] said: If, in the matter of a mitzva, one may refuse, in the matter of a transgression, [is it] not [obvious] that one must refuse? In the matter of a mitzva one may refuse – “my husband’s brother has refused [to perpetuate a name for his brother in Israel, he is unwilling to perform levirate marriage with me]” (Deuteronomy 25:7). In the matter of a transgression, must one not refuse? “He refused, and he said…: Behold, my master….” He said to her: ‘The Holy One blessed be He is accustomed to choose from the beloved of my father’s household for a burnt offering – to Abraham: “Take now your son” (Genesis 22:2). Shall I accede to you? Perhaps I have been chosen as a burnt offering, and I will be disqualified from being an offering.’ Another matter, “he said to his master's wife” – he said to her: ‘The Holy One blessed be He is accustomed to reveal Himself to the beloved of my father’s household at night: Abraham – “After these matters, the word of the Lord was to Abram in a vision,” (Genesis 15:1); Isaac – “The Lord appeared to him that night” (Genesis 26:24); Jacob – “He dreamed, and behold, a ladder” (Genesis 28:12). If I accede to you, perhaps the Holy One blessed be He will reveal Himself to me and find me impure.’ Another matter, “Behold, my master” – he said to her: ‘I am afraid. If Adam the first man was commanded regarding a minor mitzva, and when he violated it, he was expelled from the Garden of Eden, this, which is a major transgression of forbidden sexual relations, all the more so.’ “Behold, my master” – [he said to her:] ‘I am afraid of my father, in the land of Canaan; Reuben, because it is written in his regard: “Reuben went and lay with Bilha” (Genesis 35:22), his birthright was taken from him and given to me. If I accede to you, I will be rejected from my birthright.’ Another matter, “Behold, my master” – [he said to her:] ‘I am afraid of my master.’ She said to him: ‘I will kill him.’ He said to her: ‘Is it not sufficient that I will be counted in the company of adulterers, that [I should also be among] the company of murderers? And if this matter is what you seek – “behold, my master” – go to the one who is before you’ . Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The milk of black goats and the milk of white goats is the same. (If you seek sexual relations, go to your husband, who can provide that just as well as I can. ) Another matter, “Behold, my master” – [he said to her:] ‘I am afraid of the Lord.’ She said to him: ‘He is not here.’ He said to her: “The Lord is great and highly extolled, [and His greatness is unfathomable]” (Psalms 145:3). Rabbi Avin said: She took him from room to room aand from bed chamber to bed chamber until she positioned him next to her bed. Her idol was etched above it. She took a sheet and covered its face. He said to her: ‘You have done well that you covered its face. The one in whose regard it is written: “They are the eyes of the Lord roving throughout the earth” (Zechariah 4:10), all the more so.’ (If you are concerned about being seen by your idol, all the more so should you be concerned about being seen by God. ) “There is no one greater in this house than I, and he has not withheld anything from me but you, as you are his wife. How can I do this great wickedness, and sin to God?” (Genesis 39:9). Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Ami: Was the verse missing anything? “And sin to the Lord” (This is the typical expression when referring to sin.) is not written here, but rather, “[and sin] to God.” By God, I will not perform this evil matter. (The midrash interprets Joseph to have taken an oath that he would not perform this sin. )
“It was as she spoke to Joseph, day after day, and he did not heed her to lie with her, to be with her” (Genesis 39:10). “It was as she spoke to Joseph, day after day” – Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Binyamin: Rachel’s children, (The reference is to Joseph and to Mordekhai, who was a descendant of Benjamin. ) their ordeal was equal and their greatness was equal. Their ordeal was equal – “it was as she spoke to Joseph, day after day”; “it was, as they spoke to him, day after day” (Esther 3:4). Their greatness was equal – “Pharaoh removed his ring” (Genesis 41:42); “the king removed his ring” (Esther 8:2). “And he placed it upon Joseph's hand” (Genesis 41:42); “and he gave it to Mordekhai” (Esther 8:2). “He dressed him in garments of linen” (Genesis 41:42); “and place the garments and the horse…Haman took [the garments and horse and dressed Mordekhai]” (Esther 6:9–11). “He placed a gold chain on his neck” (Genesis 41:42); “Esther placed Mordekhai over the house of Haman” (Esther 8:2). “He had him ride in the second chariot that he had” (Genesis 41:43); “he had him ride the horse through the city square” (see Esther 6:11). “They cried before him: Kneel” (Genesis 41:43); “he cried before him: So [shall be done to the man whose honor the king desires]” (Esther 6:11). “And he did not heed her to lie with her” – in this world, “to be with her” – to be with her in Gehenna in the future. Another matter, “he did not heed her” – even for lying [with her] without intercourse. A noblewoman asked Rabbi Yosei, she said to him: ‘Is it possible that Joseph, seventeen years old, at the height of his passion, could conduct himself in such a manner?’ (Is it really possible that he withstood the temptation? ) He took out for her the book of Genesis and began reading before her the incident of Reuben and Bilha, (Genesis 35:22.) the incident of Judah and Tamar. (Genesis 38:18.) He said to her: ‘If these two, who were adults and in their father’s domain, the verse did not cover up their actions, this one who is young and on his own, all the more so.’
“Reuben, you are my firstborn” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] would say [an interpretation] of this as praise and [an interpretation] as criticism. You are firstborn, and Esau is firstborn. “Esau went to the field to hunt game [to bring]” (Genesis 27:5) – if he found, fine; if not, “to bring” from what he stole or took by force. But you, “Reuben went during the days of wheat harvest [and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah]” (Genesis 30:14). (Reuven took mandrakes that were ownerless and not from what belonged to others (see Bereshit Rabba 72:2), unlike Esau.) “My strength, and the first of my potency” – these are the vanguard in the battle. “Greater honor and greater power” – “their faces were like the faces of lions” (I Chronicles 12:9). (This is written regarding the Gadites, but since the Gadites and Reubenites both formed the vanguard in the conquest of Canaan, it is true of the Reubenites as well (Matnot Kehuna). ) He would say [an interpretation] about this as criticism – “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are firstborn and I am firstborn. (Jacob bought the birthright from Esau.) I, at the age of eighty-four years old, had never seen a drop of seminal emission, (That is, until Jacob married Leah and fathered Reuben. The midrash assumes that Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah. ) but you: “[Reuben] went and lay with Bilha” (Genesis 35:22). “My strength, and the first of my potency” – the first of my toil and the first of my travail. (He was the one with whom Jacob first experienced the travail of raising children.) “Greater honor and greater power” – the birthright was yours, the priesthood was yours, the kingship was yours, but now that you sinned, the birthright was given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingship to Judah. Rabbi Aḥa said: The birthright was not yours. Is it not so that Jacob went to Laban only for Rachel? All the furrows that I plowed in your mother; was it not in Rachel that they should have been plowed? (This is a euphemism for marital relations. Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah, when he thought she was Rachel, and therefore by right the firstborn should have been from Rachel (Nezer HaKodesh). ) Now, the birthright has returned to its owner. "Impetuous as water, you shall not excel; because you mounted your father's bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:4). “Impetuous as water, you shall not excel” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer said: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in harlotry [zanita]. (The Hebrew term for impetuous, paḥaz, is an acronym for paḥazta, ḥatata, zanita.) Rabbi Yehoshua said: You rebelled [parakta ol], you desecrated [ḥilalta] my couch, your evil inclination stirred [za] within you. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: You trampled [pasata] the law, you forfeited [ḥavta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar] vis-à-vis your gifts. They said: Even now, we still need the Moda’i. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i came and explained: You shuddered [zata], you trembled [ḥaradta], the sin flew [paraḥ] from upon your head. (Reuben shuddered and trembled with remorse for his sin, and therefore was forgiven (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: You acted like those impetuous ones who break their shins in the water. (They leap before they look.) “As water” – the Rabbis say: You sinned through water, (Water in the sense of liquid, a reference to semen.) let the one who was drawn from water come and draw you near: “May Reuben live and not die” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This verse was stated by Moses, who was so called because he was drawn from the water (see Exodus 2:10). ) “As water” – just as water is released from place to place, so, you have been released. (Just as water flows, your sin has flowed away from you, i.e., you have been relieved of liability. Alternatively, the implication is: Your privileges have been taken from you (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: One does not make a ritual bath of wine or of oil, but rather of water; so, you made yourself a ritual bath of water and you purified yourself in it. (Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i is of the opinion that Reuben sinned only in thought but not in deed, as he did not carry out his sinful thoughts. Therefore, his thoughts of sincere repentance restored him to a state of purity, as though he had immersed in a ritual bath (Etz Yosef). ) “You shall not excel [totar]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said this: Nothing was relinquished [vitarta] for you. (You have not been absolved from punishment. This is derived from the fact that totar and vitarta are derived from the same root in Hebrew. ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: There will be nothing remaining [vitaron] for you from your sin. “Because you mounted [alita]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: Because you mounted in its plain sense. (They interpret the phrase “because you mounted your father’s bed” in the plain sense as indicating that Reuben literally sinned with Bilha. ) Rabbi Elazar said: Because you mounted [alita] (He interprets alita to mean “you elevated [he’eleita],” meaning that Reuben brought about benefit regarding his father’s bed. This occurred in the incident of the mandrakes, which led to the birth of Issachar.) – where? In the case of the mandrakes. “Your father’s bed [mishkevei avikha]” – Rabbi Berekhya said: It is not written here: Your father’s bed [mishkav] , but rather, “your father’s beds [mishkevei]” (The term mishkevei, generally translated “bed,” is actually a plural term, such that a literal translation would be “beds.” ) – the bed of Bilha and the bed of Zilpa. (Accordingly, not only did Reuben literally sin, but he did so with Zilpa as well as with Bilha. ) Rabbi Abbahu, and some say Rabbi Yaakov, in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: We learned: One who is suspect in some matter neither judges in its regard nor testifies in its regard. (Mishna Bekhorot 4:10. ) Is it possible that he is destined to be one of the six tribes that were standing on Mount Eval and saying: “Cursed is one who lies with his father’s wife” (Deuteronomy 27:20), and he performed this very act? Rather, he was defending his mother’s honor. All the days that Rachel was alive, her bed was situated alongside the bed of Jacob our patriarch. When Rachel died, Jacob our patriarch took Bilha’s bed and placed it alongside his bed. [Reuben] said: Is it not enough that my mother was jealous during her sister’s lifetime, that she must be so even after her death? He rose and rearranged the beds. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon disagrees with this and [says that] Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi [said] in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: This is analogous to one who was suspected of selling teruma as non-sacred produce. (Teruma, which could be eaten only by priests and the members of their households, and only in a state of ritual purity, would command a much cheaper price than non-sacred produce. ) They investigated him and inspected, but did not find any substance to these claims, and they appointed him in charge of setting prices in the marketplace. “Then you desecrated” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: “Then you desecrated” – in its plain sense. “Ascended” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: You ascended from your sin. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i said: You ascended from your gifts. (Numerous commentaries suggest that the text should read that according to Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, “you ascended from your gifts,” meaning that due to his sin, Reuben lost out on the priestly gifts, and Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says, “you ascended from your sin,” meaning that Reuben repented and achieved atonement for his sin. ) The Rabbis say: I am neither distancing you nor drawing you near. Instead I am leaving you in loose abeyance until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “And Moses ascended to God” (Exodus 19:3), comes, and does with you what he perceives to be correct. When Moses came, he began to draw him near: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). The Rabbis say: The same was true of the congregation of Koraḥ, . (See the end of section 2. )
R Samuel b. Nachmeini said in the name of R. Jonathan: "Whoever says that Reuben (the son of Jacob) sinned, errs, for it is said (Gen. 35, 22.) Now the sons of Jacob were twelve. It is intended to inform us that they were all equal [in righteousness]. How then shall we explain the first part of the above-mentioned passage? It is intended to teach that he (Reuben) deranged his father's bed, and the Scriptures charge him as if he had been lying with Bilhah." We are taught that R. Simon h. Elazar said: "That righteous one (Reuben) is cleared of that crime, that such an occurrence never happened to him, for how could it possibly be that a man whose descendants were to stand on Mt. Ebal and proclaim (Deu. 29, 20.) Cursed be he who lieth with his father's wife, would commit such a sin. But how then is the passage (Gen. 35, 22 ) And he lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, to be explained? It is intended to inform us that he demanded redress for the humiliation inflicted upon his mother saying: 'When my mothers sister lived and proved a vexation to her, it was bearable; but that the servant of my mother's sister should be a vexation to my mother is unbearable!' Whereupon he went and deranged the bed of Bilhah." Others say he deranged two beds, that of the Schechina and that of his father, and this explains that which is written (Gen. 48, 4.) Unstable as water, thou shalt not have the excellence, because thou did go up to thy father's bed; then didst thou defile the Shechina of my couch. Do not read Yetzu'ey (my bed), but read Yetzuay (the beds).
And Pinchas son of Eleazar, son of Aaron, saw. What did he see? He saw an act and remembered the halacha (Jewish law). When someone commits a forbidden relationship with a non-Jewish woman, zealots may strike him. Alternatively, he saw that no one was standing up to zealously act for the sake of God's name. He said, "Is there no one here who will take action and execute judgment?" As it is stated, "Judah is a lion's cub" (Genesis 49:9). "Dan shall be a serpent by the way" (Genesis 49:17). "Benjamin is a wolf that tears" (Genesis 49:27). However, since he saw that everyone remained silent, Pinchas immediately arose and took action, for no one showed concern for the honor of their Creator. Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, a righteous son of a righteous father. Alternatively, "And Pinchas saw" - Reuben was suspected of a matter, but they did not judge or testify against him, as it is stated, "And he lay with Bilhah" (Genesis 35:22). All of Simeon was guilty, and the matter depended solely on Levi. Moses said to Pinchas, "My father's brother, did you not learn that when someone commits a forbidden relationship with a non-Jewish woman, zealots may strike him?" He said to him, "A messenger of the letter should be for him a horseman." Immediately, he arose from the midst of the congregation and took a spear in his hand. He arose from the Sanhedrin of Moses and took a spear in his hand. He removed the spearhead and placed it in his armpit, and it was fixed and stayed on his staff. They said to Pinchas, "Where are you going?" He said to them, "And who is greater than Shimon?" They said, "Let him be." He even went to attend to his needs. The Sages allowed the matter to proceed.
(Gen. 49:3:) REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN. One said < it was > to his discredit, and another said < it was > to his credit. To his discredit: He said to him: REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN. (Gen. R. 98(99):4.) You are a first-born, and I am a firstborn. (By virtue of having bought Esau’s birthright.) R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: For eighty-four years Jacob never saw a < nocturnal > pollution. (Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:3 (= p. 1204 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); cf. Gen. R. 99 (another version):6 (= p. 1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); Tanh., Gen. 12:9; see also Gen. R. 68:5; Meg. 17a and Rashi, ad loc.) I am a first-born, and you are a first-born. (Gen. R. 98(99):4 explains that Reuben did not follow his father’s example, but (according to Gen. 35:22, 49:4) slept with his father’s concubine and thereby lost his birthright, his priesthood, and his right to kingship. See also below; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:3; Tanh., Gen. 12:9.)
Another interpretation: Judah bar Shallum the Levite said: When she came out, the Holy One made her eyes light up and she found them after she had lost them because there is no finding except of what is LOST. Thus it is written (in Lev. 5:22): OR HAS FOUND WHAT IS LOST. Immediately she sent < her tokens of the pledge > to Judah, (according to Gen. 38:25) THE ONE TO WHOM THESE BELONG. She said to him (ibid., cont.): PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE your Creator. (Gen. R., 97, New Version, on Gen. 49:8 (= p. 1214 in the Theodor-Albeck edition) explains that for Judah to acknowledge the Creator meant for him not to be ashamed in confessing the matter before flesh and blood. Cf. Sot. 10b.) Immediately (in vs. 26): JUDAH GAVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT. In that hour a heavenly voice (bat qol) came forth and said to him: You are to say: [She is pregnant from me; lest] she be burned. And afterwards he confessed: The affair stemmed from me. The Holy One said to Him: Judah, for me you have saved three lives from the fire and one (i.e., Joseph) from the pit. By your life, I will save < four lives > for you just as you have saved < them > for me. Who are they? Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah from the fiery furnace (in Dan. 3:20-27) and Daniel from the lions' pit (in Dan. 6:16-23). What is written about them (in Dan. 1:6)? NOW AMONG THOSE FROM THE CHILDREN OF JUDAH WERE DANIEL, HANANIAH, MISHAEL, AND AZARIAH. "From Hezekiah's children" (See PRE 52 at the end; Sanh. 93b.) is not written here, but FROM THE CHILDREN OF JUDAH. For what reason? For the reason that he had saved Tamar and her children < from the fire > and Joseph from the pit. When Reuben heard that Judah had confessed, he immediately arose also and said: I also have violated my father's beds (in Gen. 35:22). Eliphaz said to Job (in Job 15:17-18): I WILL INFORM YOU; HEARKEN TO ME. NOW THIS HAVE I SEEN, AND I WILL DECLARE THAT WHICH SAGES HAVE TOLD. These < sages > are Reuben and Judah. Therefore (in vs. 19): TO THEM ALONE WAS THE LAND GIVEN. When? (Ibid.:) AND NO STRANGER PASSED AMONG THEM. When Moses came to bless them, what did he say (in Deut. 33:6-7)? MAY REUBEN LIVE AND NOT DIE…. AND THIS IS FOR JUDAH….
"I will act wisely on the innocent way. Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Nehemiah. Rabbi Judah says, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, "Appoint for Me a priest." Moses said to Him, "What tribe?" He replied to him, "Do not put Reuben before Me, who sinned with Bilhah, his father's concubine, as it is said (Genesis 35:22), 'And Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine.' " He said to him, "From the tribe of Simeon." He said to him, "They are engaged in violence, which I hate, as it is said (Genesis 49:5), 'Simeon and Levi are brothers, weapons of violence are their wares.' " He said to him, "How about the tribe of Dan?" He said to him, "They will cause My anger, for they are idolaters, as it is said (Zechariah 10:11), 'And they shall cross the sea with affliction, and smite the waves in the sea, and all the depths of the Nile shall dry up; and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, and the scepter of Egypt shall depart.' " This is a reference to the image of Micah. Moses therefore warned Israel (Deuteronomy 29:17), "Lest there be among you a man or woman or family or tribe." And it is said (Judges 18:30), "And the children of Dan set up the graven image for themselves." He said to him, "How about the tribe of Joseph?" He said to him, "They speak evil behind their brethren's backs, as it is said (Genesis 37:2), 'And Joseph brought evil tales of them unto their father.' " He said to him, "How about the tribe of Judah?" He said to him, "He is arrogant of eye and wide of heart, as it is said (Genesis 38:15), 'And Judah saw her, and thought her to be a harlot.' " Moses then said, "Whose tribe, then, shall I appoint?" He replied, "Appoint for yourself from your own tribe." Rabbi Nehemiah said, "And there are those who say it in the name of Resh Lakish, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, 'One who serves Me in this world will serve Me in the World to Come, and will not sit in the midst of My house.' " Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said, "A person must be modest within his own home, and needless to say in the home of his friend."
And those animals mounted the asses and rode away with them and they were not to be found to this very day. And one of those animals approached Anah and dealt him a blow with its tail and fled from the place. And when he saw these things he was greatly afraid of his life, and he too fled and escaped to the city. And he related unto his father and brothers all that hath befallen him and many men went in search of the asses but they could not find them. And Anah and his brothers never dared to approach that place again for they were in great fear of their lives. And the children of Anah the son of Seir were: Dishon and his sister Ahlibamah, and the children of Dishon were: Hemdan, and Eshban, and Ithran and Cheran; and the children of Ezer were: Bilhan, and Zaavan, and Akan, and the children of Dishan were: Uz and Aran. These are the families of the children of Seir the Horite, according to their dukes in the land of Seir. And Esau with his children dwelt in the land of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land, and they acquired possessions in it and they were fruitful and multiplied exceedingly. And Jacob with his children and all belonging to him dwelt with Isaac their father in the land of Canaan, as the Lord had commanded unto Abraham their father. And it came to pass in the one hundred and fifth year of Jacob's life, which was the ninth year of his dwelling in the land of Canaan after his return from Padan-Aram, that Jacob journeyed with his children from Hebron, and they went along and reached the city of Shechem, and they located there, for the sons of Jacob found good and fat pasture for their cattle in Shechem. And the city of Shechem had been rebuilt at that time, and there were in her about three hundred men and women. And when Jacob and his sons with all belonging to them came back, they dwelt in the parcel of the land which Jacob had bought from Hamor, when he arrived there from Padan-Aram, long before Simeon and Levi had destroyed the city. And when the kings of the Canaanites and the Amorites around the city of Shechem heard that Jacob and his sons returned to Shechem to dwell therein, they said: Shall Jacob and his sons be permitted to dwell again in this city after having slain and driven away its inhabitants, to come once again to kill and drive away the people now living in the city? And all of the Canaanitish kings assembled once more to fight with Jacob and his sons. And Jashub king of Tapuah sent also to all the kings that were around him, to Elan king of Gaash, and to Thuri king of Shiloh, and to Parathon, king of Hazar, and to Susy king of Sarton, and to Laban king of Beth-horan, and to Shabir king of Othnaimah, saying: Come up to my assistance, and we will smite the Hebrew and his sons and all belonging to him, for they have come once more to Shechem, to take possession thereof and to slay its inhabitants as heretofore.
And thus is it written (Ibid. 35:22) "And it was, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, and Israel heard." When Jacob heard this, he shuddered and said: Can it be that there is "base matter" in my sons! — until he was told by the L-rd that Reuven had repented, as it is written (Ibid.) "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (including Reuven.) We are hereby taught that Reuven afflicted himself all of his days because of that act, until Moses accepted his penitence, viz. (Devarim 33:6) "Reuven shall live (in this world) and he shall not die" (in the world to come).
(Devarim 33:6) "Reuven shall live and he shall not die": How is this related to what precedes [("together, the tribes of Israel")]? This is analogous to (the situation of) a king, who visits his sons on occasion. When he takes leave of them, they and his kinsmen come to escort him. He says to them: "My sons, is there anything that you need? Is there anything on your mind?" They answer: "Father, there is nothing that we need and nothing that we desire of you but that you forgive our big brother." If not for the tribes' (intercession), the L-rd would not have forgiven Reuven (for the episode of Bilhah [viz. Bereshith 35:22]) — wherefore it is written (at this point) "together, the tribes of Israel."
Variantly: "He shall be desired of his brothers": When Reuven performed that act (viz. Bereshith 35:22), Asher went and related it to his brothers, who rebuked him, saying "Our brother, is this how you speak of our big brother?" And when Reuven admitted his deed, they were reconciled with him (Asher) — wherefore it is written "He shall be desired of his brothers."
The incident of Reuben, about which it says: “And Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine” (Genesis 35:22), is read from the Torah in public but not translated, so that the uneducated not come to denigrate Reuben. The incident of Tamar (Genesis, chapter 38) is read in public and also translated. The first report of the incident of the Golden Calf, i.e., the Torah’s account of the incident itself (Exodus 32:1–20), is read and translated, but the second narrative, i.e., Aaron’s report to Moses of what had taken place (Exodus 32:21–24) is read but not translated. The verses constituting the Priestly Benediction (Numbers 6:24–26) and the incident of David and Amnon (II Samuel, chapter 13) are neither read nor translated. One may not conclude the Torah reading with by reading from the Prophets the account of the Divine Chariot (Ezekiel, chapter 1), so as not to publicize that which was meant to remain hidden. And Rabbi Yehuda permits it. Rabbi Eliezer says: One may not conclude with section from the Prophets beginning with: “Make known to Jerusalem her abominations” (Ezekiel 16:2), because it speaks derogatively of the Jewish people.
The mishna details the next stage of the process. They would bring her up to the Sanhedrin that was in Jerusalem, and the judges would threaten her in order that she admit her sin. And this was done in the manner that they would threaten witnesses testifying in cases of capital law. In those cases, the judges would explain to the witnesses the gravity of their testimony by stressing the value of human life. Here too, the judges would attempt to convince the woman to admit her sin, to avoid the loss of her life. And additionally, the judge would say to her: My daughter, wine causes a great deal of immoral behavior, levity causes a great deal of immoral behavior, immaturity causes a great deal of immoral behavior, and bad neighbors cause a great deal of immoral behavior. The judge encouraged her to admit her sin by explaining to her that he understands that there may have been mitigating factors. The judge then continues: Act for the sake of His great name, so that God’s name, which is written in sanctity, shall not be erased on the water. If the woman admits to having committed adultery, the scroll upon which the name of God is written will not be erased. And additionally, the judge says in her presence matters that are not worthy of being heard by her and all her father’s family, in order to encourage her to admit her sin, as the Gemara will explain.
In Genesis 44,17, Joseph said to his brothers: ואתם עלו לשלום אל אביכם, "As for you, go up in peace to your father." The word אתם, in that connection was used advisedly. Joseph meant that the brothers themselves could come to their Father in Heaven safely, i.e. they would not in this world suffer the execution as kidnappers who sell their prey. On a future occasion, however, their re-incarnates would have to pay for the crime with their lives. The Ten Martyrs mentioned were the ones who had to pay with their lives for that sin which had gone unpunished for so long. The allusion in the verse just quoted serves some Kabbalists as the reason why Reuben, who had not been a party to the sale of Joseph, was included among those who were executed for the crime. His sin had been of a different nature, namely the incident described in Genesis 35, 22, involving Bilhah. Reuben's own words provide us with a hint of this when he said after discovering that Joseph had been removed from the pit (37, 30): ואני, אנה אני בא, "Where can I go to?" Rabbi Abraham Saba in his Tzror Hamor comments on this that the letters in the words and אני and אנה are the respective first letters of א-ל נקמות י-ה-ו-ה נקמות הופיע, "G–d of retribution, Lord, G–d of retribution, appear!" (Psalms 94, 1) The reincarnations of Joseph and Benjamin were not among the Ten Martyrs described.
As long as the angel's prediction about G–d changing Jacob's name had not been fulfilled, Jacob still bore the marks of his nocturnal encounter with Samael on his body. Dinah's rape was the visible effect of the contact with impurity during the encounter in which Jacob's thigh joint was injured. One of his offspring, Dinah, became infected with טומאת מגע, impurity contracted due to contact with something impure, as a direct consequence of her father's physical contact with something impure. The Torah (34,2) describes the rapist as שכם בן חמור החוי. The word החוי is an allusion to the original serpent which is called חויא in Aramaic. We have explained earlier that this נחש, i.e. its power, is active within the ירך, reproductive organs of man, and that this is the connection with the prohibition of the גיד הנשה. Through Dinah's experience, and the incident with Reuben in Bilhah's tent described later in 35,22 (although our sages view Reuben's deed as symbolical rather than actual, Shabbat 55b), any lingering vestige of the serpent's pollution was drained from Jacob, and after that his "bed" could be described as totally pure, or שלימה, in the parlance of our sages. It was at this point that G–d Himself bestowed the name ישראל on Jacob and blessed him.
Since the commission of even such a "shade of an impropriety" can harm the public image of someone perceived as a צדיק, Jacob had to be punished. Dinah was raped, i.e. became someone's sex partner without benefit of the holy state of matrimony. Her brothers described such relations as only being conducted with a harlot, i.e. that only harlots were sexually violated (34, 31). The episode in which Reuben is described as having slept with Bilhah (35, 22) is also perceived as an indirect result of the flaw in Jacob's piety discovered by the guardian angel of Esau.
את בלהה שפחתה לאשה, “her servantmaid Bilhah as wife.” This was similar to what Leah had received from her father when she had married. She also gave that servant maid to her husband Yaakov, as reported in 30,9. We know that Joseph in his early years kept company with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah who are described there as his father’s “wives.” (Genesis 37,2) This teaches that these women were not concubines, but regular wives with all the financial security that such a status guarantees the wife. None of the 12 “tribes” were born to women who were merely concubines. The only time when the expression “concubine” is used about them is when they are mentioned in comparison to Rachel and Leah, when the indiscretion of Reuven is alluded to by the Torah in both Genesis 35,22, and 49,4. Gad and Asher had already been born when that indiscretion took place.
While Israel was living in that land, Reuben went and slept with Bilha, his father’s concubine, and Israel heard about it… Jacob had twelve sons. (Gen. 35:22)
Section one: Reuven sleeps with Bilhah, his father’s concubine (Genesis 35:22). This story is not translated in order not to shame Reuven. Section two: Tamar tricks Judah into sleeping with her (see Genesis 38). This story is read and translated because it is actually to Judah’s credit. When he discovers that he has committed a wrong (vs. 26), he doesn’t try to hide his crime, as embarrassing as it might be. Note that Judah serves as a foil for Reuven. Reuven intentionally commits a crime, so we must hide it from the public. Judah accidentally commits a crime and then confesses, so we make public the entire story. Section three: The first part of the golden calf story is from Exodus 32:1-20. This part is translated either because Israel does receive atonement, or in order so that the congregation will learn from their mistakes. In verse 21 Moses questions and accuses Aaron. In order not to embarrass Aaron, this section is not translated. Section four: The version of this mishnah in good manuscripts says that these sections are neither read nor translated. The priestly blessing is not read, perhaps because it is a regular part of the prayer service. According to the version of the mishan in the Talmud, these verses are read but not translated. The Talmud explains that they are not translated because one of the verses says, “May God show favor to you” and people might think that God shows favor in judgment and doesn’t judge justly. The story of David and Bathsheva (II Samuel 11) is not read as a haftarah because it is embarrassing to David. In the story of Amnon (II Samuel 13), Amnon rapes Tamar and then wants to abandon her. He eventually is killed by Absolom, David’s other son. This is also quite embarrassing to David and to his house. Section five: We don’t read the description of the chariot contained in Ezekiel, chapter one, as a haftarah because ordinary people are not supposed to study this mystical chapter. However, Rabbi Judah allows this. Section six: Rabbi Eliezer prohibits reading Ezekiel 16 as a haftarah because its content is simply too graphic. Read the chapter for yourself to get an idea of its disturbing content.
The incident of Reuven is read but not translated. Reuven sleeps with Bilhah, his father’s concubine (Genesis 35:22). This story is not translated in order not to shame Reuven.
zu hören würdig sind. Man führt ihr Fälle aus der Geschichte vor, da bedeutende und fromme Männer sich auf ähnlichem Gebiete vergangen hatten und ihr Vergehen eingestanden, z. B. die Erzählung von Juda in Gen. Kap. 38 und von Ruben in Gen. 35, 22 (Talmud 7 b). Man erwähnt dies alles nur, um sie zum Geständnis zu bewegen.
The next episode in which we see Reuben is far more tragic: “Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrat, that is, Bethlehem…. While Israel was living in that region, Reuben went in and slept [vayishkav] with his father’s concubine Bilhah” (Gen. 35:19–22). If understood literally this would amount to a major sin. Sleeping with your father’s concubine was not only a sexual crime; it was an unforgivable act of treason and betrayal, as we discover later in Tanakh. Absalom decides to rebel against his father David and replace him as king. Ahitophel gives him the following advice: “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to take care of the palace. Then all Israel will hear that you have made yourself obnoxious to your father, and the hands of everyone with you will be more resolute” (II Sam. 16:21).
He handed her roasted grain… “Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Maryon said: The verse comes to teach that if a person performs a mitzvah he should perform it wholeheartedly. Had Reuben known that the blessed Holy One was writing: “Reuben heard and rescued him (Joseph) from their hands,” (Gen. 37:21) he would have taken his brother to their father on his shoulder. Had Aaron known that the blessed Holy One was dictating in his regard: “Behold, he is coming out to meet you” (Exodus 4:14), Aaron would have emerged to meet Moses with drums and dancing. Had Boaz known that the Holy One blessed be He was dictating in his regard: “He handed her roasted grain, and she ate, was sated, and there was some left over,” he would have fed her fattened calves.” (Ruth Rabbah 5:6) It is possible to explain this statement, by beginning with Rabbi Yaakov Hagiz’s, (Jacob Hagiz (1620–1674) was a Jewish Talmudist born of a Sephardi Jewish family at Fes, Morocco. Ḥagiz's teacher was David Karigal who afterward became his father-in-law. In about 1646, Ḥagiz went to Italy for the purpose of publishing his books, and remained there until after 1656, supporting himself by teaching. Samuel di Pam, rabbi at Livorno, calls himself a pupil of Ḥagiz. About 1657, Ḥagiz left Livorno for Jerusalem, where the Vega brothers of Livorno had founded a beit midrash for him and where he became a member of the rabbinical college. (Wikipedia)) explanation in Korban Mincha: (S. 115) “Israel heard. The sons of Jacob were twelve in number.” (The full verse states, “While Israel stayed in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine; and Israel found out. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve in number.” (JPS translation)) (Gen. 35:22) the sages state in a Midrash on Parshat V’Zot HaBerachah that Jacob had been given the Torah and in this way Reuben was saved because he was exempt for having had relations with his father’s concubine. This is what the verse states, “Israel heard,” that he had the status of an Israelite and therefore, “The sons of Jacob were twelve in number.” If the sons had the status of Noahides, then Reuben would have been put to death for this act and there would not have been twelve sons of Jacob. That is what is stated, “The heritage (morashah) of the congregation of Jacob,” (Deut. 33:4) There was already a heritage or a tradition of betrothal for Jacob and his children that marriage is only finalized through chuppah. (Therefore, the concubine was not judged as one of Jacob’s wives according to Jewish law.) “Then he became King in Jeshurun,” (Deut. 33:5) this refers to Moses who gather all the heads of the people (and officially taught them the laws), “Numerous people is the glory of a king,” (Prov. 14:28) This is the reason for the statement, “May Reuben live and not die,” (Deut. 35:6) Because Rebuen was judged as a Israelite, he did not die as a Noahide. This is the essence of his explanation in short. In my youth I wrote a treatise called Rosh David (P. 36) containing the opinion of Rabbi Chagiz, expressed in the introduction of Parashat Derachim. (A work containing twenty-six homiletic treatises on various subjects, by Rabbi Yehuda Rosanes. He (1657-1727) was a Rabbi of Constantinople. On account of his knowledge of Arabic and Turkish he was appointed by the government as chief rabbi of the Ottoman empire. He took a very active part in condemning and denouncing the Shabbethaians, and was one of the signers of an appeal to the German communities to oppose the movement. This work and others were edited & published by his devoted pupil Rabbi Yaakov Culi, author of Meam Loez. (https://seforimcenter.com)) I explained all of these verses there but I never found the Midrash on V’Zot HaBerachah that Rabbi Hagiz mentions. However, what was written on, “The heritage of the congregation of Jacob,” was explained there. And according to this one can explain, “O offspring of Israel, His servant;” (offspring of Israel, His servant, O descendants of Jacob, His chosen ones.) (I Chron. 16:13) Israel - our forefather Jacob - received Torah and passed it onto his children so that Reuben was not guilty of sin and there would still be the 12 sons of Jacob. Some have written in homilies that Joseph the righteous assumed that they had the status of Noahides as the author of Parashat Derachim and others wrote. If this were so then Reuben would have been deserving of he death penalty (God Forbid!). While it was Reuben’s righteous intention to save Joseph, he didn’t try hard enough, because he was afraid that he would find out that the law was according to Joseph and that they had the status of a Noahides. If he saved Joseph he might have brought evil upon himself. If he had known, however, that God would write that he would save Joseph from the brothers, in other words, similar to what the Torah states, “He tried to save him from them,” (Gen 37:21) and also, “Intending to save him from them in order to return him to his father.” (Gen. 37:22) (he might have acted differently.) His only intention was to bring Joseph back. This is what the Holy One wrote about him and it proves that he had the status of an Israelite for whom good intentions are joined to actions. (See BT Kiddushin 40a: “The Holy One, Blessed be He, links a good thought to an action, as it is stated: “Then they that feared the Lord spoke one with the other, and the Lord listened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before Him, for them that fear the Lord, and that think upon His name” (Mal. 3:16). The Gemara explains: What is the meaning of the phrase “and that think upon His name”? Rav Asi said: Even if a person intended to perform a mitzvah but due to circumstances beyond his control he did not perform it, the verse ascribes him credit as if he performed the mitzvah, as he is among those that think upon His name.” This however only applies to Jews and not non-Jews.) If, however, Reuven was considered a Noahide, then good intentions would not be joined to his actions. Since the blessed Holy One wrote that he had the status of Israelites, he had no fear that they would say that he had the status of a Noahide as Joseph claimed, and that he was guilty (of having relations with his father’s concubine). Then he would have carried Joseph on his shoulders back to Jacob even though Joseph thought the law was different. Still, Reuben saved him because he knew that one who saves an Israelite is as if he saved the whole world. And that is why one who performs a commandment should do so with a whole heart and not worry about suspicions or other matters. And we have heard about Reuben with whom damage would have resulted had he acted on his thoughts when they (the brothers) sold Joseph resulting in a step between him and death, and all the other events that would have come to pass. One might conclude that Reuben should have acted on his good intentions and not worried about those who disagreed. But what if one’s action will not lead to such damages; should one worry about “the scorn of the complacent?” (Ps. 123:4) The Midrash brings proof to show that a person should still perform mitzvot with a wholeheart even if there is no danger of damage as in the case of Aaron. It is possible that Aaron thought that Israelites were considered Noahides when he saw what his father, Amram, did. Amram was one of the righteous people of his generation. He was one of four who died due to Adam’s sin with the serpent (and not because of his own sin). (BT Shabbat 55b) He married his own aunt, Yocheved. According to Targum Yonatan when he divorced her she married Elitzafan ben Parnach but in the end, he remarried her and they gave birth to Moses. All of these acts would later be forbidden by Torah law. As a result, Aaron concluded that the Israelites had the status of Noahides until they received the Torah. Amram could take his aunt as a wife, divorce her and then take her back as a wife because the Torah had not yet been given. However, in order not to cause the scorn of the masses, Aaron didn’t want to go out to meet his brother with “drums and dance” which would have given the people an excuse to talk about his family or Moses. That is why he went out to greet Moses privately. Even though there was no danger or suffering involved in this matter, he thought that it was better to worry about scorn of the people. Thus we learn that even in this situation, it is better to perform the commandment with a full heart... If Aaron had known that God would write, “he (Aaron) will be happy in his heart to see you.” (Ex. 4:14) he would have known that they had the status of Israelites and his analysis was incorrect. Amram had acted according to the word of God, as the Zohar comments on the verse, “A man from the house of Levi…” (Ex. 2:1), then Aaron would have gone forth with timbrels and dancing (when meeting his brother), to fulfill the commandment properly. Further we also learn this lesson from Boaz. It occurred to Boaz and he saw through the Holy Spirit that he would marry Ruth. Further Ruth said, “Why are you so kind as to single me out, when I am a foreigner?” (Ruth 2:10) The sages comment, “To single me out,” in the way of all the earth. Boaz only gave her a little grain because he was fearful that people would say that he didn’t do so for the sake of a commandment but rather out of desire for her and in order to marry her. If Boaz had known that God would write about him, “He handed her roasted grain, and she ate her fill and had some left over,” so that it appeared as of he gave her a extra in order to satisfy her hunger, when in fact he gave her just a little bit but it was blessed, as the sage explain. But the blessed Holy One wrote that he gave her enough for her satisfaction. But if he really valued the mitzvah he would have given her fatted chickens! Further it states the details; it states that he said to her”“Come over here and partake of the meal, and dip your morsel in the vinegar.” and afterwards it states that he gave her roasted grains, all as part of a single commandment to feed her. Had Boaz known how important this mitzvah was, he would have fed her fatted chickens.
אליצור בן שדיאור, Perhaps there is an allusion in this name that G'd had forgiven the sin of Reuben which the Torah recorded (Genesis 35,22). He may have put balsam or balm, i.e. צרי, on his wound. The letters אלי mean אלקי, my G'd; the letters צור are to be understood as similar to Jeremiah 8,22: הצרי אין בגלעד, "is there no more balm in Gilead?" The word בן שדיאור is to be broken up into בן שדי and אור, i.e. a hint that he was a son of G'd who is also known as שדי. The combined name then is reminiscent of the story in the Torah that Reuben slept with Bilhah. The Torah reported immediately afterwards that the sons of Jacob numbered 12 which shows that any damage inflicted by Reuben had been healed. This prompted our sages in Shabbat 55 to say that if someone were to accuse Reuben of having committed a sin he is in error.
AND THERE WENT A MAN OF THE HOUSE OF LEVI. Our Rabbis have said (Sotah 12a.) that he went after the advice of his daughter. (Amram and Jochebed, Moses’ parents, had been married previously. The children of that union were Miriam and Aaron. “When Pharaoh decreed that the male children of the Hebrews be killed, Amram separated from his wife, and his example was followed by all of the Israelites. Miriam then told her father that his decree is worse than that of the king. ‘Pharaoh decreed only against the male children, while you include the girls as well. It is doubtful if the decree of wicked Pharaoh will persist, while you are a righteous man and your enactment will surely be upheld by G-d.’ Upon recognizing the justice of her plea, Amram remarried his wife, and the men who had previously followed his example also remarried” (Sotah 12 b). It is this episode which the verse suggests by saying, And there went a man, i.e., “went” after the advice of his daughter and remarried his divorced wife. See also further on in the text for a reference to a prophecy Miriam made at that time.) Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the Israelites dwelled in many cities, and this woman Jochebed lived in another city. [This would explain the term “went” in the above verse, i.e., he went to another city for his wife.] But what need is there for Scripture to mention this? In my opinion Scripture uses the term “went” because this man paid no heed to Pharaoh’s decree and took to himself a woman to beget children. Such is Scripture’s way of speaking of anyone who prompts himself to do something new. Thus: And Reuben went and lay with Bilhah; (Genesis 35:22.) So he went and took Gomer the daughter of Diblaim; (Hosea 1:3. Since she was a harlot, it required self-prompting on his part to perform the novel act of marrying her.) Come, and let us sell him to the Ishmaelites; (Genesis 37:27.) Come, and let us smite him with the tongue; (Jeremiah 18:18.) Come now, and let us reason together. (Isaiah 1:18.) Similarly this man Amram alerted himself and married a daughter of Levi. The reason Scripture does not mention the name of the man nor the name of the woman he married is to avoid tracing their genealogy and mentioning who their fathers and their fathers’ fathers were up to Levi. At this point, Scripture desires to shorten the subject until the birth of the redeemer takes place, and after that, in the second seder, (I.e., in Seder Va’eira. (A seder is the weekly portion of the Torah read in the synagogue at the Sabbath morning services.) Specifically, Moses’ genealogy is found in Seder Va’eira, Chapter 6, Verses 16-20.) He traced the genealogy even of other tribes (Reuben and Simeon. (Ibid., Verses 14-15).) on account of Moses. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture, i.e., that this was a first marriage [and not a remarriage as stated above], there is no significance in its being mentioned earlier or later in the chapter. This marriage took place before Pharaoh’s decree [that all male Hebrew children be killed], and she gave birth to Miriam and Aaron. After that, Pharaoh decreed, Every son that is born, ye shall cast into the river, (Above, 1:22.) and then she gave birth to this goodly son Moses. Scripture did not mention the birth of Miriam and Aaron inasmuch as there was nothing new about them. However, in the opinion of our Rabbis, (Sotah 12a.) this was a remarriage, since Amram separated from his wife in consequence of Pharaoh’s decree and then took her back on account of his daughter’s prophecy. (Miriam prophesied, “My mother is destined to bear a son who will deliver Israel” (Sotah 13 a).) He made her a wedding and placed her in the litter, while Miriam and Aaron danced about them in their joy (So clearly stated in Sotah 12a.) because through this marriage, Israel would be redeemed [from Egypt]. Even though Aaron was young (He could have been no more than two years old since he was but three years older than Moses, and Moses was born after the second marriage.) [at that time], G-d put gladness in his heart for this occasion, or possibly his sister Miriam taught him.
AND THE LAD WAS WITH THE SONS OF BILHAH. His actions were those of youth: he would touch up his eyes and dress his hair. With the sons of Bilhah, that is to say, he associated with the sons of Bilhah because his brothers slighted them as being the sons of handmaids, and he therefore befriended them. Their evil report — he told his father about every wrong which he discerned in his brothers, the sons of Leah. This is the language of Rashi. But if this be so, why did the children of the handmaids not save him later on, inasmuch as he loved and befriended them, and told his father about his brothers’ slighting them. And if we say that they feared their brothers, they were four, (Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.) and Reuben was with them, (As expressly stated further on in Verses 21-22.) and, with Joseph himself, [they made a total of six]. Surely they would have prevailed against them especially when considering that the remaining five sons of Leah would not wage war against them. Moreover, it appears from Scripture that all (“All,” except Reuben, the eldest, and Benjamin, the youngest, (Rabbeinu Bachya, p. 306, in my edition.)) of the brothers concurred in the sale of Joseph. However, according to our Rabbis in Bereshith Rabbah, (84:7.) he uttered slander against all of them. (And not, as Rashi has it, that the evil report concerned only the sons of Leah.) In my opinion the correct interpretation is that this verse returns to explain that which it mentioned above, and its purport [is as if the phrases in the verse were transposed as follows]: Joseph being a lad of seventeen years, was feeding the flock together with his brothers, the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives. A similar case requiring transposition of phrases is found in this Seder: (Sedrah or Parsha (section).) And they dreamed a dream both of them in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were bound in the prison. (40:5.) The verse returns to explain the word shneihem (both of them) which it had mentioned at the outset. Its purport, [after the phrases have been suitably transposed, is as follows]: And both of them dreamed a dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were bound in the prison, each man according to the interpretation of his dream. There are many similar verses. It may be that the word v’hu (and he was) requires another similar word, as if it were written: “and he was a lad, and he was with the sons of Bilhah and with the sons of Zilpah, who were his father’s wives.” The verse thus states that because he was a lad he was constantly with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives, never being separated from them on account of his youth, for their father had commanded them to watch over him and serve him, not the sons of the mistresses, and he brought an evil report concerning them (The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah.) to their father. It was for this reason that these four brothers (Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.) hated Joseph. Following that, the verse says that his father loved him. Now when the other brothers (The sons of Leah.) saw that their father loved him more than all, they became jealous of him and they hated him. Thus Joseph is found to be hated by all: the sons of the mistresses were jealous of him because Jacob loved him more than them although they were also sons of a mistress as he was, and the sons of the handmaids, who would otherwise not have been jealous of his superior position over them, hated him because he brought their evil report to their father. The purpose of the redundant expression, dibatham ra’ah (their evil report), is to magnify, (I.e., to indicate that the report was of an exceedingly evil nature.) for dibah itself connotes evil. (Otherwise, why does Scripture add the word ra’ah (evil)? It does so in order to magnify the evil nature of the report.) Now according to the opinion of Rashi it is possible for dibah to be a good report. Thus when Scripture uses the expression, “he brings dibah“, it means that he tells what he sees, (He reports the truth.) but when it uses the term, he bringeth forth ‘dibah,’ it refers to the fool who speaks falsehood. (This opinion that dibah connotes evil only when used in conjunction with the word motzi (bring forth) is borne out by Numbers 13:32.) In line with the literal meaning of Scripture, the fact that it calls one a na’ar (lad) when he was seventeen years of age (Ramban’s intent is to disagree with Rashi’s interpretation of na’ar, which is that his actions were those of a youth.) presents no difficulty for since he was the youngest among them, it calls him by that name, indicating that he was not as sturdy as his brothers and therefore needed to be with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah on account of his youth. Now of Rehoboam, Solomon’s son, it is written, And Rehoboam was young and faint-hearted and could not withstand them, (II Chronicles 13:7.) yet he was forty-one years old when he began to reign. (Ibid., 12:13.) Similarly the verse: Is it well with the lad Absalom? (II Samuel 18:32. Now although Scripture does not state how old Absalom was at the time of his death, it would appear certain that he was about thirty years old since he was born to David in Hebron (ibid., 3:3-5), and David ruled thirty-three years in Jerusalem. The rebellion of Absalom occurred three years before David’s death (see Seder Hadoroth, year 2921). Hence Absalom, at his death, was at least thirty years old, yet David calls him na’ar.) And Benjamin, upon going down to Egypt, was older than Joseph was now, (For Joseph was separated from his father for twenty-two years. Therefore Benjamin must have been at least thirty years old at the time he went down to Egypt.) and yet Scripture frequently refers to him as na’ar. (Further, 44:31 and 33.) Now Onkelos translated v’hu na’ar as “he grew up with the sons of Bilhah.” Thus the verse states that from the time he was a lad he was in their company. They raised him as a father would, and they served him. This interpretation is also correct according to the literal interpretation of Scripture, which I offered as an explanation, namely that Scripture relates that he brought evil report concerning [the sons of the handmaids, who, according to Onkelos, raised him. This is why they hated him, whereas] the sons of the mistresses hated him because of their jealousy, as explained above. (Ramban thus indicates that the authoritative interpretation of Onkelos is here consistent with his own.) The meaning of the expression, His father’s wives, is that they were his “wives” for he took them as such. Scripture calls them “handmaids” only when they are mentioned together with Rachel and Leah, who were their mistresses. Similarly, And he put the handmaids and their children foremost, (Above, 33:2.) as if to say that because they were handmaids of Rachel and Leah, Jacob placed them before them in a more exposed position. Similarly, And he lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine. (Above, 35:22.) [The word “concubine” is used to indicate] that if she were a mistress it would not have occurred. It is possible that during the lifetime of Rachel and Leah, Scripture calls them “handmaids” and “concubines,” but now that they had died [Jacob] took them as wives.
בראשית ברא אלוקים, let the “intellectuals” realize that all the words of our sages and their interpretations are true and accurate. This is what the Talmud (Shabbat 63) had in mind when it quoted Rav Kahane saying that he had studied the Talmud until the age of 18 and had not yet appreciated that although the laws of the Torah are derived from the text, none of the interpretations are such that they can uproot the plain meaning of the text. They are based on anomalies in the text, not on the text itself wherever the law derived from the Torah appears to conflict with the plain meaning of the text. One example is Genesis 2,4 where the word בהבראם, a most unusual construction, used by the sages to declare that the world was created “for the sake of, or with the help of אברהם,” (Bereshit Rabbah 12,9) seeing that the letters in that word are the same as the ones in the name אברהם, [though in a different sequence. Ed.] I shall list the explanations of earlier commentators of old, in order to demonstrate why I did not follow in their footsteps. Some scholars understand the first verse to mean that “at the beginning G’d created heaven and earth.” This is an erroneous explanation, seeing that water preceded the creation of heaven and earth as we know from verse 2 where “the spirit of G’d” is described as already “hovering over the surface of the water.” Moreover, the Torah did not write בראשונה, which would have been appropriate if it had wanted to tell us that heaven and earth preceded all other phenomena in the universe. The word בראשית is in a construct mode, as in Genesis 10,10 ותהי ראשית ממלכתו בבל “the mainstay of his kingdom was Babylon.” A construct mode like this cannot describe the commencement of something but refers to something already in existence. As to the scholars who understand the word as equivalent to the word תחלה in Hoseah 1,2 i.e. so that it would mean “at the beginning G’d created the heaven,” i.e. before He created heaven and earth there was chaos, darkness on the face of the water, etc., so that it emerges that water had been created first, this too is nonsense. How could the Torah refer to a state of the earth prior to creation of the heaven? The plain meaning of the text is, as occurs many times, that something may be mentioned first in one instance although elsewhere this same phenomenon is mentioned as having occurred at a later stage. In Genesis 9,18 we are told about the three sons of Noach who left the ark after the deluge being Shem, Cham and Yephet, and the Torah adds that Cham was the father of Canaan. Although the information about Canaan is quite out of place at this juncture, the fact that later on the Torah tells us that Noach cursed Canaan, makes it necessary to mention him here, as otherwise we would not have known who this Canaan was whom Noachh cursed in verse 25 of the same chapter. We have a similar situation in Genesis 35,22 where, although Reuven’s conduct with Yaakov’s concubine Bilhah is mentioned, Yaakov’s reaction is not mentioned until shortly before his death when he explains why Reuven had not been viewed by him as suitable to occupy the position normally accorded to a firstborn (Genesis 49,3-4). In 35,22 the Torah already tells us that Yaakov had heard about what Reuven had done. Had the Torah not done so, the reader would have been taken aback at Yaakov’s remonstrating with Reuven at this late stage. There are many such examples. Our entire paragraph here was written by Moses in order for us to understand what is written in the Ten Commandments concerning the reason why the Sabbath is holy, i.e. that it is a symbol reminding us of the fact that G’d created the universe in 6 days and rested on the seventh day. (Exodus 20,10) If anyone were to think that the universe as such had already existed then in the format that we see it now, the Torah corrects such thinking by continuing with
אלה תולדות יעקב, “the following describes events and problems which Yaakov encountered in his life.” [by the way, Seforno, who lived hundreds of years later than Rash’bam, also accepts the interpretation described as nonsensical by Rash’bam. Ed.] This exegesis is nonsense. Whenever the expression תולדות occurs in the Bible, sometimes this word introduces the names of the grandsons of the party referred to, such as in Genesis 6,9 where the Torah after describing the righteousness of Noach tells us that Noach had three sons and proceeds to give us their names. The names of the sons could not be the purpose of the story there, as we had been told earlier in 5,32 that Noach at the age of 500 sired three sons and we were already told their names. The Torah then continues to describe mankind’s ongoing corruption and that Noach was the only one with whom G’d was pleased. When the Torah commences a second time with the line אלה תולדות נח in 6,9, clearly the Torah does not mean to repeat itself, but it leads to the Torah telling us of Noach’s grandchildren, something that is reported in greater detail in 10,1 under the heading of “and these are the generations of the sons of Noach.” [Perhaps the reason for the repetition of אלה תולדות בני נח in chapter 10, is that if, as the author says, the grandchildren were meant already in chapter 6, now after the deluge, the task of these children to generate a new mankind began in earnest, whereas up to that point they were charged with merely surviving the deluge. Ed.] Just as the Torah reported the growth and development of mankind after the deluge until we have a total of 70 such descendants of Noach being named, so in chapter 36,6 we have been told of the descendants of Esau who have been born in the land of Canaan, i.e. the land in which his father lived. After that, the Torah reported Esau’s further development in Mount Seir, commencing with verse 9 of that chapter. The Torah reports the development of Yaakov’s family in a parallel manner, 35,23 extending through verses 26-27 and listing all his children who had been born in exile, while he was in Padan Aram with Lavan. Now the Torah continues with the words אלה תולדות יעקב, concentrating forthwith on the grandchildren who combine to make up a total of 70 prior to the descent of the family to Egypt. Details of the birth of these various grandchildren are being provided, beginning with the chronicle of what happened to Joseph, who at 17 years of age experienced traumatic events, as a result of which his older brother Yehudah separated from the other brothers and started his own family in Keziv and Adulam, siring three sons, and grandsons respectively, i.e. Shelah, Peretz and Zerach. The history of Yaakov’s family became complicated further with Joseph having been brought to Egypt as a slave where Menashe and Ephrayim were born for him. Having attained high office, Joseph invited his father and family to join him in Egypt so that ultimately 70 members of Yaakov’s family wound up in Egypt. Moses had to record all this in order to substantiate his claim in Deuteronomy 10,22 that “your fathers descended to Egypt when they numbered only 70 persons.”
ויהי מתיו מספר lit., AND LET HIS MEN BE A NUMBER — let him be counted amongst the number of his other brothers. This is exactly similar to the idea that is expressed in the text, (Genesis 35:22) “[And Reuben went] and lay with Bilhah [his father’s wife]” … “And the sons of Jacob were twelve”, which suggests that he was not excluded from the number of Jacob’s sons.
בכור ישראל. He had not lost his status in the books kept in heaven as he had repented his sin as testified in Genesis 35,22-23 commencing with the otherwise unnecessary words ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר, “that Yaakov’s sons remained twelve.” This was in contrast to Reuven’s birthright privileges here on earth having been revoked in favour of Joseph.
I have seen [this] in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary, etc. You might ask: Why does Rashi mention [the comment of] R. Moshe Hadarshan for [the verse] “whoever strikes his fellow in secret”? The answer is that without this comment [i.e., saying that this verse is in regard to slander] the fact that the Torah writes eleven curses is no difficulty, as one could suggest it was done in order to remove Reuvein from [being represented among] the cursed because it is written, “Cursed is whoever has relations with his father’s-in-law wife,” and he disturbed his father's sleeping arrangement (Bereishis 35:22). Therefore there are only eleven curses in order to exclude Reuvein [who in any case is hinted at in this curse]. But now that we explain that striking one's fellow in secret refers to slander, if so, the Torah should have only said ten curses and [also] exclude Yoseif who slandered his brothers and spoke slander against them. Rashi answers, “I have seen, etc.” This is easy to understand. I have seen texts where Rashi writes “I have seen, etc.” on (v. 26), “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” The explanation of this [why he cites R' Moshe Hadarshan there] is as follows: “I have seen [this] in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary: There are eleven curses, etc. he, therefore, did not want to curse him.” [Rashi is answering that] you might ask: There are twelve curses, etc. if you include “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” Rashi explains that the verse here, “Cursed is whoever does not uphold etc,” encompasses the entire Torah and all the above curses are included in “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” But if so, you might ask that the above curses are superfluous and why were they written? But certainly [the answer is] as “I have seen in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary,” [that the eleven curses correspond to the tribes].
At the same time, David’s plans for a return to power are bearing fruit, with the acceptance of his counselor Hushai by Avshalom toward the end of the chapter. This occurs amid Avshalom’s symbolic act of sleeping with his father’s concubines, always a sign of attempted or actual succession in biblical Israel (see Re’uven’s actions in Gen. 35:22 and Avner’s in II Sam. 3:7). But as Clines has noted, Avshalom’s move, given that it involves multiple women, may additionally be an exaggerated act of masculine bravado, beyond the merely symbolic political aspect.
Genesis 35:21-22
The following tiny fragment, concerning Re’uven’s usurping his father’s concubine, serves to presage his fall as firstborn later on. Such an act had symbolic value in biblical society; Avshalom (Absalom) sleeps with David’s concubines as a sign of rebellion and a desire to attain the crown (II Sam. 16:21–22).
Incensed to the point of irrationality, Reuben did the unthinkable: he slept with his father’s wife, Bilhah. (Genesis 35:22. The Sages mitigated the nature of the sin by proffering that Reuben did not actually have relations with Bilhah, but committed the lesser offense of taking Jacob’s bed out of Bilhah’s tent and moving it into Leah’s tent, instead. His accountability was in meddling in his father’s private affairs. See Shabbat 55b.)
What Jacob thought of this all played out over the rest of the Book of Genesis, sometimes tantalizingly, in the empty spaces within the stories, and sometimes with explicit directness. The text tells us that immediately after Reuben sinned with Bilhah, Jacob heard of the matter. We are not privy to more than that dry fact, but we do know that immediately afterwards, the verses list Jacob’s sons, placing Reuben first – and a telling addition to his name: “Reuben – Jacob’s firstborn – Simeon, Levi, Judah… ” (Genesis 35:23). Reuben seems to have retained the prime position within the family hierarchy. Are we to intuit from this that all was forgiven? (Most commentators understand the inclusion of “bekhor Yaakov” (Jacob’s firstborn) as a strong signal that Reuben retained some element of primacy, even in the wake of his sin with Bilhah. To what extent he was still considered a bekhor is a matter of dispute. See Rashi, Radak, Seforno on Genesis 35:22.)
ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven you are my firstborn, etc.” Yaakov meant to imply that due to his being the biologically first born, he should normally have been accorded a preferential rank, as is customary for firstborns, such as being the family’s priest, as well as its leader in secular matters. However, on account of the unfortunate incident in Genesis 35,22, he had disqualified himself for such preferential treatment. When he demonstrated an inability to control his biological urges, something Yaakov compares to the unstoppable tendency of water to flow downhill, he proved unfit for the task normally allotted to firstborns in those days. An alternate explanation of the line בכורי אתה כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת, is: “you were my firstborn as long as you were reminiscent of the first product of my virility. At that time you possessed the advantage known as יתר שאת, the word meaning the same as in Job 13,11 הלא שאתו תבעת אתכם, “will not his height terrify you, etc?” The expression ויתר עוז refers to superior physical power, such as is useful in battle. You possessed this advantage only as long as you fulfilled the function of the firstborn. Since this task has been transferred to Joseph, you no longer possess it, as elaborated on by Rashi. You forfeited your advantages.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: All those forty years that the Jewish people were in the desert, the bones of Judah, which the Jewish people took with them from Egypt along with the bones of his brothers, were rolling around in the coffin, until Moses came and asked for mercy on Judah’s behalf. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, who served as the impetus for Reuben that he should confess his sin, through which he merited a blessing and was not excluded from the count of the twelve sons of Jacob (see Genesis 35:22)? It was Judah, as Reuben saw him confess his sin, and thereby did the same.
“And they mention in front of her things that neither she nor any of her paternal family should hear,” etc. (A more detailed homily in the Babli, 7b.) For example, what happened between Reuben and Bilhah (Gen. 35:22.) , or what happened between Jehudah and Tamar (Gen. 38:13–26.) . (Job 15:18–19. These verses are explained as referring to Reuben and Jehudah who confessed their sins, in Gen. rabba 57(3), [Num. rabba 13(6)]; Babli Makkot 11b; Yerushalmi Megillah4:11 (fol. 75c).) “If Sages tell,” these are Reuben and Jehudah, “they do not hide before their fathers.” What rewards did they take for this, “to them alone the Land was given; no stranger passes in their midst.” When Moses came to bless them, “Reuben may live and not die, (Deut. 36:6.) ” “and that for Jehudah (Deut. 36:7: “Listen, o Eternal, to Judah’s voice.”) ”.
Throughout those forty years that the children of Israel were in the wilderness, Judah’s bones were rattling in the coffin, detached from one another, because the ostracism that he declared upon himself remained in effect, until Moses stood and entreated God to have mercy upon him. Moses said before Him: Master of the Universe, who caused Reuben to confess his sin with Bilhah? It was Judah. Judah’s confession to his sin with Tamar led Reuben to confess to his own sin. Moses continued: “And this is for Judah…hear God, the voice of Judah” (Deuteronomy 33:7).
MISHNA: The incident of Reuben, about which it says: “And Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine” (Genesis 35:22), is read from the Torah in public but not translated, so that the uneducated not come to denigrate Reuben. The incident of Tamar (Genesis, chapter 38) is read in public and also translated. The first report of the incident of the Golden Calf, i.e., the Torah’s account of the incident itself (Exodus 32:1–20), is read and translated, but the second narrative, i.e., Aaron’s report to Moses of what had taken place (Exodus 32:21–24) is read but not translated. The verses constituting the Priestly Benediction (Numbers 6:24–26) and the incident of David and Amnon (II Samuel, chapter 13) are read, but not translated.
The Tosefta also states: And these sections are read but are not translated. The acrostic composed of the letters reish, ayin, bet, dalet, nun is a mnemonic for the sections included in this category, as the Gemara will explain. The Tosefta states that the incident of Reuben is read but not translated. The name Reuben begins with a reish, the first letter of the mnemonic. And there was an incident involving Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel, who went to the village of Kavul, and the sexton of the synagogue was reading: “And it came to pass, while Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it” (Genesis 35:22). Rabbi Ḥanina said to the translator: Stop, translate only the end of the verse. And the Sages praised him for this.
Having mentioned the sins of some of the significant ancestors of the Jewish people, the Gemara now addresses several additional ancestors. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says that Reuben sinned with Bilhah is nothing other than mistaken, as it is stated: “And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). The fact that the Torah stated the number of Jacob’s sons at that point in the narrative teaches that, even after the incident involving Bilhah, all of the brothers were equal in righteousness. Apparently, Reuben did not sin. How then do I establish the meaning of the verse: “And he lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine”? The plain understanding of the verse indicates sin. This verse teaches that Reuben rearranged his father’s bed in protest of Jacob’s placement of his bed in the tent of Bilhah and not in the tent of his mother Leah after the death of Rachel. And the verse ascribes to him liability for his action as if he had actually lain with Bilhah.
Rabbi Yoḥanan says: All those years that the Jewish people were in the desert, the bones of Judah, which the Jewish people took with them from Egypt along with the bones of his brothers, were rolling around in the coffin, until Moses arose and asked for compassion on Judah’s behalf. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, who served as the impetus for Reuben that he admit his sin, through which he merited a blessing and was not excluded from the count of the twelve sons of Jacob (see Genesis 35:22)? It was Judah, as Reuben saw him confess his sin, and thereby did the same. Moses continues in the next verse: “And this for Judah,” as if to say: Is this Judah’s reward for serving as an example of confessing to one’s sins, that his bones roll around?
For example, Judah admitted that he sinned with Tamar and was not embarrassed to do so, and what was his end? He inherited the life of the World-to-Come. Reuben admitted that he lay with his father’s concubine Bilhah and was not embarrassed, and what was his end? He too inherited the life of the World-to-Come. The Gemara asks: And what is their reward? The Gemara interjects: What is their reward? Their reward was clearly as we say, that they inherited the life of the World-to-Come. The Gemara clarifies: Rather, the second question was: What is their reward in this world? The Gemara answers by citing the next verse in the book of Job: “To them alone the land was given, and no stranger passed among them” (Job 15:19). Judah was given the kingship, and Reuben inherited a portion of land in the Transjordan before the other tribes.
The incident of Reuben (Gen. 35, 22.) is read (In the public lection of the Scriptures.) but not translated. (Out of respect for the memory of Reuben. In the ancient Synagogues, the readings from the Scriptures were rendered into Aramaic by an official for the benefit of those who were unable to follow the Hebrew.) The story of Tamar (Gen. 38.) is both read and translated. (So GRA and H in agreement with Meg. 25a (Sonc. ed., p. 151). V inserts the negative before both verbs. The reflection on Judah’s behaviour is mitigated by his frank confession.) The first [account of] the golden calf (Ex. 33, 1-20.) is read and translated, (Since the sin was forgiven (Meg. 25b, Sonc. ed., p. 152).) the second (ibid. 21-25 according to Meg. loc. cit. (Sonc. ed., p. 153).) is read but not translated. (Because of the statement and there came out this calf (ibid. 24) which seems to indicate that the calf had abnormal powers.)
May Reuben live and not die, Though few be his numbers.
When Yaakov was settled in that land. Reuvein went and lay near Bilhah, his father’s concubine, and Yisrael heard [about it]. The sons of Yaakov were twelve.
And it was while Israel dwelt in this land that Reuben went and confounded the bed of Bilhah the concubine of his father, which had been ordained along with the bed of Leah his mother; and this is reputed with regard to him, as if he had lain with her. And Israel heard it, and it afflicted him, and he said, Alas, that one should have come forth from me so profane, even as Ishmael came forth from Abraham, and Esau from my father! The Spirit of Holiness answered and thus spake to him: fear not, for all are righteous and none of them is profane! So, after Benjamin was born, the sons of Jakob were twelve.
One who leads the responsive recitation of the Shema, or blesses over fruit or over matzah, behold, he should not answer "amen" after himself. If he answered ["amen" after his own prayer], behold, this is how ignoramuses act. We do not answer with either an "orphaned amen"* (i.e., where one does not know to what blessing he is saying "amen") , or a "truncated [amen]"* (where one does not pronounce the entire word) . Ben Azzai says, one who answers with an "orphaned amen" -- his children will be orphaned; with a "truncated [amen]," his days will be truncated. But whoever prolongs [his amen], his days and years will be prolonged.
There are [scriptural passages] that are [publicly] read and translated [orally into Aramaic during the public reading], [others] that are read but are not translated, [and others] that are neither read nor translated. The account of creation (Gen. 1), we read and translate. The account of Lot and his two daughters (Gen. 19) is read and translated. The account of Judah and Tamar (Gen. 38) is read and translated. The first account of the [Golden] Calf* (i.e., the Torah's initial narrative of the sin of the Golden Calf at Ex. 31:1-20 (see Meg. 4:10)) is read and translated. The curses that are in the Torah are read and translated, but we may not permit one [reader] to start and another [reader] to finish; rather, the one who starts is the one who finishes. The warnings and punishments that are in the Torah are read and translated. The account of Amnon and and Tamar (2 Sam. 13) is read and translated. The account of Absalom and his father's concubines (2 Sam. 15:16-16:22) is read and translated. The account of the concubine of Gibeah (Judges 19-21) is read and translated. [The passage commencing with] "Proclaim to Jerusalem [her abominations (to'avoteha)]" (Ezek. 16:2) is read and translated. And it so happened that someone was reading before Rabbi Eliezer "Proclaim to Jerusalem [etc.]," and he translated it. [Rabbi Eliezer] said to him, "Go and proclaim the abominations (to'avoteha) of your mother!" The Divine Chariot (Ezek. 1), we read it to the masses. The incident of Reuben [and Bilhah] is read but not translated. And it so happened with Rabbi Chananiah ben Gamaliel that he was reading in Akko, "And Reuben went and he lay with Bilhah, etc., and the sons of Jacob were twelve" (Gen. 35:22), and he told the translator, do not translate this except for the end. The second account of the [Golden] Calf, from "And Moses said to Aaron, What did this people do to you?" until "And Moses saw that the people had become unrestrained" (Ex. 32:21-25), and also what is written after, "And God plagued the people, etc." (Ex. 32:35): from this, said Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, a person should not recount a disgraceful event, is it was due to Aaron's recounting to Moses that the apostates rebelled* (in other words, Aaron's statement, "I threw [the gold] into the fire, and this calf emerged," appeared to acknowledge that the calf possessed divine power (see Meg. 25b:12)) . The account of David and Bathsheba is neither read nor translated. But the [Bible] teacher teaches [these passages] in his usual way.
| בְּנֵ֣י לֵאָ֔ה בְּכ֥וֹר יַעֲקֹ֖ב רְאוּבֵ֑ן וְשִׁמְעוֹן֙ וְלֵוִ֣י וִֽיהוּדָ֔ה וְיִשָּׂשכָ֖ר וּזְבֻלֽוּן׃ | 23 P | The sons of Leah: Reuben—Jacob’s first-born—Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun. |
בני לאה, בכור יעקב ראובן the sons of Leah Jacob's firstborn Reuben. The reason that the Torah had to repeat here that Reuben was Jacob's firstborn was in order that we should not think that Reuben's misconduct with Bilhah had disqualified him from being the firstborn. This also proves that when the Torah described Reuben as having slept with Bilhah this was not meant literally. When the number of Jacob's sons is described as 12, this too is proof that Reuben had not committed an act by which he forfeited being included in that count. Inasmuch as Reuben represented the first drop of semen Jacob ever ejaculated, the idea that he could have been guilty of such a horrendous crime as actually sleeping with one of his father's wives is quite impossible. This is why the Torah emphasises בכור יעקב, he was Jacob's firstborn.
בכור יעקב ראובן, “Yaakov’s firstborn was Reuven.” The distinctive title “firstborn” is accorded to Reuven at the very place where his misdemeanour has been recorded. The Torah informs us that although as a result of this misdemeanour Reuven lost the distinction of being looked up to by his brothers as the firstborn, the Torah implies that what Reuven lost to Joseph as a result was only the double share in the father’s inheritance that the firstborn is entitled to and possibly the respect normally accorded to the firstborn by his younger siblings. The status of being a “firstborn” in matters of genealogy, etc. remained unchanged. This is why the Torah underlined: “Reuven was the firstborn of Yaakov.” We find this confirmed in Bereshit Rabbah 82,11. The Midrash uses the words ויהי בשכון ישראל in verse 22 to elaborate on this theme. Rabbi Simon is quoted as saying that it is difficult for G’d to uproot genealogical facts. The Torah proves this when describing Reuven as the firstborn immediately after having recorded his misdemeanour. Rabbi Yudon added that Reuven remained the firstborn in respect to officiating as the family’s priest (as was customary prior to the sin of the golden calf); he remained officially the oldest; and he remained the firstborn in respect of תשובה, (i.e. that his repentance was accepted assuring him his claim to his former title). Rabbi Azariah added that he also remained the firstborn in respect of prophecy as we read in Hoseah 1,2 that G’d communicated first with Hoseah (seeing he enjoyed the privilege of being senior to the other prophets who were his contemporaries).
בני לאה, seeing that Binyamin had by now been born, the Torah enumerates all the sons.
בכור יעקב ראובן, even though he had sinned and Yaakov had deprived him of the birthright on account of his sin, the Torah still refers to him as “the firstborn.” We are told in Bereshit Rabbah 82,11 that Rabbi Shimon said that it is legally difficult for G’d to tamper with the chronological chain of ancestry. How do we know this? Because we find the following verse in Chronicles I 5,1 ובני ראובן בכור ישראל כי הוא הבכור ובחללו יצועי אביו נתנה בכורתו לבני יוסף, “and the sons of Reuven, Yisrael’s firstborn, for he (Reuven) was the firstborn even though because he had mounted the bedstead of his father his birthright had been given to the sons of Joseph.” This appears to mean that Reuven forfeited the material advantages associated with the birthright, i.e. double portion of an inheritance; but he was not deprived of his status as the biological firstborn, in fact he could not be deprived of it. Rabbi Yitzchok, on the same folio of the Midrash, adds that even in his hour of disgrace, the Bible refers to Reuven with the attribute “the firstborn.”
ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר. Now that Binyamin had been born the total number of Yaakov’s son amounted to 12. This verse has been delayed in order not to break the sequence of the narrative.
בכור יעקב JACOB’S FIRSTBORN — even when it speaks of his corrupt action Scripture calls him firstborn (Genesis Rabbah 82:11).
בכור יעקב JACOB’S FIRSTBORN — firstborn with regard to heritage, firstborn with regard to Divine Service (for before the Levites were appointed to minister to God the duty devolved upon the oldest son in each family), firstborn in any enumeration of the twelve tribes; for the right of a firstborn son was given to Joseph only in respect of the tribes — in that he founded two tribes (just as a firstborn son received a double portion in his father’s property) (Genesis Rabbah 82:11).
בכור יעקב ראובן, as far as Heaven was concerned Reuven did not suffer consequences because he had repented forthwith. He also did not suffer really in this world, i.e. on earth, until on his deathbed Yaakov punished him by depriving him of the material benefits enjoyed by the first born in that he inherits an extra share of his father’s estate. This punishment was withheld in accordance with the principle that anyone guilty of being ostracised by the community is not actually ostracised until the leading sage of the generation declares him to be so. (Moed Katan 16) This is based on Judges 5,23 where Devorah, the ruling judge of Israel, curses the inhabitants of a certain place called מרוז who had failed to answer her call to arms against the army of Siserah, general of Yavin, King of the Canaanites who had been oppressing the Israelites. The מלאך ה' she quotes in that verse is the leader of the generation, herself in this instance.
The firstborn in inheritance; the firstborn in Divine Service. I.e., when the Kohen Gadol performed the Divine Service, he would wear the choshen and ephod. The names of the Tribes were on the choshen and the shoulder straps of the ephod. Reuvein[’s name] appeared first.
The firstborn in enumeration... When the names of the Tribes are enumerated, Reuvein is counted first.
The chapter lists all of Jacob’s sons. The sons of Leah were Reuben, who is still Jacob’s firstborn, although on his deathbed Jacob will dismiss him from this status, and Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun.
“On the fourth day, prince of the children of Reuben, Elitzur son of Shedeur” (Numbers 7:30). “On the fourth day, prince of the children of Reuben…” – once the banner of Judah (See Numbers 2:1–9.) finished, the prince of Reuben began presenting his offering, because he was the firstborn, and he presented the offering regarding his tribe of Reuben. “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:31). “One gold ladle, ten shekels, full of incense” (Numbers 7:32). “His offering was one silver dish [ke’arat]” (Numbers 7:31), do not read it as ke’arat, but rather, as akeret; this is Reuben, who played the main [ikar] role in the rescue [of Joseph]. It was he who first initiated the rescue. That is what is written: “Reuben heard and rescued him from their hand” (Genesis 37:21). Alternatively, that he uprooted [akar] the thought of his brothers, who wanted to kill him, just as it says: “Now let us go and kill him…” (Genesis 37:20). “Silver,” in the sense of: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20). ”Its weight one hundred and thirty,” this is because the first three letters of the first three words that he said to them, their numerical value totals one hundred and thirty. “Let us not smite him mortally [lo nakenu nafesh]” (Genesis 37:21); take lamed from lo, nun from nakenu, and nun from nafesh; that is one hundred and thirty. (Lamed is thirty and nun is fifty, so 30 + 50 + 50 = 130.) “One silver basin [mizrak],” (Numbers 7:31), corresponding to the counsel he gave them that they should cast [sheyizreku] him into the pit, just as it says: “Reuben said to them: Do not shed blood; cast him into [this] pit…” (Genesis 37:22). “Silver,” in the sense of: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20). “Of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” (Numbers 7:31), corresponding to the secret [sod] that was in his heart to save him [Joseph]. The numerical value of sod is seventy. (Samekh is sixty, vav is 6 and dalet is 4 = 70.) “Both of them full of high quality flour…” (Numbers 7:31), as what he said to them: “Let us not smite him mortally” and “cast him,” he intended only to rescue him, as in both matters, (His statement not to kill Joseph, and his proposal to throw Joseph into the pit.) rescue is written: Initially, it is written: “Reuben heard and rescued him from their hand” (Genesis 37:21), and ultimately, it is written: “In order to rescue him from their hand” (Genesis 37:22). “One gold ladle [kaf], ten shekels…” (Numbers 7:32), kaf, (Kaf also means palm or hand.) corresponding to what he said to his brothers: “Do not lay a hand on him” (Genesis 37:22). “Gold…ten shekels,” because he saved himself by admonishing them, and he saved nine brothers from bloodshed. That is why “gold” is written, as there is one type of gold that resembles blood, and that is parvayim gold. “Full of incense” (Numbers 7:32), although it happened to the tribes that Joseph’s sale befell them, you presume that this act would not have befallen them unless they had been wicked in performing other acts. No, but rather they were full-fledged righteous men, and no sin had ever befallen them other than this one: That is what is written: “They said one to another: But we are guilty [regarding our brother]” (Genesis 42:21). They were engaged in self-reflection as to why their detention in Egypt befell them, but found only this. From their disgrace, the verse relates their praise, that they had only this iniquity alone attributable to them. And because Joseph’s sale was fortuitous for him, as it led him to rule, and it was fortuitous for his brothers and his father’s entire household, as he provided them with food during the famine years, that is why he was sold by them, because merit is engendered by means of the meritorious. That is “full of incense.” Another matter, “full of incense,” as, at that time, Reuben was a penitent, donning sackcloth, fasting, and praying before the Holy One blessed be He, that He grant him atonement for the iniquity of the act with Bilha. (See Genesis 35:22.) Prayer is likened to incense, just as it says: “Let my prayer stand as incense before You…” (Psalms 141:2). That is, “full of incense.” “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:33). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:34). “And for the peace offering, two cattle, five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year. This was the offering of Elitzur son of Shedeur” (Numbers 7:35). “One young bull…” (Numbers 7:33), these are the offerings that he sacrificed, corresponding to the penitence in which he was engaged when Joseph was sold. Penitence is likened to all the offerings of a sinner, as it is written: “Offerings to God are a broken spirit” (Psalms 51:19). Just as the sinner brings a burnt offering and a sin offering for his sin, that is why he brought here a burnt offering and a sin offering, corresponding to them. And because the burnt offering is more cherished (By the Holy One blessed be He.) than the sin offering, that is why he sacrificed a burnt offering from all the species with the exception of the goat, as we do not find the goat as a burnt offering throughout the Torah. “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:34), this is to atone for the act with Bilha. “And for the peace offering, two cattle” (Numbers 7:35), because he was [going to be] excluded from being enumerated with his brothers because of the act with Bilha, as it is written: “Reuben went and lay with Bilha, his father's concubine, and Israel heard” (Genesis 35:22), the matter was interrupted, (Genesis 35:22 is written in the Torah with an empty space in the middle of the verse following the phrase "and Israel heard," before the continuation “the sons of Jacob were twelve.”) as it placed the end of the portion there, alluding that he was banished. This is why that portion is an open portion, as even though he was banished, the arms of the Holy One blessed be He are open to receive penitents. Because he sought to perform two good deeds, Joseph’s rescue and repentance, he was restored to be part of them, and was included in their tally. That is what is written: “The sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). Due to these two acts that Reuben performed, Moses found an opportunity to pray on behalf of Reuben so that he would not be excluded from his brothers. That is what is written: “May Reuben live [and not die, and may his people be counted]” (Deuteronomy 33:6). “May Reuben live,” because he gave life to Joseph; “and not die,” due to the act of Bilha, because he repented; “and may his people be counted,” may his descendants be included in the tally of the other tribes in every sense. That is why it is stated: “And for the peace offering, two cattle [bakar]” (Numbers 7:35), corresponding to the two good deeds that he sought out [shebiker], Joseph’s rescue and the repentance, he was restored and was enumerated with his brothers. “Five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year” (Numbers 7:35), why three species? It is corresponding to the three times Reuben is mentioned in the portion of Joseph’s rescue and corresponding to the three “vayomer” that are written there. (Genesis 37:21, 22, 30.) Why were there five of each? They correspond to the five words through which Reuben was drawn near. That is what is written: “The sons of Jacob were twelve.” (There are five words in the Hebrew phrase.) “This was the offering of Elitzur…” (Numbers 7:35), when the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented his offering in this order, He began lauding his offering; “this was the offering…”
“God remembered Rachel.” “He remembered His kindness and His faithfulness to the house of Israel; all the ends of the earth beheld the salvation of our God” (Psalms 98:3). “He remembered His kindness” – this is Abraham, as it is stated: “Kindness to Abraham” (Micah 7:20). “And his faithfulness” – this is Jacob, as it is stated: “Give truth to Jacob” (Micah 7:20); “To the house of Israel” – Israel the elder. Who was the house of our patriarch Jacob? Was it not Rachel? Regarding all of them it is written: “The children of Leah, the firstborn of Jacob, Reuben” (Genesis 35:23); “the children of Zilpa, maidservant of Leah, Gad and Asher” (Genesis 35:26); “the children of Bilha, maidservant of Rachel, Dan and Naphtali” (Genesis 35:25). But regarding Rachel it is written: “The children of Rachel, Jacob’s wife” (Genesis 46:19). Another matter, “He remembered His kindness and His faithfulness to the house of Israel” – “God remembered Rachel, and God heeded her.”
“It was when Israel dwelled in that land that Reuben went and lay with Bilha, his father's concubine, and Israel heard. The sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). “It was when Israel dwelled” – Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: Uprooting a [person from his place on his] family tree is severe in the eyes of the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “It was when Israel dwelled,” and it is written: “The sons of Jacob were twelve.” (Despite Reuben’s misconduct, Jacob is still referred to as having twelve sons, as Reuben’s place in the family was not uprooted (Yefeh To’ar). ) “The sons of Reuben, firstborn of Israel; [for he was the firstborn, but when he desecrated his father's couch, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel, but not to be reckoned as the firstborn]” (I Chronicles 5:1). Say from here that the firstborn status in respect to monetary rights were taken from him, but the firstborn status in respect to genealogy was not taken from him. (Joseph became the firstborn regarding inheriting a double portion of the estate, and similarly, Joseph is considered two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim. However, Reuben is still accorded the honor of being listed first among the sons, and called the firstborn. ) Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Simon, one of them said: It is not for Reuben to be reckoned as the firstborn. The other said: One does not reckon Joseph as the firstborn, but only for Reuben. (The argument is whether the phrase “but not to be reckoned as the firstborn” indicates that Reuben is still listed as the firstborn, or not. ) Rabbi Ḥagai said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak: Even at the moment of corruption, one reckons only Reuben as the firstborn. That is what is written: “It was when [Israel] dwelled.” “The sons of Leah: Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, and Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Zebulun” (Genesis 35:23). “The sons of Leah: Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn” – Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: Reuben was the first in conception, first in birth, first in birthright, first in inheritance, first in Temple service, first in repentance. Rabbi Azarya said: First for prophecy as well, as it is stated: “The Lord spoke first to Hosea” (Hosea 1:2). (Hosea was the first of four prophets who were active in the same time period, and the Sages had a tradition that he was from the tribe of Reuben (Yefeh To’ar). )
The sons of Samuel: the first-born Vashni ((וַשְׁנִי and Abijah (va-Aviyyah). Some explain (cf. Pseudo-Rashi) vashni as ve-ha-sheni (=and the second one)—as if the text had said ve-ha-sheni Aviyyah (=and the second one Abijah)—and that it says “the first-born” without mentioning his name because it is known that it is Joel (v. 18), whereas the second is Abijah as it says in Samuel, “and his second son’s name was Abijah” (1 Sam 8:2). They say that שְׁנִי is akin to שֵׁנִי, similar to שְׁלֵו (shelev; =tranquil; Jer 49:31) and שָׁלֵו (shalev; =tranquil; Ezek 23:42), and that the pataḥ under the vav is as in “va-ḥamor and the lion” (1 Kgs 13:28), which is akin to ve-ha-ḥamor (=and the donkey). But this interpretation is not correct, because we never find any case of שְׁנִי that is akin to שֵׁנִי. And there is no proof from שְׁלֵו and שָׁלֵו, because those are two different patterns. Also, there cannot appear a vav with a pataḥ in a case such as this. The vav in va-ḥamor has a pataḥ because of the guttural; for it would otherwise have had a shureq, as does the vav of u-Zevulun (“and Zebulun”; Gen 35:23). Indeed, any conjunctive vav appears as a shureq when juxtaposed to a word that has a sheva at the beginning, unless it is juxtaposed to the letters alef, ḥet, hei, or ‘ayin, in which case it is has a pataḥ when the word has a ḥatef pataḥ at the beginning, and a segol when the word has a ḥatef segol at the beginning. So had the vav of vashni been a conjunctive vav, the text should have said u-sheni—the vav with a shuruq. Also, how could the text say “the first-born” without mentioning his name? We never find such an elision! Finally, they would have to say that the vav of va-Aviyyah is extraneous. Who forced them into that predicament? Rather, what is correct is that Vashni is Joel, and that he had two names, as one finds in many places in this book. Thus, this person’s name was Joel, even as his name was also Vashni.
What Jacob thought of this all played out over the rest of the Book of Genesis, sometimes tantalizingly, in the empty spaces within the stories, and sometimes with explicit directness. The text tells us that immediately after Reuben sinned with Bilhah, Jacob heard of the matter. We are not privy to more than that dry fact, but we do know that immediately afterwards, the verses list Jacob’s sons, placing Reuben first – and a telling addition to his name: “Reuben – Jacob’s firstborn – Simeon, Levi, Judah… ” (Genesis 35:23). Reuben seems to have retained the prime position within the family hierarchy. Are we to intuit from this that all was forgiven? (Most commentators understand the inclusion of “bekhor Yaakov” (Jacob’s firstborn) as a strong signal that Reuben retained some element of primacy, even in the wake of his sin with Bilhah. To what extent he was still considered a bekhor is a matter of dispute. See Rashi, Radak, Seforno on Genesis 35:22.)
The sons of Leah [were]: Reuvein, Yaakov’s firstborn, Shimon, Leivi, Yehudah, Yissachar and Zevulun.
The sons of Leah, the first--born of Jakob, Reuben, and Shimeon, and Levi, and Jehudah, and Issakar, and Zabulon.
| בְּנֵ֣י רָחֵ֔ל יוֹסֵ֖ף וּבִנְיָמִֽן׃ | 24 P | The sons of Rachel: Joseph and Benjamin. |
The sons of Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin.
“He seats the barren woman of the house as a happy mother of children. Hallelujah!” (Psalms 113:9) There are seven barren women: Sarah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah, Manoach’s wife, Chana and Zion…Another explanation. ‘He seats the barren woman’ this refers to Zion. “Sing you barren woman who has not borne…” (Isaiah 54:1) ‘a happy mother of children,’ “And you shall say to yourself, Who begot these for me…” (Isaiah 49:21)
The sons of Rochel [were]: Yoseif and Binyomin.
The sons of Rahel, Joseph and Benjamin.
| וּבְנֵ֤י בִלְהָה֙ שִׁפְחַ֣ת רָחֵ֔ל דָּ֖ן וְנַפְתָּלִֽי׃ | 25 P | The sons of Bilhah, Rachel’s maid: Dan and Naphtali. |
The sons of Bilha, Rachel’s maidservant, were Dan and Naftali.
“God remembered Rachel.” “He remembered His kindness and His faithfulness to the house of Israel; all the ends of the earth beheld the salvation of our God” (Psalms 98:3). “He remembered His kindness” – this is Abraham, as it is stated: “Kindness to Abraham” (Micah 7:20). “And his faithfulness” – this is Jacob, as it is stated: “Give truth to Jacob” (Micah 7:20); “To the house of Israel” – Israel the elder. Who was the house of our patriarch Jacob? Was it not Rachel? Regarding all of them it is written: “The children of Leah, the firstborn of Jacob, Reuben” (Genesis 35:23); “the children of Zilpa, maidservant of Leah, Gad and Asher” (Genesis 35:26); “the children of Bilha, maidservant of Rachel, Dan and Naphtali” (Genesis 35:25). But regarding Rachel it is written: “The children of Rachel, Jacob’s wife” (Genesis 46:19). Another matter, “He remembered His kindness and His faithfulness to the house of Israel” – “God remembered Rachel, and God heeded her.”
The sons of Bilhah, Rochel’s handmaid, [were]: Don and Naftali.
The sons of Bilhah, the handmaid of Rahel, Dan and Naphtali;
| וּבְנֵ֥י זִלְפָּ֛ה שִׁפְחַ֥ת לֵאָ֖ה גָּ֣ד וְאָשֵׁ֑ר אֵ֚לֶּה בְּנֵ֣י יַעֲקֹ֔ב אֲשֶׁ֥ר יֻלַּד־ל֖וֹ בְּפַדַּ֥ן אֲרָֽם׃ | 26 P | And the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s maid: Gad and Asher. These are the sons of Jacob who were born to him in Paddan-aram. |
אשר יולד לו בפדן ארם, “that had been born for him in Padan Arom.” This statement begs the question that as we have just heard, Binyamin had not been born in Padan Arom?We have to understand the verse as meaning that Binyamin had been born as a result of Rachel’s having prayed to G-d to give her another son while she had still been in Padan Arom (Compare Genesis 30,23. This is why the Torah here, 7 years later, describes Binyamin’s birth as dating back to that time.) A different exegesis of this puzzling statement: Seeing that almost all of Yaakov’s children had been born while he was in Padan Arom, the Torah applies the Talmudic statement of רובם ככולם, “if the majority had been distinguished by a certain detail we view all of the ones referred to in that context as if they possessed the same distinguishing features.” We find this principle applied by the Torah also in Genesis 46,27, where 70 people are reported to have been brought to Egypt by Yaakov, although only 69 names are listed, three of them being Joseph and his two sons. The Midrash (B‘reshit Rabbah 94,9) claims that seeing that Moses’ mother was born at the border of Egypt, her birth completes the number 70.
THAT WERE BORN TO HIM IN PADDAN-ARAM. Actually only eleven sons were born to Jacob in Paddan-aram (The problem is that our verse states that all of Jacob’s sons were born in Paddanaram, when in fact this was not so.) for Benjamin was born in the land of Canaan. Scripture speaks of the majority of his sons. (These are the sons of Jacob, that were born to him in Paddan-aram refers to the majority of his sons.) I will in the future point out many similar cases. (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 47:27.)
אשר ילד לו בפדן ארם, the word yulad (instead of yuldu) occurs generally in the singular mode though applying to a number of births. The Torah speaks of all of these children having been born in Padan Aram although we know that Binyamin was born in the land of Israel, quite close to Bethlehem. The reason is that the Torah was concerned with where most of the children had been born.
And the sons of Zilpa, Leah’s maidservant, were Gad and Asher. These are the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Padan Aram, apart from Benjamin, who was born in the land of Canaan.
אשר ילד לו בפדן ארם, “who were born to him at Padan Aram.” What is meant is that the majority were born there, seeing we have read just recently that Binyamin was born on Holy Soil in the Land of Israel
“God remembered Rachel.” “He remembered His kindness and His faithfulness to the house of Israel; all the ends of the earth beheld the salvation of our God” (Psalms 98:3). “He remembered His kindness” – this is Abraham, as it is stated: “Kindness to Abraham” (Micah 7:20). “And his faithfulness” – this is Jacob, as it is stated: “Give truth to Jacob” (Micah 7:20); “To the house of Israel” – Israel the elder. Who was the house of our patriarch Jacob? Was it not Rachel? Regarding all of them it is written: “The children of Leah, the firstborn of Jacob, Reuben” (Genesis 35:23); “the children of Zilpa, maidservant of Leah, Gad and Asher” (Genesis 35:26); “the children of Bilha, maidservant of Rachel, Dan and Naphtali” (Genesis 35:25). But regarding Rachel it is written: “The children of Rachel, Jacob’s wife” (Genesis 46:19). Another matter, “He remembered His kindness and His faithfulness to the house of Israel” – “God remembered Rachel, and God heeded her.”
יצע Was spread. It is the past, (Piel. of יצע.) like יֻלַּד was born (Gen. 35:26); or the future (Hophal of יצע.) instead of the past.—As to the masculine form יצע (the subject רמה being feminine) compare לקח מהם קללה And of them a curse shall be taken up. (Jer. 29:22); this is a poetical license; the same freedom in the use of the gender is to be noticed in the Arabian language. Concerning the following ומכסך, which is participle masculine, (I. E. seems to have read ומכסך, instead of ומכסיך. There is, however, no difference in the sense, since the latter can he both plural and singular. (Ges. Hebr. Gr. § 93, 9.)) (I. E. seems to have read ומכסך, instead of ומכסיך. There is, however, no difference in the sense, since the latter can he both plural and singular. (Ges. Hebr. Gr. § 93, 9.)) the same remark is to be made.
Bereshit Rabbah 61,4 which held that Keturah was none other than Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, Avraham’s other son, claims that the name Keturah reflects the concept of קטורת, incense, because her personal deeds were as pleasing to G’d as incense is to Him as a sacrificial offering. The approach reflected by this Midrash would account for the fact that this paragraph has been introduced with the words ויסף אברהם ויקח, “Avraham continued and married (remarried), etc.” After all, she had already been his servant before he had expelled her at the command of G’d and Sarah. The expression ויוסף has been used also in that sense in Genesis 35,26 when the Torah reports that Yehudah did not again sleep with Tamar after he had become aware of her true identity.
THESE ARE THE ACCOUNTS OF THE TABERNACLE, THE TABERNACLE OF THE TESTIMONY. Scripture uses this expression because the term “Tabernacle” means the curtains of fine-twined linen, which are so called both when the command was given (And thou shalt make the Tabernacle of ten curtains (above, 26:1).) and at the construction of the Tabernacle, (And every wise-hearted man… made the Tabernacle of ten curtains (ibid., 36:8). See also Ramban further on, 39:33.) while “the Tabernacle of the Testimony” includes the entire building, which is the Tabernacle made to house the Tablets of the Testimony. In the opinion of many scholars (Rashi and Ibn Ezra.) the phrase these are the accounts of the Tabernacle refers back to all the things mentioned above, the verse stating that the Tabernacle and its vessels, namely, the house and the court and all that was made for them, constituted the service entrusted to the Levites at the command of Moses by the hand of Ithamar [whose duty it was to hand over to each family the service that devolved upon it]. But the holy vessels — the ark, the table, the candelabrum, and the altars — are not included in the term “Tabernacle,” for they were in the hands of Eleazar. (Numbers 3:32. The verse refers to the time of the journeying through the wilderness.) But this is not my opinion, for why should Scripture mention the entrusting of those things given to Ithamar, and not mention that of Eleazar, which was the more honored one? Rather, these are the accounts of hints at those things that Scripture mentions in the section further on, thus stating that the silver of them that were numbered of the congregation was a hundred talents etc., (Further, Verse 25.) — from which were made the sockets, the hooks for the pillars, the overlaying of their capitals and their fillets. (Ibid., Verses 27-28.) And the brass of the wave-offering, which was seventy talents, from which were made the brazen altar and its grating and all its vessels, and the sockets of the court and the pins (Ibid., Verses 29-31.) — all these Moses gave over by number and weight through the hand of Ithamar. Now the section does not say what was done with the gold, for that was partly in the charge of Ithamar, namely, that used for covering the boards and the bars, and part of it was in the charge of Eleazar — the ark and the cover, the candelabrum, the table, and the golden altar. Now since one cannot know exactly how much gold went into the covering of each of these vessels, Scripture did not say that Moses gave it over to them by number and weight. It is for this reason that Scripture did not mention here the entrusting of the things given to Eleazar, for its intention here is only to speak of the work of the Tabernacle, not of that involved in the journeyings. Do not object [to this explanation] because Scripture mentions here the brazen altar, (Ibid., Verse 30.) which was in the charge of Eleazar, (Numbers 3:31-32.) for Scripture had to state that they made it out of the brass of the wave-offering, therefore it was not particular to exclude this one item from the general list of objects of which it said that they were by the hand of Ithamar, this being the way of Scripture in many places. Scripture does not mention in this section the laver and its base [which were also made of brass, and were under the charge of Ithamar], because it was not made according to a specified weight; instead, he put into it all the mirrors that the women brought together (see Ramban above, 38:8, towards the end.) and thus Moses did not know its weight. It is possible that these were not under the charge of Ithamar [and therefore they are not mentioned], but they come into the category of that which Scripture says [of the children of Kohath, whose work was under the charge of Eleazar], and their charge was the ark, and the table, and the candelabrum, and the altars, and the vessels of the Sanctuary wherewith the priests minister, (Numbers 3:31.) for through the laver and its base the priests were enabled to minister at the altar. Thus they do not come into the listing given in this section.
AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE TO ELIPHAZ ESAU’s SON. Because Scripture was not particular to tell us the names of the mothers of all the others, our Rabbis have interpreted that this was to tell us of the esteem in which Abraham our father was held, i.e., how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [and Lotan was one of the chieftains of Se’ir]. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife, would that I might become your concubine,” as Rashi has written. It is possible that the five sons of Eliphaz, mentioned in the preceding verse, were generally known as his children since he had begotten them from his wives. But Amalek, [born of Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz], was not known among his brothers, [who were the recognized children of Eliphaz], and he might have been included among Esau’s children because he was his descendant. Therefore, Scripture found it necessary to say that his mother so-and-so, to whom Amalek was known to have belonged, bore him to Eliphaz, but he is not listed among the descendants of Esau and did not dwell with them on mount Se’ir. Only the sons of the mistresses, and not the son of a concubine, are called Esau’s seed, since the son of the handmaid will not be heir with his sons, in keeping with the practice of his father’s father. (Above, 21:10.) Now concerning the descendants of Esau, we have been commanded not to abhor them (Deuteronomy 23:8.) or take their land. (Ibid., 2:5.) This refers to all his known sons who dwell in Se’ir, as they are called Edomites by his name, but the son of the concubine is not part of the descendants of Esau, and he did not inherit together with them in their land, and in fact with respect to him we have been commanded to the contrary, i.e., to abhor him and blot out his name. (Ibid., 25:19.) Now Rashi wrote further: “In the book of Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) Scripture enumerates Timna among the children of Eliphaz! This implies that he lived with Se’ir the Horite’s wife and from this union Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. And this is why Scripture says, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [since Lotan’s father was Se’ir the Horite]. And the reason why Scripture does not enumerate her among Se’ir’s children is that she was Lotan’s sister maternally but not paternally.” But I do not agree with this since in the book Chronicles, it should have said, “and Timna his daughter.” (See further, 46:15: “and Dinah his daughter.”) Why should Scripture enumerate the woman among the sons? Perhaps Scripture is not particular about this when a matter is known for so we find there in Chronicles: And the sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Miriam. And the sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu, etc. (I Chronicles 5:29.) [Scripture thus enumerates a woman among the sons.] If so, it is fitting that we say that this Timna was the daughter of Eliphaz, who had been born to him of the wife of Se’ir the Horite after the death of her husband, and she was thus Lotan’s sister from one mother. Eliphaz took her as a concubine, this being permissible to an idolater. (Sanhedrin 55b.) Or we shall say, in accordance with the opinion of our Rabbis [that Timna was illegitimate, as explained above in the words of Rashi], that the Timna mentioned in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) is identical with Timna the chieftain mentioned further on, (Verse 40 here.) for he is enumerated there in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) among the sons of Eliphaz, just as Korah is enumerated there (I Chronicles 1:35.) among the sons of Esau [while here in Verses 15-16 Korah is listed among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude that he was illegitimate, as was Timna]. Furthermore, Korah is listed here in Verse 5 as the son of Oholibamah [and Esau, and further in Verse 16 he is enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude] that both Korah and Timna were illegitimate, born of one father, and enumerated with the children of another, for it is far-fetched to say that the woman Timna was enumerated among the sons, as was suggested above. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is feasible to conjecture that Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, after having given birth to Amalek [as stated in our present verse], gave birth to a son, and she had hard labor and died. As her soul was departing she called his name Timna so that her name be remembered, while his father Eliphaz called him Korah. Scripture, however, does not ascribe this son Timna to Timna his mother in order not to prolong the account for the intent is only to enumerate Amalek by himself. However, the sons of Eliphaz were seven, [as they are enumerated here in Verses 15-16, and Korah is among them]. Now Scripture enumerates there the chieftains who were the sons of Eliphaz in the order of their importance. Therefore, it gave Kenaz and Korah precedence over Gatam [although the order of their birth as stated in Verse 11 was: Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz]. I have an additional opinion concerning this verse in connection with that which our Rabbis have said in the Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules by which Agadah (The part of Rabbinic teaching which explains the Bible homiletically, as opposed to the Halachic (or legal) interpretation, which is governed by the famous thirteen principles of interpretation mentioned by Rabbi Ishmael. This Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules” for Agadah was collated by Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.) is explained.” There they mentioned this rule: “There should have been one arrangement for [two verses, meaning that there are verses which should really be combined] but the prophets divided them for some reason! An example is the verse which says, For a multitude of the people, etc.” (For a multitude of the people… had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the passover otherwise that it is written. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying: The good Lord pardon, (II Chronicles 30:18). And then in Verse 19 it continues: His whole heart he hath set to seek G-d, the Eternal, the G-d of his fathers, though not according to the purification that pertaineth to holy things. Now Verse 18 does not explain whom G-d should pardon, while Verse 19 does not explain “who set his heart, etc.” Combining the two verses makes the sense clear. Hezekiah prayed that the good Lord pardon every one who, though he had not cleansed himself according, etc., had set his whole heart to seek G-d.) Those who pursue the plain meaning of Scripture apply this to other verses. And so too this verse says: (And) the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam and Kenaz, (This concludes Verse 11, while And Timna begins Verse 12. Ramban combines the two verses into one, with the result that Timna is also enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz.) and Timna. Then Scripture returns to say, there was a concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son, and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek, but Scripture does not mention the name of the concubine. But in truth she was Timna, as it is said, Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) and this is the reason that Scripture did not mention her name here since it did not want to say “and Timna” twice, once in reference to the male chieftain and once in reference to the female concubine. Thus Eliphaz had seven sons, [who are enumerated in Verses 11-12: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek], and they are the same chieftains ascribed to Eliphaz in Verses 15-16, but they changed the name of this youngest son of Eliphaz — namely Timna — to Korah because his name was like that of the concubine and so that he should not be thought of as her son. He was named Korah upon his ascending to the position of chieftain. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Korah the son of Esau’s wife Oholibamah is counted twice; [in Verse 5 he is mentioned as Oholibamah’s son while in Verse 16 he is listed as Adah’s son], because he was the youngest of Oholibamah’s sons, [as indicated in Verse 5 where he is mentioned last. Upon his mother’s death] Adah raised him, [which explains why he is mentioned among Adah’s children in Verse 16]. So also the verse, the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, (II Samuel 21:8.) as our Rabbis have said. (Sanhedrin 19 b: “But they were really Merab’s children! [See I Samuel 18:19.] It is because Merab gave birth to them. However Michal raised them; therefore, they are called by her name.”) According to this opinion [of Ibn Ezra, i.e., that because Adah raised Korah he is counted among her children], the explanation of Scripture in the book of Chronicles (I, 1:36), [where it mentions seven sons of Eliphaz, and among them, and Timna and Amalek, while here in Verses 11-12, it mentions only six sons of Eliphaz, is as follows: The expression in Chronicles, and Timna and Amalek, means] that Timna gave birth to Amalek, the sense of the verse thus being, “and to Timna, Amalek.” The letter lamed meaning “to” is missing just as in the verse: And there were two men that were captains of bands Saul’s son, (II Samuel 4:2.) which means “to Saul’s son.” [Thus it was Timna who was his mother, but because Adah raised him he is enumerated here in Verse 12 among the sons of Adah]. The correct interpretation however is, as I have suggested, [that Timna, Lotan’s sister, bore Amalek to Eliphaz], and the verse stating, And these are the sons of Adah — [namely, Verse 16, which mentions Amalek among them], refers to the majority of the names mentioned there, for Amalek was not her son. Similarly the verse, These are the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Padan-aram, (Above, 35:26.) does not apply to Benjamin, [who was born in the Land of Israel, although he is mentioned in the enumeration which follows].
The sons of Zilpah, Leah’s handmaid, [were]: Gad and Asher. These are the sons of Yaakov that were born to him in Padan Aram.
and the sons of Zilpha, the handmaid of Leah, Gad and Asher. These are the sons of Jakob who were born to him in Padan Aram.
| וַיָּבֹ֤א יַעֲקֹב֙ אֶל־יִצְחָ֣ק אָבִ֔יו מַמְרֵ֖א קִרְיַ֣ת הָֽאַרְבַּ֑ע הִ֣וא חֶבְר֔וֹן אֲשֶׁר־גָּֽר־שָׁ֥ם אַבְרָהָ֖ם וְיִצְחָֽק׃ | 27 P | And Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, at Kiriath-arba—now Hebron—where Abraham and Isaac had sojourned. |
ויבא..קרית הארבע, we explained the meaning of this on 23,2. The reason for the definitive article in front of the word ארבע, i.e. הארבע, something strange seeing that it refers to the name of a human being, is justified as the name itself is symbolic, i.e. is in reality an attribute, describing the “foursome,” the father and his three sons, all of whom giants.
אשר גר שם אברהם ויצחק, this is mentioned seeing that now Yaakov also sojourned there. It teaches that it is appropriate for a person to be buried in the town where his ancestors had lived as it is a sign of honour for his ancestors who were also buried there. Nechemyah speaks repeatedly of “the city where my fathers have been buried;” he attributed the significance to the fact that several generations of his ancestors had been buried in the same place. (Nechemyah 2,3 and 2,5)
ממרא MAMRE — the name of the plain.
קרית הארבע KIRIATH-ARBA— the name of the city.
ממרא קרית הארבע therefore means “to the plain of Kiriath-arba”. If you say that it should have written ממרא הקרית ארבע (that Kirjath-arba being one name the definite article should be placed in front of it) then I reply that this is the rule in Biblical Hebrew: in every case of a name compounded of two words, such as this, and such as בית לחם and אבי עזר and בית אל, when it is necessary to prefix the definite article (in order to determine the name) it is prefixed to the second element of the name — thus (1 Samuel 16:1)בית הלחמי the Bethlehemite; (Judges 6:24) “in Ophrah (אבי העזרי) of the Abiezrites”; (1 Kings 16:34) “did Hiel the Bethelite (בית האלי) build”.
Where Avraham and Yitzchok lived. Righteous forebears stand a person in good stead among his neighbors.
The name of the plain. But is it not written in Parshas Lech Lecha (13:18), “And he settled in אלוני ממרא which is in Chevron,” on which Rashi explains that ממרא is the name of a person? The answer is: There it is written באלוני ממרא, and אלון is itself the name of the plain. [Perforce, there it means, “The אלון of the person named ממרא.”] We should not object that perhaps the plain has two names, אלון and ממרא, and there it was called by both its names. Because then it should have said באלוני בממרא, to show that the plain has two names. Since it is not written in this manner, ממרא must be the name of a person. Re’m explains that here, ממרא cannot be the name of a person, because it is written afterwards קרית הארבע, which refers to the place.
The name of the city. Rashi is saying that the city’s name is Kiryas Arba, and it does not mean, “The kiryah (city) of the person named Arba.” For it is written (23:2) ותמת שרה בקרית ארבע היא חברון, [and not ותמת שרה בחברון קרית ארבע]. This shows that Kiryas Arba is the name of the place. The ה of הארבע in this verse is in place of של (of). Thus it means, “The plain of Kiryas Arba,” as Rashi himself goes on to explain.
Jacob continued southward and came to Isaac his father at Mamre, Kiryat Ha’arba, which is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac resided. The verse records Jacob’s return to his father’s home, but relates nothing about their reunion or any events that transpired in Isaac’s last years.
“Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, at Kiriath-arba” [35:27]. Jacob came to his father and it does not say that he came to his mother, Rebecca, since his mother had died previously. However, Scripture does not tell us that she had died. We have written previously why the Torah did not say that Rebecca died. (See the comment to Genesis, 35:8 above.)
(Hosea 12:13 [12]:) THEN JACOB FLED TO THE LAND OF ARAM. From where did he flee? From Beersheba, as stated (in Gen. 28:10): AND JACOB SET OUT FROM BEERSHEBA. Was he in Beersheba? Was he not rather in Hebron, as stated (in Gen. 35:27): I.E., HEBRON, WHERE ABRAHAM AND ISAAC SOJOURNED? < The situation was merely that he fled > from a place set aside for oaths (shevu'ot), since < it was > there < that > Abraham had sworn to Abimelech. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 21:23, 31): SO NOW SWEAR TO ME BY GOD, BEHOLD…. THEREFORE THAT PLACE WAS NAMED BEERSHEBA, (i.e., The Well of the Oath) BECAUSE < IT WAS > THERE < THAT > BOTH OF THEM HAD SWORN. Now where is it shown that Isaac had sworn? Where it is stated (in Gen. 26:32f.): THAT ISAAC'S SERVANTS CAME < AND TOLD HIM ABOUT THE WELL >…. SO HE CALLED IT SHIBAH (i.e., oath); < THEREFORE THE NAME OF THE CITY IS BEERSHEBA UNTO THIS DAY >. (Similarly Rashi and Nachmanides on Gen. 26:33. Cf. Malbim on this verse, according to whom Beersheba means “seventh well,” in that this well was the seventh dug by Isaac. Cf. also Ibn Ezra, who, because of what might be an alternative derivation from the number seven in Gen. 21:23-33, suggests that either Beersheba had two derivations or that there were two cities with this name.) And Esau also swore to Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 25:33): < THEN JACOB SAID > SWEAR TO ME FIRST. < Thus he swore an oath > when he took his birthright. He thought in his heart and said: If he should come and say: Come, swear to me that you have not taken my blessing by deceit, what shall I be able to do to him? I shall simply go away from this place set aside for oaths. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 28:10): AND JACOB SET OUT FROM BEERSHEBA (i.e., The Well of the Oath). (Beersheba seems to be, not a particular city, but any well where one might swear an oath. Thus, there is no contradiction between Jacob living in Hebron and setting out from Beersheba, i.e., the Hebron oath well.) Ergo (in Hosea 12:13 [12]): THEN JACOB FLED TO THE LAND OF ARAM.
— You say that Scripture speaks of the superiority of Eretz Yisrael? Perhaps it speaks of the superiority of Egypt! It is, therefore, written (Bamidbar 13:22) "And Chevron (the lowest-grade soil in Canaan [later, Eretz Yisrael,]) was superior, seven-fold to Tzoan (the highest-grade soil) in Egypt." (lit., "Chevron was built seven years before Tzoan") For Tzoan was the seat of Egyptian royalty, as it is written (Isaiah 30:4) "For its (Egypt's) officers were in Tozan," and Chevron was (built of) the "refuse" of Eretz Yisrael.
ויקם, literally: “it stood up;” the subject is the field, and the Torah means that by becoming the property of Avraham this field now had “risen” in spiritual value. שדה עפרון, one side of that field extended along the whole length of that town. Here it is described in precise detail, i.e. ממרא היא חברון, whereas previously it had been described as קרית ארבע, “the city of the four;” later on during the lifetime of Yaakov it has been described as ממרא קרית הארבע היא חברון, (Genesis 35,27) a location where both Avraham and Yitzchok had been residents at one time or another. Earlier. in connection with Avraham, (12,18) he had been described as having settled in Kiryat Arba which is described there as “part of Chevron.” This was meant to tell us that Mamre was the original founder who had built himself a town adjacent to Chevron which had previously been inhabited by Hittites. He called that new town “Mamre,” thus memorializing himself. The “groves” of Mamre, i.e. אלוני ממרא, were situated at the entrance to that town. The cave of Machpelah, in another direction, at that time had belonged to the Hittites. After Mamre’s death, a giant by the name of Arba became very powerful and claimed the entire area, naming it Arba after himself. Several centuries later, when the Israelites had defeated most of Canaanite tribes they called that town Chevron.
ושמרתיך, “I will guard you;” this was necessary because of Esau’s threat to kill Yaakov. והשיבותיך אל האדמה הזאת, “I will bring you back to this soil;” this promise was fulfilled as stated in Genesis 35,27: וישב יעקב אל יצחק אביו “Yaakov returned to his father Yitzchok.”
AND ABRAM PASSED THROUGH THE LAND. I will tell you a principle by which you will understand all the coming portions of Scripture concerning Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is indeed a great matter which our Rabbis mentioned briefly, saying: (Tanchuma Lech Lecha, 9.) “Whatever has happened to the patriarchs is a sign to the children.” It is for this reason that the verses narrate at great length the account of the journeys of the patriarchs, the digging of the wells, and other events. Now someone may consider them unnecessary and of no useful purpose, but in truth they all serve as a lesson for the future: when an event happens to any one of the three patriarchs, that which is decreed to happen to his children can be understood. Concerning all decisions of “the guardians [angels],” (Daniel 4:14.) know that when they proceed from a potential decree to a symbolic act, the decree will in any case be effected. It is for this reason that the prophets often perform some act in conjunction with the prophecies, just as Jeremiah commanded Baruch his disciple, And it shall be, when thou hast made an end of reading this book, that thou shalt bind a stone to it, and cast it into the midst of the Euphrates, and thou shalt say: Thus shall Babylon sink. (Jeremiah 51:63-64.) Likewise is the matter of Elisha when he put his arm on the bow [held by Joash, King of Israel]: And Elisha said, Shoot. And he shot. And he said, The Eternal’s arrow of victory, even the arrow of victory against Aram. (II Kings 13:17.) And it is further stated there, And the man of G-d was wroth with him, and said, Thou shouldst have smitten five or six times; then hadst thou smitten Aram till thou hadst consumed it whereas now thou shalt smite Aram but thrice. (Ibid., Verse 19.) It is for this reason that the Holy One, blessed be He, caused Abraham to take possession of the Land and symbolically did to him all that was destined to happen in the future to his children. Understand this principle. Now, with the help of G-d, I will begin to explain in detail the subject matter of the verses. And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem. This is the city of Shechem for such was the name of this place, (Ramban differs with Ibn Ezra’s comment that the name Shechem was non-existent in the days of Abraham but is used here because Moses called it by the name by which it was known in his time.) and Shechem the son of Hamor (Genesis 34:2.) was called by the name of his city. Now Rashi wrote, “He entered it unto the place of Shechem in order to pray on behalf of Jacob’s sons when they would come grieved from the field.” (Ibid., 34:7. In our text of Rashi: “when they would come to fight against Shechem.”) This is correct. And I add that Abraham took possession of this place at the very beginning, even before the land was given to him. (As told later in Verse 7. His taking possession of Shechem is stated in the preceding Verse 6.) It was thus hinted to him that his children would first conquer this place (Reference is to the capturing of the city by the sons of Jacob. See further, 34:25.) before they would merit it and before the guilt of the dwellers of the land was full (Further, 15:16.) to warrant their exile therefrom. It is for this reason that the verse here states, And the Canaanite was then in the land. (He took possession of this place even though the Canaanite was yet in the land. (Tur.)) And when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave him the land by His Word, Abraham journeyed from there and pitched his tent between Beth-el and Ai for this was the place that Joshua captured first. (In battle. (Joshua 8:1-24.) The capture of Jericho earlier was effected by a miracle.) It is possible that Scripture mentions, And the Canaanite was then in the land, to teach us concerning the substance of this chapter, i.e., to state that Abram came into the land of Canaan, but G-d did not show him the land He had promised him. He passed to the place of Shechem while the Canaanite, that bitter and impetuous nation, (Habakkuk 1:6.) was yet in the land, and Abram feared him. Therefore he did not build an altar to G-d. But when he came to the vicinity of Shechem at the oak of Moreh, G-d appeared to him and gave him the land, and as a result his fear departed from him for he was already assured in the land that I will show thee, and then he built an altar to G-d in order to worship Him openly. Now eilon Moreh (the oak of Moreh) is in the vicinity of Shechem and is also called eilonei Moreh, as it is written over against Gilgal, beside ‘eilonei Moreh.’ (Deuteronomy 11:30.) There in Shechem, near the Jordan, are Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal, where the Israelites arrived at the beginning of their entrance into the land. (Sotah 36 a: “On the day Israel crossed the Jordan, they came to Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal.”) Eilonei Mamre, (“The oaks of Mamre.” (Genesis, 18:1.)) however, is a place in the land of Hebron, (As is clearly stated: Mamre… the city of Arba which is Hebron. (Ibid., 35:27.)) far from the Jordan. Know that wherever Scripture states, eilonei Mamre, the name Mamre is on account of an Amorite by that name to whom the place belonged, just as it says, And he dwelt at the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshkol and brother of Aner, (Ibid., 14:13.) and wherever it says, eilon moreh or eilonei moreh, (Deuteronomy 11:30.) the places were so called on account of a man by the name of Moreh, but he was a Canaanite from the land of the Canaanites, who abide in the plains. (Ibid. The end of this verse reads: beside the oaks of Moreh. From this Ramban derives the fact that Moreh was a Canaanite, unlike Mamre who was an Amorite.) When Scripture mentions Mamre alone, it means the name of a city, just as it is said: And Jacob came unto Isaac his father unto Mamre, the city of Arba, which is Hebron; (Genesis 35:27.) Before Mamre which is Hebron. (Ibid., 23:19.) The man to whom the oaks belonged was called after the name of the city. A similar case is that of Shechem the son of Hamor, who was called Shechem after the name of the city Shechem. In Bereshith Rabbah (42:14.) it is said, “In the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah, Mamre is the name of a place, and in the opinion of Rabbi Nechemyah, it is the name of a person.”
THIS IS NONE OTHER THAN THE HOUSE OF G-D, AND THIS IS THE GATE OF HEAVEN. This refers to the Sanctuary which is the gate through which the prayers and sacrifices ascend to heaven. Rashi comments, Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra said, ‘This ladder stood in Beer-sheba and its slope (“Its slope.” In our text of Rashi: “the middle of its slope.” Ramban will explain later that the reference is to “the end” of the slope, which is the head of the ladder.) reached unto the Sanctuary in Jerusalem. Beer-sheba is situated in the southern part of Judah, and Jerusalem is to its north on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin, and Beth-el was in the northern portion of Benjamin’s territory, on the boundary between Benjamin’s territory and that of the children of Joseph. It follows, therefore, that a ladder whose base is in Beer-sheba and whose top is in Beth-el has its slope (“Its slope.” In our text of Rashi: “the middle of its slope.” Ramban will explain later that the reference is to “the end” of the slope, which is the head of the ladder.) reaching opposite Jerusalem. Now regarding the statement of our Rabbis that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘This righteous man has come to the place where I dwell, [namely, the Sanctuary in Jerusalem, and shall he depart without spending the night?’], (Chullin 91b.) and with regard to what they also said, ‘Jacob gave the name Beth-el to Jerusalem’ (Pesachim 88b.) this place which he called Beth-el was Luz and not Jerusalem! And whence did they learn to say so, [implying that Luz is identical with Jerusalem]? I therefore say that Mount Moriah [the Temple site in Jerusalem] was forcibly removed from its place and came here to Luz, and this movement of the Temple site is ‘the springing of the earth’ which is mentioned in Tractate Shechitath Chullin. (“The slaughtering of unconsecrated beasts.” This tractate is now generally called Chullin (Unconsecrated Beasts). 91b.) It means that the site on which the Sanctuary was later to stand came towards Jacob to Beth-el. And this too is what is meant by vayiphga bamakom (and he met the place): (Verse 11 here.) [as two people meet, who are moving towards each other]. If you should ask, ‘When our father Jacob passed the site of the Sanctuary [on his way from Beer-sheba to Haran] why did He not detain him there?’ The answer is: If it never entered his mind to pray at the place where his fathers had prayed, should Heaven make him stop there? He had journeyed as far as Haran, as we say in the chapter of Gid Hanasheh, (“The sinew of the hip.” It is the seventh chapter of Tractate Chullin (see Note 18) 91b.) and Scripture itself helps us clarify this point by saying, And he went to Haran. (Verse 10 here.) When he arrived at Haran he said, ‘Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without praying there myself?’ He decided to return and had returned as far as Beth-el, whereupon the ground of the Temple site sprang for him until Beth-el.” All these are the words of the Rabbi. (Rashi. See also Note 139, Seder Bereshith.) But I do not agree with them at all for ‘the springing of the earth’ which the Rabbis mention in connection with Jacob is like that which they have said happened to Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, namely, that he reached Haran in one day. As they have said in Tractate Sanhedrin, (95a.) “The earth sprang for three persons: Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, our father Jacob, and Abishai the son of Zeruiah.” (II Samuel 21:17. In coming to the rescue of David, a miracle occurred, and he reached him at once though he was far away from him.) And the Rabbis explained: “Eliezer, the servant of Abraham — for it is written, And I came this day unto the fountain, (Above, 24:42.) which teaches that on that very day he embarked on his journey. Jacob — for it is written, And he met the place. (Verse 11 here.) When he arrived at Haran he said, ‘Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without praying there myself?’ As soon as the thought of returning occurred to him, the earth sprang for him, and immediately he met the place.” Thus the Rabbis explicitly say that as soon as the thought to return occurred to him in Haran, the earth sprang for him and he met the place where his fathers prayed, but not that he returned to Beth-el, nor that Mount Moriah sprang and came there to Beth-el. In Bereshith Rabbah (59:15.) the Rabbis further equated them both [Eliezer and Jacob] with respect to “the springing of the earth.” Thus they said: “And he arose, and went to Aram-naharaim (Above, 24:10.) — on the very same day. And I came this day unto the fountain (Above, 24:42.) — this day I embarked on the journey, and this day I arrived.” With respect to Jacob the Rabbis interpreted in a similar vein: “And he went to Haran (Verse 10 here.) — the Rabbis say on the very same day.” And furthermore, what reason is there for Mount Moriah to “spring” and come to Beth-el, as Rashi claims, after Jacob had troubled himself to return from Haran to Beth-el, a journey of many days? (If such a miracle was to be performed, why did not Mount Moriah spring all the way to Haran?) Moreover, Beth-el does not lie on the border of the Land of Israel which faces towards Haran for Haran is a land which lies to the east [of the Land of Israel while Beth-el lies in its western part]. (Above, 12:8.) Additionally, the middle part of a ladder is not referred to as its “slope.” (Thus Rabbi Elazar who said that “its slope” reached to the Sanctuary did not refer to its middle, as Rashi has it.) And, finally, what reason is there for the middle of the ladder to be opposite Beth-el, [where, according to Rashi, the side of the Sanctuary had been transported], when the middle part of an object does not possess significance beyond that of its whole? There is, however, another intent to these Midrashim. The Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah, (68:6.) “Rabbi Hoshayah said, ‘It has already been stated, And Jacob hearkened to his father and his mother, and was gone to Paddan-aram. (Above, 28:7.) What then does Scripture teach by repeating, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba? (Verse 10 here.) Rather, the redundancy teaches us that Jacob said, “When my father desired to leave the Land of Israel, at what location did he seek permission for it? Was it not in Beer-sheba? I, too, shall go to Beer-sheba to seek this permission. If He grants me permission, I shall leave, and if not, I shall not go.” Therefore Scripture found it necessary to state, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba.’” (Verse 10 here.) The intent of this Midrash is that the Rabbis were of the opinion that Jacob was blessed by his father in Hebron, the land of his father’s sojournings, and it was to Hebron that he came when he returned to his father from Paddan-aram, as it is said, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, to Kiriath-arba — the same is Hebron — where Abraham and Isaac sojourned. (Further, 35:27.) Now if so, the verse stating, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba (Verse 10 here.) teaches that when his father commanded him to go to Laban (Above, 28:5.) he went to Beer-sheba to receive Divine permission, and that is the place wherein he spent the night and saw visions of G-d, and it was there that He gave him permission to exit from the Land of Israel, even as He said, And I will keep thee wherever thou goest and will bring thee back unto this land. (Verse 15 here.) And the ladder which he saw, in the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, he saw with its feet in Beer-sheba, in the very place where he lay, and with the end of its slope which is the top of the ladder reaching to a point opposite the Sanctuary. It was supported by heaven at the gate through which the angels enter and exit. The revered G-d stood over him, and therefore he knew that Beer-sheba was the gate of heaven, suitable for prayer, and the Sanctuary was the house of G-d. And in the morning Jacob continued his journey from Beer-sheba and arrived at Haran on the same day, and this was “the springing of the earth” mentioned with respect to Jacob. This is the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra who said in Bereshith Rabbah, (69:5.) “This ladder stood in Beer-sheba and its slope reached to the Sanctuary, as it is said, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba; (Verse 11 here.) And he was afraid and said, How fearful is this place.” (Verse 17 here.) And the stone which he erected as a pillar (Verse 18 here.) he did not erect in the place where he slept, for Beer-sheba is not Beth-el and it was in Beth-el that he erected it, and there he went upon his return from Paddan-aram, as it is said, Arise, go up to Beth-el … and make there an altar unto G-d who appeared unto thee, etc. (Further, 35:1.) But he erected it [after carrying the stone from Beth-el to Jerusalem] (Thus comments Rabbi David Luria (R’dal) in explanation of Ramban’s words. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 160.) opposite the slope, at the place where the head of the ladder stood, which he had called the house of G-d, and this is the city which had previously been called Luz. (Verse 19 here.) Thus in the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, Luz was Jerusalem which Jacob called Beth-el. (Verse 19 here.) Possibly this may be so, according to the verses in the book of Joshua. (The source intended is not clear to me. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 160, for further discussion of this matter.) It is certainly true that it is not the Beth-el near Ai (Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz.) for that Beth-el was originally so named in the days of Abraham (Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz.) and prior to that. But Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon differs there (Bereshith Rabbah 69:8.) with Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, and he says: “This ladder stood upon the Sanctuary site and its slope reached to Beth-el. What is his reason? And he was afraid, and said, (Verse 17 here.) etc. And he called the name of that place Beth-el.” (Verse 19 here.) Thus in the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon the verse stating, And he lighted upon the place, (Verse 11 here.) means Mount Moriah. And he tarried there all night, because the sun was set for him not at its proper time [so that he should spend the night there], for as our Rabbis have stated: (Chullin 91b.) “[The Holy One, blessed be He, said], ‘This righteous man has come to the place where I dwell. Shall he then depart without staying there over night?’” And so Jacob saw the ladder with its feet standing in that place, and its slope, which is its top, reached to a point which was opposite that particular Beth-el [which was mentioned in connection with Ai during Abraham’s era], (Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz.) and that was the city of Luz. And Jacob said that the very place where he spent the night was the house of G-d, and the slope of the ladder was the gate of heaven, thus Mount Moriah is excellent for prayer, and Beth-el also is a suitable place for the worship of G-d. And he erected the pillar in Beth-el, for in the opinion of all Rabbis he erected it opposite the slope of the ladder. The opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon, [i.e., that Jacob slept on Mount Moriah, and he erected the pillar in Beth-el], is in agreement with the Midrash in the Gemara of the chapter concerning Gid Hanasheh, (“The sinew of the hip.” It is the seventh chapter of Tractate Chullin (see Note 18) 91b.) and that of Chapter Cheleck, (“Portion,” i.e., in the World to Come. This is the tenth chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin, 95b.) which states that Jacob left Beer-sheba and came to Haran, and when he reconsidered and decided to return and pray at Mount Moriah, the place where his fathers had prayed, then the earth “sprang” for him and he lighted immediately upon Mount Moriah. Perhaps it is the Rabbis’ opinion that the earth “sprang” for him both when going from Haran to Mount Moriah and when returning from Mount Moriah to Haran. This would be in agreement with the opinion of the Rabbi who says: (Bereshith Rabbah 68:9.) “And he went to Haran (Verse 10 here.) — on the same day. And he lighted upon the place (Verse 11 here.) — at once, very suddenly.” I found it more explicitly in Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol: (Chapter 35.) “Jacob was seventy-seven years of age when he left his father’s house, (He was sixty-three when he was blessed by his father (Megillah 16 a), and for the following fourteen years he was secluded in the house of Shem and Eber for the purpose of studying Torah. This makes Jacob seventy-seven years old when he left Haran. The Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer refers to it as “when he left his father’s house,” but the intent is as explained. (Rabbi David Luria.)) and he followed the well that travelled before him from Beer-sheba to Mount Moriah, a two-day journey, and he arrived there at midday, etc. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, ‘Jacob, you have bread in your travelling-bag, the well is before you, enabling you to eat and drink and lie down in this place.’ Jacob replied, ‘Master of all worlds, the sun has yet to descend fifty stages, and shall I lie down to sleep in this place?’ Prematurely, the sun then set in the west. Jacob looked and saw that the sun had set in the west, so he tarried there all night, because the sun was set. (Verse 11 here.) Jacob took twelve stones from the stones of the altar upon which his father Isaac had lain bound as a sacrifice (Above, 22:9.) and put them under his head. By the fact that his resting-place contained twelve stones, G-d informed him that twelve tribes were destined to be established from him. But then all twelve stones were transformed into one stone to inform him that all twelve tribes were destined to become one nation in the earth, as it is said, And who is like Thy people, like Israel, a nation one in the earth? (II Samuel 7:23.) In the morning Jacob awoke with great fright, and said, ‘The house of the Holy One, blessed be He, is in this place,’ as it is said, And he was afraid, and said: How fearful is this place! (Verse 17 here.) From here you learn that whosoever prays in Jerusalem is considered as if he prayed before the Throne of Glory, for the gate of heaven is open there to receive the prayer of Israel, as it is said, And this is the gate of heaven. (Verse 17 here.) Jacob then wanted to collect the stones [which he had used as a resting-place for his head in order to build an altar], but he found them all to be one stone, and so he set it up as a pillar in that place. Thereupon oil flowed down for him from heaven, and he poured it on top of the stone, as it is said, And he poured oil upon the top of it. (Verse 18 here.) What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? With His right foot He sank the anointed stone unto the depths of the abyss to serve as the key-stone of the earth, just as one inserts a key-stone in an arch. It is for this reason that it is called Even Hashethiyah (The Foundation Stone), (On this stone, the Ark of G-d, which contained the two Tablets of the Law, rested in the Holy of Holies in the Sanctuary in Jerusalem. (Yoma 53b.)) for there is the center of the earth, and from there the earth unfolded, and upon it stands the Temple of G-d, as it is said, And this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be G-d’s house. (Verse 22 here. The use of the present tense in the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer — “and upon it stands the Temple of G-d” — may either be a reference to the remains of the ancient Sanctuary and its environs, which were still visible in the days when the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer was composed, or it may preferably indicate that although the Temple is now in ruins the place thereof is still deemed sacred as in the days when the House of G-d was firmly established on the sacred mountain.) From there he [Jacob] went on his journey, and in the twinkling of an eye he arrived in Haran.” Thus far [extends the quotation from the Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol]. Thus, all Midrashim — despite some minor differences among them — acknowledge that “the springing of the earth” occurred to Jacob through which he travelled a journey of many days in the twinkling of an eye. It is possible that all Midrashim concede to one another, and that on all these journeys of his — when going from Beer-sheba to Haran, when he desired to return to Mount Moriah, and when he left there to go to Haran — the earth “sprang” for him. But there is not one of all these Midrashim which says, as Rashi said, [that Mount Moriah was forcibly removed from its location and was transported to meet him in Beth-el].
AND DEBORAH REBEKAH’s NURSE DIED. I do not know why this verse has been placed between the verse, And he called the place El-beth-el (Verse 7 here.) and the following verse, And G-d appeared to Jacob again. (Verse 9 here.) Scripture thus interrupts one subject which occurred at one time and in one place for when Jacob came to Luz, that is Beth-el, (Verse 6 here.) he built an altar there and he called the place El-beth-el, (Verse 7 here.) and G-d appeared to him there and He blessed him. (Verse 9 here.) Why then was this verse concerning Deborah’s death placed in the midst of one subject? A feasible answer is that which our Rabbis have said, (Bereshith Rabbah 81:8.) namely that the verse alludes to the death of Rebekah, and therefore Jacob called the name of that place, Alon-bachut (the oak of weeping), for the weeping and anguish could not have been such for the passing of the old nurse that the place would have been named on account of it. Instead, Jacob wept and mourned for his righteous mother who had loved him and sent him to Paddan-aram and who was not privileged to see him when he returned. Therefore G-d appeared to him and blessed him, in order to comfort him, just as He had done to his father Isaac following the death of Abraham. (Above, 25:11.) With reference to both of them the Sages have said (Sotah 14 a; Bereshith Rabbah 82:4.) that He gave them the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners. Proof for this is that which is said below, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, (Verse 27 here.) for had Rebekah been there, Scripture would have mentioned “unto his father and unto his mother” for it was she who sent him. to Paddan-aram and caused him all the good, for Isaac commanded him to go there at her advice. Now Rashi commented: “Because the time of her death was kept secret in order that people might not curse her — the mother who gave birth to Esau — Scripture also does not make mention of her death.” This is a Midrash of the Sages. (Tanchuma Ki Theitzei 4.) But neither does Scripture mention the death of Leah! Instead, we must say that the intent of the Sages was to explain why Scripture mentions Rebekah’s death by allusion, connecting the matter with her nurse. Since Scripture did refer to it, they wondered why the matter was hidden and not revealed. And the justification for the curse stated by Rashi is not clear since Scripture mentioned Esau at the death of Isaac, And Esau and Jacob his sons buried him. (Verse 29 here.) It is, however, possible to say that Rebekah’s death lacked honor, for Jacob was not there, and Esau hated her and would not attend; Isaac’s eyes were too dim to see, (Above, 27:1.) and he did not leave his house. Therefore, Scripture did not want to mention that she was buried by the Hittites. I found a similar explanation in Eileh Hadvarim Rabbah, (I found this not in Midrash Rabbah but in Tanchuma Ki Theitzei, 4.) in the section of Ki Theitzei Lamilchamah, (Deuteronomy 21:10.) where the Sages say: “You find that when Rebekah died, people said, ‘Who shall go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac is confined to the house and his eyes are dim. Jacob is gone to Paddan-aram. If wicked Esau shall go before her, people will say, “Cursed be the breast that gave suck to this one.’” What did they do? They took out her bier at night. Rabbi Yosei bar Chaninah said, ‘Due to the fact that they took out her bier at night the Scriptures mentioned her death only indirectly. It is this which Scripture says, And he called its name Alon-bachut, two weepings, [one for Deborah and one for Rebekah]. Thus Scripture says, And G-d appeared unto Jacob… and blessed him. (Verse 9 here.) What blessing did He give him? He gave him the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners.’” Thus far the Midrash. Now because Esau was the only one present at her burial, they feared the curse, and they did not view the burial as an honor to her, this being the significance of the Scriptural hint. Deborah was in Jacob’s company because after accompanying Rebekah to the land of Canaan, she had returned to her country, and now she was coming with Jacob in order to see her mistress. It may be that she was engaged in raising Jacob’s children out of respect for Rebekah and due to her love for her, and thus she resided with him. Now it is possible that she is not “the nurse” of whom it is said, And they sent away Rebekah their sister, and her nurse, (Above 24: 59.) but that she was another nurse who remained in the house of Laban and Bethuel, and now Jacob brought her with him to support her in her old age out of respect to his mother, for it was the custom among the notables to have many nurses. It is improbable that the old woman would be the messenger whom his mother had dispatched to Jacob [to have him return to the Land of Israel], as Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan would have it. (Mentioned by Rashi in this verse. A preacher in the city of Narbonne, Provence, France, who lived in the second half of the eleventh century, Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan, compiled a collection of Agadic material on the book of Genesis. The book itself, which had a great influence upon Rashi and other writers, has been lost except for the quotations made by other scholars.)
שלשים שנה וארבע מאות שנה FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY YEARS — Altogether from the birth of Isaac until now were 400 years, and we must reckon from that event, for only from the time when Abraham had offspring from Sarah could the prophecy (Genesis 15:13) “Thy offspring shall be a stranger” be fulfilled; and there had been 30 years since that decree made at “the convenant between the parts” until the birth of Isaac. It is impossible to say that this means that they were 430 years in the land of Egypt alone, for Kohath was one of those who came into Egypt with Jacob (Genesis 46:11); go and reckon all his years and all the years of Amram his son and the whole eighty years of Moses, the latter’s son, until the Exodus and you will not find that they total to so many; and you must admit that Kohath had already lived many years before he went down to Egypt, and that many of Amram’s years are included in the years of his father Kohath, and that many of the 80 years of Moses are included in the years of his father Amram, so that you see that you will not find 400 years from the time of Israel’s coming into Egypt until the Exodus. You are compelled to admit, even though unwillingly, that the other settlements which the patriarchs made in lands other than Egypt come also under the name of “sojourning as a stranger” (גרות), including also that at Hebron, even though it was in Canaan itself, because it is said, (Genesis 35:27) “[Hebron] where Abraham and Isaac sojourned”, and it says, (Exodus 6:4) “[the land Canaan], the land of their sojournings wherein they sojourned”. Consequently you must necessarily say that the prophecy, “thy offspring shall be strangers… [four hundred years]” began only from the time when he had offspring. And only if you reckon the 400 years from the birth of Isaac will you find that from the time they came into Egypt until the time they left it, was 210 years (as alluded to in Genesis 15:13). This was one of the passages which they altered for king Ptolemy (Mekhilta; Megillah 9a).
When you were few in number [It was] then that He swore to give them the land of Canaan, the portion of your heritage. And this is a great thing, so that they cannot say that because of your great numbers, you seized the land of Canaan, but when you were few in number. Now if you say that even a thousand or more have a number, what is this about which it is written: “When you were few in number”? Therefore, it says: “hardly dwelling in it.” The meaning is that if He would say to one settler, e.g., to Abraham alone, to Isaac alone, to Jacob alone, to one of them He would say, “To you I will give the land of Canaan,” it would not be a wonder, because they were settled in it! But He swore to give you the land at a time when your ancestors were strangers sojourning in it, as it is written (Gen. 35:27): “... that is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac sojourned.” And furthermore, if He would say to a stranger who is settling, “To you and to your seed I will give this land,” it would not be such a wonder. Therefore, he says that they were not even strangers who were settling, but...
The Beis Lechemite. From Beis Lechem. The rule of every noun composed of two words, e.g., Beis Lechem, Beis Shemesh, Beis Eil, Kiryas Arba, if one wishes to add a 'ה' he adds it between the two words, e.g., Kiryas Ha'arba, ( Bereishis 35:27.) Beis Ha'Eili, ( I Melachim 16:34.) Beis Ha'lachmi.
Rather, it is called Machpelah in the sense that it is doubled with the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, who are buried there in pairs. This is similar to the homiletic interpretation of the alternative name for Hebron mentioned in the Torah: “Mamre of Kiryat Ha’Arba, which is Hebron” (Genesis 35:27). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The city is called Kiryat Ha’Arba, the city of four, because it is the city of the four couples buried there: Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, and Jacob and Leah.
Once they reached the Cave of Machpelah, Esau came and was preventing them from burying Jacob there. He said to them: It says: “And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, to Kiryat Arba, the same is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac sojourned” (Genesis 35:27). And Rabbi Yitzḥak says: It is called Kiryat Arba because there were four couples buried there: Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Leah. Esau said: Jacob buried Leah in his spot, and the spot that is remaining is mine.
Yaakov came to Yitzchok, his father, in Mamrei at Kiryas Arba, which is Chevron where Avraham and Yitzchok lived.
And Jakob came to Izhak his father, at Mamre the city of Arba, which is Hebron, for there Abraham and Izhak had dwelt.
| וַיִּֽהְי֖וּ יְמֵ֣י יִצְחָ֑ק מְאַ֥ת שָׁנָ֖ה וּשְׁמֹנִ֥ים שָׁנָֽה׃ | 28 P | Isaac was a hundred and eighty years old |
ויהיו ימי יצחק מאת שנה ושמונים שנה, Isaac lived to be one hundred and eighty years old. The reason that the Torah does not add אשר חי, "which he lived," as it did when reporting Abraham's death or Jacob's death or even Joseph's death, may have been that from the day of his birth until the time he was bound on the altar no wife had been assigned to Isaac; our sages in Kohelet Rabbah section 9 state that anyone who lives without a wife is not really considered as "living." On the other hand, our sages also say that as a result of the עקדה Isaac began to lose his eyesight (Bereshit Rabbah 65,10). A person who is deprived of his eyesight cannot be described as truly "alive."
Alternatively: since he did not bring חיים with him on his way to the עקדה, the Torah did not see fit to mention the word חיים in his connection.
AND THE DAYS OF ISAAC WERE. There is no strict chronological order in the narrative of the Torah. The sale of Joseph preceded Isaac’s death. This is Rashi’s language. Now I have already written (Above, 11:32. ) that such is the customary way of Scripture with respect to all generations: it tells of a person and his children and his death and then begins with the account of the next generation even though the generations overlapped. Now it would have been proper for Scripture to present Isaac’s death prior to the experiences of Jacob, just as it did in the case of Abraham and all former generations. But by this delay, Scripture intended to state that Isaac died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years (Ibid., 25:8.) — [just as is said of Abraham] — after his blessed son Jacob, the inheritor of his high rank, returned to him, and his sons Esau and Jacob, great men of the world, buried him. (Verse 29 here.) It was not necessary for Scripture to mention that they buried him in the cave of Machpelah since it mentioned that Isaac was in the city of Hebron, (Verse 27 here.) and where should they bury him if not near the gravesite of his father?
The days of Isaac were one hundred years and eighty years.
ויהיו ימי יצחק, וגו', “Yitzchok lived to a total of 180 years.” Rashi reminds us that the Torah is not obligated to narrate in chronological order, seeing that the sale of Joseph had preceded the death of Yitzchok. Nachmanides explains that it was an accepted custom when relating someone’s biography, to complete that person’s biography, and only then to begin to describe details of the next generation and the characters that are important during that generation. Actually, the death of Yitzchok should have been reported still earlier, just as the Torah reported the death of Avraham or other generations before proceeding to inform us about the activities of Yitzchok. The reason why the Torah had delayed reporting Yitzchok’s death until now needs explanation. We have to justify the delay displayed by the Torah in reporting Yitzchok‘s death only now as reflecting the Torah’s intent to show us that he lived to a ripe old age, long enough for his son Esau to return to the parental home and take part in the funeral of his father. There was no need to tell us that Yitzchok was buried in the cave of Machpelah, seeing that he lived in Kiryat Arba, right next door to that cave.
Chapter 40: Torah [1] And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old (Genesis 27:1). Twenty generations passed until Abraham, in which old age is not mentioned except for him, as it says, "Now Abraham was old" (Genesis 24:1). And Isaac also stood [before God] and it came to pass, that when Isaac was old (Genesis 27:1). And Jacob also stood [before God], as it says, "And the eyes of Israel were dim with age" (Genesis 48:10). The verse (Psalms 102:17) says, "He will regard the prayer of the destitute, and not despise their prayer." The only way [to achieve this level of prayer] is through old age, as it says, "The beauty of young men is their strength, and the glory of old men is their gray hair" (Proverbs 20:29). Abraham merited his son through five things, as our Rabbis taught: the father merits a son through five things: through his [the father's] name, through his [the father's] good deeds, through his [the father's] wealth, through his [the father's] strength, and through his [the father's] wisdom. Similarly, Isaac [merited his son through five things], and similarly Jacob [merited his son through five things]. Similarly, Jacob merited Joseph [through these five things], who resembled him in appearance and in title, as it says, "And Joseph was handsome in form and appearance" (Genesis 39:6). [He resembled him] in wisdom, as it says, "Behold, he is the master of dreams" (Genesis 37:19). He had beauty, appearance, and wisdom. And in Isaac's case, it is written, "Who is this man?" (Genesis 24:65). What is the meaning of "this man" in reference to Joseph? That he was handsome and had wisdom. Likewise, Isaac was also built with wisdom. And just as Joseph stood up to his brothers in strength, so did Isaac stand up in strength against all the men of Gerar. Just as Joseph was wealthy, so was Isaac wealthy, as it says, "And the man became great and went forward and became very great" (Genesis 26:13). The verse (Genesis 26:8) explains [the word] "wisdom" as meaning "the greatness of his children." From where do we learn that Isaac was handsome like Joseph? It is written about Joseph, "And Joseph was handsome in form and appearance," and when he went to his brothers, what did they say? "Behold, the master of dreams is coming!" (Genesis 37:19). And it is said about Isaac, "Who is this man?" (Genesis 24:65). What is the meaning of "this man" in reference to Joseph? That he was handsome and had wisdom. Likewise, Isaac was also built with strength, as it says, We know this from the fact that he dug many wells, as it says, "Isaac dug again the wells of water" (Genesis 26:18), and "Isaac's servants dug in the valley" (Genesis 26:19), and "they dug another well" (Genesis 26:21). He had strength in his hands. From where do we know that he was wealthy? It says, "The man became great, and he grew richer and richer until he was very wealthy" (Genesis 26:13). And from where do we know that he lived to a ripe old age of 180 years? It says, "And Isaac lived one hundred and eighty years" (Genesis 35:28). Abraham was the son of Terah, and Isaac was the son of Abraham. Why does the Torah mention this? Because God said to Isaac, "You have merited these five things, so I will add another five years to your life, like your father Abraham." That is why it says, "Look upon your servants" (Psalms 119:16). Anyone who has merit will receive these five things, and anyone who does not have merit will receive five calamities in return. And who was this? Joab, as it is said: "Let Joab and his descendants be perpetually guilty of their bloodshed. May they be afflicted with leprosy, jaundice, and starvation." (2 Samuel 3:29) Leprosy corresponds to strength; one who has leprosy has no strength. Jaundice corresponds to beauty; even if someone is young and jaundiced, there is no beauty in them. Starvation corresponds to wealth, as it says, "Come, eat my food and drink the wine I have mixed. Leave your simple ways and you will live" (Proverbs 9:5-6). One who is starving has no leisure to engage in Torah study. Falling by the sword corresponds to the five aspects of praise. These are five calamities corresponding to five aspects of praise. One who does not merit praise inherits these five kinds of calamities, like Joab. But one who does merit praise receives them like Isaac, as it is said, "And it came to pass, when Isaac was old" (Genesis 27:1), and David cries out, "May your children be like your ancestors" (Psalms 45:17). Therefore, it says, "And it came to pass, when Isaac was old."
We need to consider why the Torah enumerates the years of Jacob's life in a different manner from the way it enumerated the lives of Abraham and the other patriarchs. When the Torah told us about the number of years Abraham lived, it commenced with the larger unit first, i.e. 100 years plus seventy years plus five years (compare Genesis 25,7). We find the same thing in Genesis 35,28 when Isaac's life is described; the same also is the case when the Torah described the number of years Sarah lived (Genesis 23,1). Perhaps the reason that the Torah reversed this in Jacob's case is to drive home the point that Jacob's last 17 good years were the key to his whole life.
The days of [the life of] Yitzchok were one hundred and eighty years.
And the days of Izhak were an hundred and eighty years.
| וַיִּגְוַ֨ע יִצְחָ֤ק וַיָּ֙מׇת֙ וַיֵּאָ֣סֶף אֶל־עַמָּ֔יו זָקֵ֖ן וּשְׂבַ֣ע יָמִ֑ים וַיִּקְבְּר֣וּ אֹת֔וֹ עֵשָׂ֥ו וְיַעֲקֹ֖ב בָּנָֽיו׃ | 29 P | when he breathed his last and died. He (He Lit. “Isaac.”) was gathered to his kin (kin (So NJPS.) See the Dictionary under “predecessors.”) in ripe old age; and he was buried by his sons Esau and Jacob. |
Everything that has been handed down to us about Avram suggests that he was unwavering in his faith in G’d from his very youth, and certainly did not have any theological relapses. Nachmanides stated with absolute certainty, basing himself on Genesis 25,8 that Avram had always considered anything that happened to him as being G’d’s desire and meant for his own good. Nachmanides understood this as being the meaning of the words: זקן ושבע ימים, “of old age, satisfied and satisfied in years.” Contrary to most people, who are described in Kohelet Rabbah, 5,9 as leaving behind many unfulfilled aspirations when they die, Avraham died fully fulfilled. In Baba Batra 117, as well as in Sanhedrin 91 the meaning of the word מורשה is discussed, there being different opinions of how the distribution of the ancestral plots in the Land of Israel was determined by lottery; if the lottery only applied to the tribal allocations, or to families. The discussion also concerns whether only Jews who partook in the Exodus or their offspring were allocated land, or whether the allocation included Jews who had lived before that period, including Avram, Yitzchok, etc. Avram’s question of במה אדע כי אירשנה, meant: “how will I know that I personally will be included in the distribution of the land at that time? He knew that he would not inherit a plot of land in Israel as part of his father Terach’s merit, as he had been the first convert to Judaism, something that was confirmed in Sukkah 49. Since he did not endure slavery in Egypt as did the generation of the Exodus, he was not sure that he would qualify at the time of the distribution. Avram’s question had been triggered by G’d saying to him:, לתת לך את הארץ הזאת לרשתה, “to give to you this land in order to inherit it.” (15,7) Avram wanted to know if he would live long enough to take part in the distribution of the land in Joshua’s time, or how he was to understand the words: לתת לך, “to give to you.” The Talmud in Sukkah 49 quotes psalms 47,10 where we encounter the expression עם אלוקי אברהם, “the nation that worships the G’d of Avraham”; a sage raised question whether G’d perhaps is not also the G’d of the people of Yitzchok and the G’d of the people of Yaakov.” The answer given is that Avraham was the first convert from which the Jewish people developed, so that he enjoys a special status. As a reward, G’d gave the land of Israel especially to him. Avraham wanted to know if, since the land of Israel becomes a מורשה, his share would be due to his father bequeathing it to him. The term ירש, “to inherit,” always implies that one inherits from a father. If Avram’s question had been במה אדע כי תתן לי, “how will I know that You give it to me,” it would have been inappropriate, of course. G’d had spoken about “giving;” Avram asked only about the hereditary aspect, אירשנה. We will deal with the expression במה אדע, somewhat later in this paragraph. When G’d introduced His reply to Avram’s question with the words: ידוע תדע כי גר יהיה זרעך, “you must truly realize that your descendants will be strangers, etc.,” this can best be understood when referring to a commentary by the Zohar I 87 on the verse: (Genesis 2,4)אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם . The letter ה in smaller script in the middle of this word alerts the reader not to read the word as a single word, but as באברהם ברא, i.e. G’d created the universe on account of, or with the eventual assistance of Avraham.” Had G’d not foreseen that someone like Avram will be born, He would not have considered it worth His while to create the human race. The fact that Avraham, on his own, without prompting, would proclaim the name of the Creator, made it worth G’d’s while to put up with all the sins man would commit. Avraham would be the one to acquaint his peers with the concept that G’d is One, is unique, is in charge of the universe and yet had granted the creatures he made in His image freedom of choice to choose their own path in life. The fact that this Avraham would sire a Yitzchok, and Yitzchok in turn would sire a Yaakov who raised 12 sons who would form the nucleus of the Jewish nation, a nation of priests, made it all worthwhile for G’d. When the Jewish people collectively accepted G’d’s Torah, without critically examining what was written therein first, this was a crowning moment not only for the Jewish people, but it enabled G’d to converse with a mortal human being, Moses, as if he were on His own level, i.e. פנים אל פנים, face to face. When G’d introduced His reply to Avram’s question with the words: ידוע תדע כי גר יהיה זרעך, “you must truly realize that your descendants will be strangers, etc.,” this can best be understood when referring to a commentary by the Zohar I 87 on the verse: (Genesis 2,4)אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם . The letter ה in smaller script in the middle of this word alerts the reader not to read the word as a single word, but as באברהם ברא, i.e. G’d created the universe on account of, or with the eventual assistance of Avraham.” Had G’d not foreseen that someone like Avram will be born, He would not have considered it worth His while to create the human race. The fact that Avraham, on his own, without prompting, would proclaim the name of the Creator, made it worth G’d’s while to put up with all the sins man would commit. Avraham would be the one to acquaint his peers with the concept that G’d is One, is unique, is in charge of the universe and yet had granted the creatures he made in His image freedom of choice to choose their own path in life. The fact that this Avraham would sire a Yitzchok, and Yitzchok in turn would sire a Yaakov who raised 12 sons who would form the nucleus of the Jewish nation, a nation of priests, made it all worthwhile for G’d. When the Jewish people collectively accepted G’d’s Torah, without critically examining what was written therein first, this was a crowning moment not only for the Jewish people, but it enabled G’d to converse with a mortal human being, Moses, as if he were on His own level, i.e. פנים אל פנים, face to face. Moses reminded the people in Deut. 5,4 how 40 years earlier, when most of them had not yet been alive, G’d had addressed the whole nation on the פנים אל פנים “face to face level,” [until the people asked Moses to be their interpreter instead. Ed.] At that time all creatures on earth were in awe of their Creator. When the people had consecrated the Tabernacle in the desert as a “home” for Hashem in the lower parts of the universe, G’d took delight in the world He had created, as we know from Taanit 26 where the Talmud understands Song of Songs 3,11 ביום חתונתו וביום שמחת לבו, “on His wedding day, the day when His heart rejoices,” as referring to G’d’s feelings on the day of the revelation at Mount Sinai, and the day when the Tabernacle was consecrated, respectively. This is the kind of נחת רוח, “pleasure, satisfaction,” that man in the lower part of the universe can contribute to G’d in the loftier spheres, in heaven. On both of these occasions the joy was reciprocal, G’d showing that He can associate with earthlings and take pleasure from this. The Israelites’ enthusiastic response after the splitting of the sea and their miraculous and escape from Pharaoh’s pursuing armies, was another occasion when the reciprocal nature of the relationship between G’d and His “chosen” people was demonstrated publicly. Nowadays, almost 4000 years later, we recall these events and praise the Lord every week when we pronounce the blessings over wine. Not a day goes by without our giving thanks to the Lord for the Exodus from Egypt. At the time when Avram lived, the world, i.e. the planet earth and man on it, was still in a state of semi-collapse, its continued existence far from assured, until Yitzchok and Yaakov continued the work that Avram had started when he kept proclaiming the power and goodness of the Creator. This assurance of the earth’s continued existence was only confirmed with the creation of the Jewish people, and this people’s leaving Egypt as G’d’s people, after having slaughtered the Passover, and proven that they considered the Creator as their highest authority. The Tur, commenting on why we mention the Exodus of Egypt in the weekly Kiddush, as opposed to the Kiddush on the festivals whose link to the Exodus is self-evident, explains that the Sabbath harbours within it the כח המוליד, the power that enables creatures to regenerate themselves by producing offspring. This “power” is conditional on the observance of the Sabbath (in some form). Terach, Avram’s father, while able to produce physical offspring, was unable to produce offspring equipped with the kind of soul that would be active in spreading the message that G’d is the one and only Creator. [I have not been able to find where the Tur writes this, although he writes about man as well as most other living creatures becoming endowed with the ability to procreate bodies in his Torah commentary. (Genesis 2,3)
ויקברו אותו עשו ויעקב בניו, “and his sons Esau and Yaakov buried him.” Esau is mentioned first seeing that biologically, he remained the firstborn. Yaakov also treated him with the honour due to a firstborn. When the Torah describes the burial of Avraham, in which both his sons also participated, Yitzchok is mentioned first although he was 14 junior to Yishmael, seeing Yishmael was the son of a slavewoman. (Compare Rash’bam).
AND ISAAC EXPIRED. When Isaac died and was gathered to his people Easu and Jacob buried him. (Chronologically speaking Isaac did not die at this point for he lived until Joseph was 29 years of age (see I.E. on Gen. 37:35). Scripture notes the death of Isaac here because it will no longer deal with him (Filwarg). Thus And Isaac expired, and died should be rendered: And when Isaac expired and died, etc. (Krinsky).) Scripture mentions Esau (Even though Esau sold his birthright to Jacob and was no longer technically the eldest.) before Jacob because the Pentateuch follows the order of their birth. However, in relating the burial of Abraham the Bible reads, And Isaac and Ishmael (If the Torah follows the order of birth then Ishmael should be mentioned first.) his sons buried him (Gen. 25:9) because Ishmael was the son of a handmaid.
Lit. “Isaac.”
ויגוע...עשו ויעקב, Esau is mentioned first, seeing that he was the firstborn although he had sold his birthright to Yaakov. Moreover, Yaakov had been in the habit of according the honour due to a firstborn to Esau, ever since the two had made peace between themselves. On the other hand, when describing the funreal of Avraham, the Torah names Yitzchok first, seeing that Yitzchok had been the son by the major wife of Avraham, Sarah, whereas Yishmael had only been the son of the servant maid (25,9)
עשו ויעקב, they are mentioned in this order, a) because Esau was the firstborn, and, b) Yaakov deferred to him according him this honour. When the Torah described Avraham’s funeral, Yitzchok, the younger, was mentioned first seeing that Yishmael was the son of a slave-woman.
ויגוע יצחק AND ISAAC EXPIRED — There is no such thing as “earlier’’ or “later” (chronological order) in the narratives of the Torah (Pesachim 6b), and the sale of Joseph preceded Isaac’s death by twelve years. Thus: at Jacob’s birth Isaac was sixty years old — as it is said (25:26) “And Isaac was sixty years old [when he bore them]” (Esau and Jacob). Isaac died when Jacob was 120, for if you deduct 60 from 180 (Isaac’s age when he died), you have left 120. Joseph was 17 years old when he was sold, and that year was the one hundred and eighth of Jacob’s life. How is this? Jacob was 63 when he received the blessing of his father; 14 years he hid himself in Eber’s School — making 77 — and 14 years “he served for his wives” (Rashi borrows a phrase from Hosea 12:13 “And Israel served for a wife”; but he means for both wives), and at the expiration of these 14 years Joseph was born as it is said (30:25) “and it came to pass when Rachel had born Joseph” (that Jacob wished to return home and he would not have desired to do this if his fourteen years of service were not completed) making 91. Add to this the seventeen years of Joseph’s life before he was sold, and you have 108. This may also be derived more directly from Scripture thus: from the time when Joseph was sold until the time when Jacob came to Egypt was 22 years, for it is said (41:46) “And Joseph was 30 years old [when he stood before Pharaoh]” (and therefore he had been in Egypt 13 years, as he was 17 when he was sold) and the seven years of plenty and two of famine had elapsed before Jacob came to Egypt (cf. 45:6), making 22 years. And as it is written (47:9) that Jacob on his arrival in Egypt said to Pharaoh “The days of the years of my sojournings are a hundred and thirty years”, it follows that at the time when Joseph was sold Jacob was one hundred and eight years old.
עשו ויעקב בניו. Wenn es oben Kap. 25, 9 bei Abrahams Begräbnis heißt: יצחק וישמעאל בניו obgleich ja auch dort Ismael der ältere war, hier aber Esau zuerst genannt wird, so glauben wir auch darin eine Bestätigung der Tatsache zu finden, daß Jakob in äußerer, materieller Beziehung weder von der בכורה noch von der ברכה irgend welchen Vorteil gezogen, vielmehr nach Jizchaks Tode anstandslos Esau den Vorrang als älterem Bruder eingeräumt habe.
Isaac expired, and he died, and he was gathered to his people. When a person passes away, he returns, as it were, to the souls of his parents and family. Isaac died old and full of days; he had reached a very advanced age. Esau and Jacob his sons buried him. Esau came from the land of Se’ir to bury his father together with Jacob, in the Cave of Makhpela in Hebron.
“He was buried by his sons, Esau and Jacob” [35:29]. Hizkuni asks a question. Why does it mention Esau the evildoer before Jacob the righteous one? It would have been just that Jacob should be listed first in the verse. The answer is that Jacob honored Esau because of his hatred, because he [Jacob] had taken away the birthright and the blessings from him. In particular, because Isaac had died, Jacob was afraid of Esau. Esau had said: as soon as my father will die, I will take revenge on Jacob. Therefore, when Isaac died, Jacob honored Esau at the cemetery and let him go first. However, when Abraham died, it is written, “Isaac and Ishmael buried him” [Genesis, 25:8]. Isaac is mentioned first and then Ishmael, who was the son of the maidservant, Hagar. Isaac was the son of Sarah, the mistress of the household. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 35:29.)
[(Gen. 43:14:) AND MAY GOD ALMIGHTY (ShDY) GRANT YOU MERCY.] What was the reason for Jacob to bless them with < the formula > GOD ShDY? (Tanh., Gen. 10:10; below, 10:16.) To teach you that a lot of afflictions had come upon him. While he was in his mother's womb, Esau had contended with him, as stated (in Gen. 25:22): BUT THE CHILDREN STRUGGLED TOGETHER WITHIN HER. (Cf. PRK 3:1.) And so it says (in Amos 1:11): BECAUSE HE PURSUED HIS BROTHER WITH THE SWORD AND DESTROYED HIS WOMB. "His womb" is < what is > written. (DESTROYED HIS WOMB would normally be read as a metaphor and translated by an expression such as “cast off all pity.”) Because of Esau he fled to Laban. See how many troubles there were! (Gen. 31:40:) THUS I WAS: BY DAY SCORCHING HEAT CONSUMED ME…. < Look at > how, when he left, < Laban > pursued after him to kill him, [as stated (in Gen. 31:23)]: AND PURSUED AFTER HIM FOR A JOURNEY OF {THREE} [SEVEN] DAYS. He escaped from him; Esau came with the intention of killing him. On account of him he lost all that gift (Gk.: doron.) (according to Gen. 32:15 [14]): TWO HUNDRED SHE-GOATS…. He went away from Esau; the trouble about Dinah came (in Gen. 34). Then after that, the trouble with Rachel < dying > (in Gen. 35:19). Then, after these troubles, he was intending to rest a bit, until there came the trouble about Joseph (in Gen. 37); and after that, the trouble with his father, Isaac, who died (in Gen. 35:29) ten years after the sale of Joseph. So the Scripture has cried out (in Job 3:26): I WAS NOT TRANQUIL, NOT QUIET, HAD NO REST; AND TROUBLE CAME. After that there came upon him the trouble with Simeon (in Gen. 42:24); and after that, the trouble with Benjamin (in Gen. 42:36; 43:3-15). He therefore prayed (in Genesis 43:14) AND MAY GOD ShDY. Now he says: The one who said: Enough (DY), to the heavens and to the earth should say: Enough (DY), to my afflictions. For, when the Holy One created the heavens and the earth, they continued expanding until the Holy One said to them: Enough (DY). (See above, 1:11; 3:25. below, 10:16.) It is therefore written (in Gen. 43:14): GOD WHO IS ENOUGH (ShDY).
Abraham also pleaded for death with his own lips, as it is said: What wilt thou give me, seeing I go hence childless (Gen. 15:2). Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace (ibid., v. 15). Isaac likewise sought death, as is said: That I may eat, and bless thee before the Lord before my death (ibid. 35:29). Similarly, Jacob asked for death, as is said: Now let me die (ibid. 46:30). The Holy One, blessed be He, told him: You have said: Now let me die, but you will live seventeen additional years. After that time had passed he became ill and died.
"And you have given me the back of your enemies." This passage speaks about Judah. Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said in the name of Rabbi Judah bar Elai that it is a legendary tradition that Judah killed Esau. When did this happen? When Isaac died, Jacob and Esau and all the tribes went to bury him, as it is written (Genesis 35:29), "And Esau and Jacob, his sons, buried him." They went into a cave and stood and wept, and the tribes stood and paid tribute to Jacob. They went out of the cave so that Jacob would not be disgusted and humiliated in front of them. Esau himself crawled into the cave. Judah went in after him and said, "Perhaps he will kill my father." Esau crawled in and found that he was seeking to kill his father. Immediately, Judah stood up and killed him from behind. Why did he not kill him face to face? Because Esau's face resembled Jacob's, so Judah honored him and killed him from behind. And this is why his father blessed him (Genesis 49:8), "Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies." Why on the neck? Joshua argued before the Holy One, blessed be He, that He should give him the neck, but He did not give it to him. As it is written (Joshua 7:8), "What will you do for your great name when Israel turns its back?" Yet it did not help anything. To whom did He give the neck? To the tribe of Judah, as it is written, "Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies." Similarly, David said, "And you have given me the back of my enemies" (Psalm 18:41). My interpreter said, "And this is for Judah," as it is written (Deuteronomy 33:7), "And this is for Judah," and he said, "Who taught his hands to fight for him?" From Migdal. As it is written (1 Samuel 17:49), "And the stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face." He did not need to fall, but after him, and why did he fall on his face? Because the angel pushed him on his face. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "The mouth that blasphemes and reviles (may it hang in the air) will be closed in the dust." As it is written (Job 20:11), "His bones are full of his youthful vigor, but it lies down with him in the dust." Another explanation is why on his face, so that David would not be upset and go and cut off his head. He was paid twelve and a half pieces (on the side). His height was filled in front of him and behind him, six cubits and a span. Therefore, he fell on his face between the legs of David, as it is said (Psalms 110:1) "The Lord said to my lord, sit at my right hand." Another explanation is why on his face, because Dagon, his god, was troubled in his heart to fulfill what is said (Leviticus 26:30) "And I will cast your carcasses upon the carcasses of your idols." Another explanation is why on his face, to fulfill what is said (Psalms 18:41) "They cried, but there was none to save them; even unto the LORD, but He answered them not." I will destroy them; I will make the decision for their strange death, as it is said (Leviticus 25:46) "To be your property absolutely."
Rabbi Levi said: In the hour of the ingathering of Isaac, he left his cattle and his possessions, and all that he had, to his two sons; therefore they both rendered loving-kindness (to him), as it is said, "And Esau and Jacob his sons buried him" (Gen. 35:29).
And in those days after Isaac's death, the Lord called a famine into all the earth. At that time Pharaoh, king of Egypt, was seated upon his throne and he fell asleep that night and he dreamed many dreams. And Pharaoh saw in his dream, and behold he stood by the banks of the river of Egypt, which is Shichor... And as he stood there he saw, and behold, seven cows fat fleshed and well favored came up out of the river, and after them came out seven cows lean fleshed and ill favored. And the seven ill-favored cows did eat up the seven well favored cows and their appearance was yet as bad as before. And he awoke. And he fell asleep and dreamed a second time. And he saw and behold seven ears of corn came up, upon one stalk, rank and good, and right after them grew up seven thin ears and blasted with the east wind. And the seven thin ears swallowed up the seven rank and full ears. And Pharaoh awoke from his dream. And in the morning when the king thought over his dreams his spirit was greatly disturbed on account of his dreams. And the king hastened and issued a call unto all the magicians of Egypt, and all the wise men thereof, and they came and stood before the king. And the king said unto them: I have dreamed dreams and there is no one to interpret them. And they said unto the king: Relate thy dreams we pray thee, unto thy servants, that we may hear them. And the king related his dreams unto them. And all of them answered and said unto the king, as if with one mouth: May the king live forever! this is the interpretation of his dreams: The seven fat cows that thou hast seen are seven daughters, which will be born unto thee in thy last days. And the seven cows that came up after them which thou hast seen swallow up the first cows are a sign that the daughters which will be born unto thee will all die during the life time of the king. And what thou hast seen in thy second dream, namely, the seven rank and good ears, springing up from one stalk, this is the interpretation that thou wilt build unto thee seven cities in the land of Egypt in thy last days. And what thou hast seen afterwards, namely, the seven blasted ears that grew up after them, and swallowed them up before thine eyes, is a sign that the cities which thou shalt build shall all be destroyed in the latter days during the life time of the king. And when they had spoken these words the king did not incline his ears. unto their speech, nor did he quiet his heart on their account; for the king in his wisdom knew well that they had not interpreted his dreams correctly. And when they ceased speaking before the king, the king answered unto them saying: What are these words which you have spoken unto me? Verily you have allowed lies. And falsehoods to come out of your mouths, and unless you give me the correct interpretation of my dreams, all of you shall be put to death.
And also the cave of Machpelah which was in Hebron, and which Abraham had bought from Ephron, Jacob took for the possession of a burial ground for himself and his seed forever. And Jacob wrote down all of these transactions into a book of sale and he sealed it and had it testified to by trustworthy witnesses concerning everything. And these are the words which Jacob wrote into the book, saying: The land of Canaan and all the cities of the Hittites and of the Hivites, and of the Jebusites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and of the Gergasites, of all the seven nations from the river of Egypt even unto the river Euphrates, and the entire city of Hebron, to-wit, Kirjath-arba, and the cave that is in it, all these Jacob hath bought of Esau his brother for value received, to possess and to inherit it for himself and his sons and his seed after him forever. And Jacob took the book of sale, and the seal, the laws and the statutes, and the public documents, and he placed them into an earthen vessel so that it be preserved for many days, and he gave it into the hands of his sons. And Esau took all that his father had left after his death, men and servants and camels and asses and oxen and sheep and gold and silver and precious stones, all the wealth that belonged to Isaac, the son of Abraham. And Esau left not the least thing of all the great wealth but he took it all, and he went into the land of Seir, the Horite, and he returned with his sons and procured pos sessions in the midst of the sons of Seir. And Esau never returned unto the land of Canaan after this day. And all the land of Canaan was an inheritance to the sons of Israel forever, and Esau and his sons possessed the mountain of Seir.
And when Jacob saw what they had done to the city and the spoil they had made, Jacob was very angry at them, and he said unto them: What is it that ye have done unto me? Behold I have found rest among the inhabitants of the land of the Canaanites, and no one of them ever said a word unto me. And now you have caused me to be in bad order with the inhabitants of the land of the Canaanites, and the Perizzites; and I, being few in numbers, they shall gather themselves together against me and slay me when they hear what you have done unto their brethren, and I shall be destroyed, I and my house. And Simeon and Levi, and their brothers, answered their father, saying: Behold, we are yet alive in the earth, and shall we suffer Shechem to do this to our sister? Why art thou silent at all that Shechem hath done, shall our sister be treated like a harlot of the street? And the number of the women captured by Simeon and Levi in the city of Shechem, outside of those they had slain, was eighty-five, of such as never knew a man. And amongst those captives was a young maiden of comely appearance, and her name was Bunah, and Simeon took her to wife. And the number of male persons which they captured and did not slay, was forty-seven men, and the rest they slew. And all the youths and women that Simeon and Levi had made captives from the city of Shechem became servants to the sons of Jacob and their children, even unto the day that the children of Jacob went forth from the land of Egypt. And when Simeon and Levi left the city the two young men that escaped death by concealing themselves in the city, arose and went about in the city, and they found the city destroyed and not a single man in it, only women crying and weeping. And these young men exclaimed: Behold, the evil which the sons of Jacob, the Hebrew, have brought over this city, in hav ing this day devastated one of the cities of Canaan without fear of their lives of all the inhabitants of Canaan' And these men went forth from the city and went into the city of Tapuah; and arriving there they said unto the inhabitants of Tapuah all that had occurred, and all that the sons of Jacob had done unto the city of Shechem. And when the news hath been imparted to Jashub the king of Tapuah, he dispatched messengers to the city of Shechem in order to see concerning what these two young men had said. For the king could not believe the statement of those men, saying: How can it be that two men could destroy a large city like Shechem. And Jashub’s messengers returned and spoke unto him saying: Behold we have come unto the city and it is completely destroyed, and we found not a single man in the entire city, only a few weeping women. And there is not one sheep nor any cattle there, for everything was taken away from the city by the sons of Jacob. And Jashub was astonished at that, saying: How could two men do such a thing as to destroy such a large city, and not even one of the inhabitants could stand against them. For such a thing hath never occurred since the days of Nimrod, nor in any of the former days hath such a thing come to pass.
And when Jacob saw what they had done to the city and the spoil they had made, Jacob was very angry at them, and he said unto them: What is it that ye have done unto me? Behold I have found rest among the inhabitants of the land of the Canaanites, and no one of them ever said a word unto me. And now you have caused me to be in bad order with the inhabitants of the land of the Canaanites, and the Perizzites; and I, being few in numbers, they shall gather themselves together against me and slay me when they hear what you have done unto their brethren, and I shall be destroyed, I and my house. And Simeon and Levi, and their brothers, answered their father, saying: Behold, we are yet alive in the earth, and shall we suffer Shechem to do this to our sister? Why art thou silent at all that Shechem hath done, shall our sister be treated like a harlot of the street? And the number of the women captured by Simeon and Levi in the city of Shechem, outside of those they had slain, was eighty-five, of such as never knew a man. And amongst those captives was a young maiden of comely appearance, and her name was Bunah, and Simeon took her to wife. And the number of male persons which they captured and did not slay, was forty-seven men, and the rest they slew. And all the youths and women that Simeon and Levi had made captives from the city of Shechem became servants to the sons of Jacob and their children, even unto the day that the children of Jacob went forth from the land of Egypt. And when Simeon and Levi left the city the two young men that escaped death by concealing themselves in the city, arose and went about in the city, and they found the city destroyed and not a single man in it, only women crying and weeping. And these young men exclaimed: Behold, the evil which the sons of Jacob, the Hebrew, have brought over this city, in hav ing this day devastated one of the cities of Canaan without fear of their lives of all the inhabitants of Canaan' And these men went forth from the city and went into the city of Tapuah; and arriving there they said unto the inhabitants of Tapuah all that had occurred, and all that the sons of Jacob had done unto the city of Shechem. And when the news hath been imparted to Jashub the king of Tapuah, he dispatched messengers to the city of Shechem in order to see concerning what these two young men had said. For the king could not believe the statement of those men, saying: How can it be that two men could destroy a large city like Shechem. And Jashub’s messengers returned and spoke unto him saying: Behold we have come unto the city and it is completely destroyed, and we found not a single man in the entire city, only a few weeping women. And there is not one sheep nor any cattle there, for everything was taken away from the city by the sons of Jacob. And Jashub was astonished at that, saying: How could two men do such a thing as to destroy such a large city, and not even one of the inhabitants could stand against them. For such a thing hath never occurred since the days of Nimrod, nor in any of the former days hath such a thing come to pass. And Jashub, king of Tapuah, said unto all his people: Strengthen yourselves and we will go forth to fight against those Hebrews, and we will do unto them as they did unto the people of that city, and we will avenge on them the cause of all the people of the city. And Jashub, king of Tapuah, consulted with his counselors concerning this matter, and they said unto him: Thou alone canst not succeed against those Hebrews for they must have a peculiar power being able to do such work with the whole city. If two of them could destroy the whole city without one man being able to stand against them, then surely, if we go against them, they will all rise and exterminate us likewise. But send thou to all the kings around us and let them assemble, and with them we will go to fight against the sons of Jacob, and then wilt thou prevail against them. And when Jashub heard the words of his advisers, their words seemed good in his eyes and in the eyes of the people, and he did so. And Jashub sent to all the kings of the Amorites around Shechem and Tapuah, saying: Send me your help and come up with me to smite Jacob the Hebrew and his sons, and to exterminate them from the earth, for thus did they do to the city of Shechem and ye do not even know of it. And when the kings of the Amorites heard of the evil which the sons of Jacob had done to the city of Shechem, they were greatly astonished. And all of them assembled, the seven kings of the Amorites with their armies, altogether about ten thousand men drawing the sword, and they came to wage war against the sons of Jacob. And when Jacob heard that the kings of the Amorites came to fight against his sons, Jacob was in great fear and distress. And Jacob rebuked Simeon and Levi, saying: What is it that ye have done unto me? why have ye done unto me the evil to summon against me all the children of Canaan, to exterminate me and my household? For I was in rest, I as well as my house hold, ere you have done this thing to unite against me all the inhabitants of the land, by your actions. And Judah replied unto his father, saying: And have my brothers Simeon and Levi slain all the inhabitants of Shechem without any cause? verily they did it because Shechem had defiled our sister, transgressing the commandments of God to Noah and his children, for Shechem hath both robbed us of our sister and defiled her. And Shechem committed that great evil, but none of the inhabitants of his city spoke unto him a word, saying: Why dost thou do this? Is it not for this reason that my brothers went out and smote the city? And the Lord gave them into their hands, because all her in habitants have transgressed the commandments of our God. Have, then, my brothers acted without any just cause? And now why fearest thou, and wherefore art thou distressed, and what causeth thy heart to think evil of my brothers and thy wrath to kindle against them? And verily our God, who hath delivered into their hands the city of Shechem and its inhabitants, will deliver into our hands likewise all the kings of the Canaanites that are now advancing against us, and we will do unto them as my brothers have done unto Shechem. And now be thou quiet concerning them, and abandon thy fears, but trust in God and pray unto him in our behalf to help us and deliver us, and to give our enemies into our hands.
And Judah called one of his father's servants, saying: Go and see where the kings, that come against us, are stationed with their armies. And the servant went and looked from the distance, ascending opposite Mount Sihon, and he saw all the armies of the kings standing in the field. And he returned unto Judah and said: Behold the kings are stationed in the field with all their armies, a people of great multitude, even like the sand on the sea shore. And Judah said unto Simeon and Levi and unto all his brothers: Strengthen yourselves and be brave men, for the Lord our God is with us; fear them not! Stand up and arm yourselves with all the utensils of war, with bow and sword, and let us go to fight against those uncircumcised ones. The Lord our God he will save us! And they arose and put on their weapons great and small, eleven sons of Jacob and their servants with them. And all the servants of Isaac, that were in Hebron with Isaac, came to them likewise, girt with all the instruments of war. And the sons of Jacob with their servants marched against the kings, one hundred and twelve men in all and Jacob went along with them. And they sent unto Isaac the son of Abraham to Hebron, to Kirjath-arba, saying: Pray thou for us unto the Lord our God, to deliver us from the hands of the Canaanites, that are coming against us, and to give them into our hands. And Isaac the son of Abraham prayed unto the Lord in behalf of his children, saying: Oh Lord God, thou who hast assured my father Abraham, saying, I will multiply thy seed like the stars of heaven, and then didst promise unto me likewise and thou hast fulfilled thy word, now behold the kings of Canaan are all united, coming to make war against my children on whose hands there is no violence. And now, oh Lord God, the God of all the earth, pervert thou the counsel of these kings, so that they do not fight against my children. And wilt thou let the fear of my children enter the hearts of all these kings and of all their people, and humble their pride, that they may turn away from my children, and deliver my children and their servants with thy strong hand and outstretched arm, for in thine hands are power and strength to do all these things. And Jacob and his sons with all their servants went forth against the kings, trusting in the Lord their God. And as they went on, Jacob their father also prayed un to the Lord saying: Oh Lord, thou sublime and fearful God, who hast ruled from the earliest days even to this day and who will rule forever, thou who provokest war and who causeth it to cease and in whose hands are power and might to lift up and to cast down to the very ground, may my prayer be accepted unto thee that thou turn unto me in thy mercy, to put the fear of my sons into the hearts of the kings and their people, to terrify them and their armies, and to deliver by thy great mercy all those that trust in thee. For it is thou who subduest peoples under us and nations under our hands! And all the kings of the Amorites came and posted themselves in the field, in order to consult with their counselors what to do unto the sons of Jacob; for they were still afraid of them, saying: Two of them have slain the whole city of Shechem.
And the Lord had hearkened unto the prayers of Isaac and Jacob and he put great fear and terror into the hearts of all the advisers of these kings, and they said all, like with one mouth: Are you all foolish to-day and is there no reason within you to fight against the Hebrews, or do you de sire the death of all of you this very day? Behold two of them came unto the city of Shechem, without fear or terror, and slew all the inhabitants of the city, so that no man could stand against them, and how can ye undertake to fight against all of them? And do ye not know that their God hath great delight in them, performing wonderful things in their behalf, such as have not come to pass since the remotest days and the like of which none of the gods of other nations can bring about? Behold he delivered Abraham the Hebrew, their father, from the hands of Nimrod and all his people, who sought to slay him time and again; and from the fire, whereunto Nimrod had him cast, his God hath delivered him, and who is he that can do such things? And the very same Abraham hath slain the five kings of Elam, when they touched his relative who was dwelling in Sodom in those days. And he took his servant, the most faithful in his house and a few of his men and pursued the kings of Elam in one night and slew them all, and he recovered all the property of his relative which they took away from him. And surely you know that the God of these Hebrews takes great pleasure in them, and they take great pleasure in him, knowing that he hath delivered them from the hands of all their enemies. And through love to their God, Abraham took his only beloved son and was ready to offer him up as a burnt offering to his God. And were it not for God who prevented him from doing it, he should surely have done it through his love to God. And when the Lord saw his behavior he swore unto him, and he promised to deliver his sons and all his seed from all trouble that might befall them, because he hath done this thing, to stifle the compassion for his child through the love of God. And have you not heard what their God hath done unto Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and unto Abimelech, king of Gerar, when they took away Sarah, Abraham's wife, though he proclaimed her to be his sister for fear that they might kill him on her account; and though they had the intention of taking her to wife. God hath done unto them and their people all that you have heard of And behold, we ourselves have seen it with our eyes, that Esau, the brother of Jacob, came against him with four hundred men, resolved to slay him, when he recalled how Jacob had taken away from him his father's blessing. And he went to meet Jacob when he came from Padan-Aram, to smite the mother with the children, and who hath saved him from his hands? Verily, only this God in whom he trusted. He delivered him from the hands of his brother, and can he not deliver him now from the hands of his enemies?
And who knoweth it not that it was their God who hath given such valor to the sons of Jacob, to do unto the city of Shechem all the evil you have heard of? Could two men, with their own strength, smite a city large as Shechem was it not for their God in whom they trusted? Verily it is he by whose instrumentality they were enabled to slay all the inhabitants of that city. And now, albeit that you are all here united and have left your cities to make war against them, think ye to prevail over all of them, even if there came to your assistance thousand times as many as there are of you. For you must know and understand that it is not with them you have come to fight, but with their God who hath chosen them, you come to make war, and you will come to destruction this very day. Now therefore refrain from the evil which you are about to summon upon yourselves, and it will be better for you not to engage in a battle with them, though they be few in numbers; for their God is with them. And the kings of the Amorites on hearing the words of their counselors had their hearts filled with terror and they were afraid of Jacob’s sons, and they resolved not to fight against them. And unto the words of their advisers they inclined their ears and hearkened unto their voice, and their words found favor in the eyes of the kings and they concluded to do accordingly. And the kings returned and abstained from the sons of Jacob, being afraid to approach them and to make war against them for their hearts melted within them for fear, and this fear from the Lord came upon them, for he listened unto the prayers of Isaac and Jacob, and their trusting in him. And all these kings returned on that day with their armies, each one to his own city, without fighting against the sons of Jacob on that day. And the sons of Jacob maintained their position till the evening of that day, opposite Mount Sihon, and when they saw that the kings did not advance to fight with them the sons of Jacob returned to their dwelling place. At that time the Lord appeared unto Jacob, saying: Go unto Beth-el and remain there and erect there an altar to the Lord who appeared unto thee and who delivered thee, and all thy sons, from trouble. And Jacob arose with his sons and all belonging to him, and they went up and came to Beth-el according to the word of the Lord;
And these are the generations of Jacob born unto him in Padan-Aram. And the sons of Jacob were twelve. The sons of Leah were: The first born Reuben, and Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Zebulum, and Dinah their sister: And the sons of Rachel were: Joseph and Benjamin. And the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s maid-servant, were: Gad and Asher. And the sons of Bilhah were: Dan and Naphtali; these are the sons of Jacob which were born unto him in Padan Aram. And Jacob with his sons and all belonging to him journeyed further and came to Mamre, the same is Kirjath-Arba which is in Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac dwelt, and Jacob with his sons with all belonging to him dwelt with his father in Hebron. And his brother Esau and his sons, and all belonging ... to him went to the land of Seir and dwelt there, and had possessions in the land of Seir, and the children of Esau were fruitful and multiplied exceedingly in the land of Seir. And these are the generations of Esau that were born to him in the land of Canaan; and the sons of Esau were five. And Adah bare to Esau his first born Eliphaz, and she also bare to him Reuel. And Ahli bamah bare to him Jeush, and Yaalam and Korah. These are the children of Esau who were born to him in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Eliphaz the son of Esau were: Teman, and Omar, and Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz, and Amalex. And the sons of Reuel were: Nachath, and Zerach, and Shamah, and Mizzah. And the sons of Jeush were: Timnah, and Alva, and Jetheth. And the sons of Yaalam were: Alah, and Phinor, and Kenaz. And the sons of Korah were: Teman, and Mibzar, and Magdiel, and Eram; these are the families of the sons of Esau according to their dukes in the land of Seir. And these are the names of the sons of Seir the Horite, inhabitants of the land of Seir: Lotan, and Shobal, and Zibean, and Anah, and Dishon, and Ezer, and Dishan, seven sons. And the children of Lotan were: Hori, and Heman, and their sister Timna, that is Timna who came to Jacob and his sons, and they would not listen to her, and she went and became a concubine to Eliphaz the son of Esau, and she bare to him Amalek. And the sons of Shobal were: Alvan, and Manahath, and Ebal, and Shepho, and Onam. And the sons of Zibeon were: Ajah, and Anah, this is Anah who found the Yemim in the wilderness when he fed the asses of Zibeon his father. And it came to pass while he was feeding the asses of his father, driving them to the wilderness into pasture as heretofore, and approaching one of the deserts on the sea shore opposite the wilderness of the people, and be hold a very great storm came from the other side of the sea, and it rested over the asses in the pasture and they were stunned and stood still all of them. And after wards one hundred and twenty great and horrible animals emerged from the wilderness on the other side of the sea, and they came all to the place of the asses and stood there. And those animals were on their lower half after the shape of the sons of men, but the upper half of some were in the shape of bears and some in the shape of apes, and they had tails behind, hanging down from between the shoulders and sweeping the ground like the tails of the dochiphath.
And all those kings assembled and they came with their armies, a people very numerous, even like the sand on the sea shore, and they gathered themselves together before Tapuah. And Jashub king of Tapuah went forth with all his armies to meet them and they en camped outside of Tapuah. And all of those kings divided themselves into seven bands to go with seven ar mies against the sons of Jacob. And they sent a writ ing to Jacob and his sons saying: Come ye forth one and all that we face each other in the plain, for we de sire to take revenge on you for the people of Shechem whom you have slain, since you have returned once more to the city of Shechem to dwell therein and to slay its inhabitants as heretofore. And when the sons of Jacob heard this their anger was kindled at the words of those kings. And ten of Jacob's sons arose and each of them put on his instruments of war, and with them one hundred and two of their servants all armed, and ready for the fight. And all these men, the sons of Jacob and their servants went to meet those kings. And Jacob their father was with them, and they posted themselves upon the hill of Shechem. And Jacob prayed to the Lord in behalf of his sons, and, lifting up his hands unto the Lord, he said: Oh Lord, thou art the Almighty God and our father, thou hast formed us and we are thy handiwork. I pray unto thee to deliver my sons through thy great mercy from the hands of their enemies, who have come this day to make battle with them, for in thy hands are power and might to deliver the few from the many. And give thou, oh Lord, to thy servant my sons, courage and strength to fight with their enemies and to overpower them and let their enemies fall down before them, so that my sons and their servants may not perish by the hands of the sons of Canaan. And if it pleaseth thee to take the lives of my sons and their servants, then let it be done in thy great mercy, through the hands of thy angels, but let them not die by the hands of the kings of the Amorites. And when Jacob had finished his prayer, the earth was shaken from its place, and the sun was darkened, and all these kings were frightened and great terror came over them. For the Lord listened to Jacob’s prayer, and the Lord put the fear and terror of the sons of Jacob into the hearts of all the kings and their armies. And the Lord caused them to hear the noise of mighty chariots and horses and the war cry of a great army coming with the sons of Jacob. And great consternation seized those kings and while they kept their position the sons of Jacob approached them with an hundred and two men amidst terrible shouting.
And when these kings saw the sons of Jacob advancing upon them, their hearts were filled with additional fear, and they thought of returning as heretofore, without fighting against the sons of Jacob. But they did not turn back, saying: It would be a great shame for us to retreat for the second time. And when the sons of Jacob came quite near to these kings and their armies, they saw a great multitude even like the sand of the sea. And the sons of Jacob called upon the Lord, saying: Oh Lord help us and answer us for in thee alone do we trust, and let us not perish by the hands of these uncircumcised ones who have come upon us this day. And the sons of Jacob armed themselves with their instruments of war, and each man took in his hand shield and lance and they approached to fight. And Judah with ten of his men | ran first before his brothers and he went to meet these kings. And Jashub king of Tapuah, went forth first with his army against Judah. And when Judah saw Jashub with his army coming against him, Judah’s wrath was kindled and his anger was burning within him, and he advanced to fight, ready to give up his soul to die. And Jashub with all his army approached against Judah. And Judah was riding upon a mighty powerful horse. And Jashub was a very heroic man, and he was covered from head to foot with iron and with copper, and he shot arrows, with both his hands, forwards and backwards whilst sitting upon his horse, according to his manner in all his battles, and his arrows never missed the point he was aiming at. And when Jashub advanced against Judah, sending forth his ar rows against Judah the Lord bound Jashub’s hands, so that the arrows bounded upon his own men.
But Jashub continued advancing against Judah to slay him with his arrows, and there was between them only the distance of thirty cubits. And when Judah saw Jashub darting his arrows against him, Judah ran against him with all his wrath and might. And Judah took up from the ground a large stone weighing about sixty shekels, and he ran at Jashub and struck him on his shield with the stone. And Jashub was stunned by the blow and he fell from his horse to the ground. And the shield was torn off from Jashub’s hand and it sprang away by the severity of the blow to the distance of fifteen cubits, so that the shield fell before the second camp. And when the kings that came with Jashub saw from the distance the strength of Judah, Jacob’s son, and what he had done unto Jashub, they were greatly afraid of Judah. And they gathered around Jashub’s army, to terrify him, but Judah drew his sword and slew forty-two men of Jashub’s camp. And the whole camp of Jashub re treated before Judah and no man dared to stand against him, and they fled leaving Jashub prostrate upon the ground. And when Jashub saw himself deserted by all his men, he rose up in his terror and faced Judah in single combat, and they struck shield against shield. And Jashub took the spear into his hand to strike Judah upon his head, but Judah placed the shield quickly over his head so that his shield received the blow from Jashub’s spear, which cut the shield asunder. And when Judah saw that his shield was broken, he quickly drew his sword and struck Jashub on his ankles and he cut off both his feet, and Jashub fell upon the ground, and the spear fell from his hand. And Judah hastened and picked up Jashub’s spear, and he cut off therewith Jashub's head, and he cast it next to his feet. And when the sons of Jacob saw what Judah had done unto Jashub they ran all into the ranks of the other kings and they $ought with all the armies of Jashub and of the other kings. And the sons of Jacob slew of them fifteen thousand men, smiting them as if they were pomp kins, and the rest ran for their lives. And Judah was still standing over Jashub's body stripping him of his armor and of the iron and copper that was on him, when behold, nine of Jashub’s princes came to fight with Judah. And Judah took quickly a stone from the ground and he smote one of them upon the head, and his skull was fractured and his body also fell from the horse to the ground. And the remaining eight princes, seeing Judah’s strength, were greatly terrified and fled, but Judah with his ten men pursued them, and they overtook them and slew them. And meanwhile the sons of Jacob were still smiting the armies of the kings killing many of them, for there were some of the kings very bold and courageous, and they would not retreat from their places. And they cheered those of the armies that fled before the sons of Jacob, but none of them would listen unto their words, | for they were afraid of their lives, lest they die. And after having completely routed the armies of the kings, the sons of Jacob returned and came unto Judah; and Judah was still slaying the eight princes of Jashub and stripping them of their garments. And Levi saw Elon, king of Gaash, advancing against him with fourteen of his princes. And he came to smite Levi, but Levi knew it not. And when Elon came near Levi looked around himself, and behold he was to be attacked from the rear. And Levi ran with twelve of his servants and slew Elon and his princes with the edge of the sword.
And Ihuri, king of Shiloh, came to Elon’s assistance, and when he approached Jacob, Jacob took the bow which was in his hand and struck Ihuri with an arrow and killed him. And when Ihuri king of Shiloh was dead the other four kings retreated from their positions with the remainder of their princes, and they fled, saying: There is not strength in us to fight against the Hebrews after they have slain those three kings and their princes, so much more powerful than we are. And when the sons of Jacob saw the remaining kings retreating from their positions, they went in pursuit of them. And Jacob came likewise from his station on the hill of Shechem and went after them. And when the kings and their princes, with the remnants of their armies saw the sons of Jacob approaching, they were afraid of their lives, and they fled until they reached the city of Hazar. And the sons of Jacob pursued them to the very gates of the city, slaying of the kings and their armies about four thousand men, and while they were engaged in smiting the armies, Jacob with his bow aimed at the kings and slew them all. And he slew Parathon, the king of Hazar at the gates of Hazar, and afterwards also Susi king of Sarton, and Laban king of Beth-horin, and Shabir king of Machnaimah. And he slew them all with his arrows, only one arrow to each of them, and they died. And when the sons of Jacob saw that all the kings were dead and their armies routed, they still fought with the remaining men before the gates of Hazar killing of them over four hundred. And three men fell in that battle from the servants of Jacob. And when Jacob saw that three of his men were slain he was greatly grieved, and his wrath burnt within him against the Amorites. And all the men that were left of the armies of the kings were exceedingly afraid of their lives, and they ran and broke open the gates of the city, and they all entered the city to save themselves. And they kept themselves hidden in the city of Hazar for the city was very large and spacious. And when all of the armies had entered the city, the sons of Jacob followed them. But four powerful men, heroes skilled in warfare, came from the city and posted themselves at the entrance of the city with swords drawn and with spears in their hands, and they took their stand against the sons of Jacob and would not permit them to enter the city. And Naphtali ran against them and came between them and he slew two of them with his sword and he cut off their heads with one blow. And when he turned to the remaining men, and behold they had fled, he ran after them and overtook them and he slew them.
And then the sons of Jacob came into the city, and they found that the city had another wall around it. And they searched for the gate of that wall but they could not find it. And Judah jumped upon the top of the wall followed by Simeon and Levi, and all three descended from the wall into the city. And Simeon and Levi slew all the men that had escaped into the city for safety, and the inhabitants of the place with their women and children they slew likewise with the edge of the sword, so that the cries of the city reached the very heavens. And | Dan and Naphtali sprang upon the wall to see what caused such great crying, for they were in fears concerning their brothers, and they heard the inhabitants of the city crying and entreating: Oh, take all there is in the city and go away, only do not slay us! And when Judah and Simeon and Levi had finished smiting the inhabitants of the city, they scaled the wall and they called Dan and Naphtali that were on the wall, and the rest of their brothers, and Simeon and Levi informed them concerning the gates of the city, and all the sons of Jacob came to take the spoil. And the sons of Jacob took all the spoil of the city of Hazar, the flocks and the herds and all its wealth, and after taking captive all remaining therein, they went away from the city on that day. And on the second day the sons of Jacob went to Sarton, for they have heard that the men remaining in Sarton were assembling to battle with them because they had slain their king. And Sarton was a very high city and well fortified, and it had a deep rampart around the city and the depth of the rampart was about fifty cubits and its breadth forty cubits, and there was no place for a man to enter the city on account of the rampart. And when the sons of Jacob saw the rampart of the city they searched for an entrance into it, but they could not find it, for the entrance of the city was at the rear. And whosoever wished to enter the city had to come by that road and then go around the whole city in order to enter it. And when the sons of Jacob saw that they could not find an entrance to the city they were exceedingly wroth. And the inhabitants of the city were in great fear of the sons of Jacob, for they had heard of what was done by them to the city of Hazar. And the people of Sarton, could not go out to fight against the sons of Jacob even after they had assembled for that purpose, for fearth: while going out, the sons of Jacob might enter the city. So they hastily removed the bridge from the road to the city and brought it into the city before the sons of Jacob came. And when the inhabitants of the city went up to the top of the wall, and behold, the sons of Jacob were seeking the entrance, they taunted and cursed the sons of Jacob from the top of the wall.
And the sons of Jacob hearing their words, were greatly provoked, and they arose and jumped over the rampart in the force of their strength and they cleared the forty cubit breadth of the rampart. And passing the rampart, they stood under the wall of the city and all the entrances were closed by iron gates. And the sons of Jacob approached to break the doors open, but the inhabitants of the city kept them away, casting upon them stones and arrows from the top of the wall, and the number of people upon the wall was about four hundred. And when the sons of Jacob saw that the inhabitants of the city would not suffer them to open the gates they sprang and scaled the walls and Judah ascended first to the east of the city. And Gad and Asher followed him to the corner westward, and Simeon and Levi to the north and Dan and Reuben to the south. And when the inhabitants of the city that were upon the wall, saw the sons of Jacob coming up to them they fled, and descended the wall and concealed themselves in the city. And Issachar and Naphtali who had remained under the wall approached and broke into the city and kindled a fire at the gates thereof, and the iron melted, and the sons of Jacob with all their servants entered; and they fought with the inhabitants of Sarton and smote them with the edge of the sword; not one man could stand against them. And about two hundred men escaped and hid themselves in a tower which was in the city. And Judah followed them up and he destroyed the tower and the tower fell upon them and they all died. And the sons of Jacob ascended the way to the roof of that tower, and behold there was another tower at a distance in the city, high and strong and its top reaching into heaven. And the sons of Jacob descended hastily and went to that tower with all their men, and they found it filled with about three hundred men women and children. And the sons of Jacob smote those men in the tower in a fearful manner, and they ran away and fled from before them. And Simeon and Levi went in pursuit of them, when lo and behold, twelve powerful and heroic men came suddenly over them from the place where they had concealed themselves. And the twelve men kept up a strong assault upon Simeon and Levi and Simeon and Levi could not prevail against them. And those heroes shattered the shields of Simeon and Levi, and one of them struck Levi’s head with his sword. And Levi placed his hand quickly to his head, for he was afraid of the sword, and the sword struck Levi's hand and his hand was nearly cut off. And Levi seized upon the sword and took it from the man by force, and then he struck with it the head of the powerful man and severed it from the body.
And the eleven remaining men approached to fight against Levi when they saw that one of them was slain, and the sons of Jacob struggled but they could not prevail over those powerful men. And when the sons of Jacob saw this, Simeon uttered a powerful and tremendous shout and the eleven men were stunned on hearing that terrible shrieking of Simeon. And Judah, though at a distance, recognized the shouting of Simeon’s voice, and Naphtali and Judah ran with their shields to Simeon and Levi and they found them struggling with those powerful men, unable to prevail against them, for their shields were broken. And Naphtali seeing this took two shields from his servants, and brought them to Simeon and Levi. And Simeon and Levi and Judah, all three, fought on that day against the eleven mighty men, until sunset, but they could not prevail over them. And when this was told unto Jacob he was greatly grieved and he prayed unto the Lord, and he with his son Naphtali went against those powerful men. And Jacob came near them and he drew his bow and slew three of those men with his arrows, and the eight remaining ones turned backwards, and beheld that they were attacked in the front and in the rear, and they were in great fear of their lives, and seeing that they could not stand against the sons of Jacob they fled from before them. And in their flight they were met by Dan and Asher who fell upon them suddenly slaying two of them, and Judah and his brethren pursued the remainder and slew them. And the sons of Jacob slew all the inhabitants of the city of Sarton save the women and little ones. And all the inhabitants of Sarton were powerful men, one of them would pursue a thousand, and two of them would not flee before ten thousand of ordinary men. And the sons of Jacob took all the spoil of the city according to their desire, and they took flocks and herds and all the property of the city. And the sons of Jacob did unto Sarton and its inhabitants as they had done to Hazar and its people, and then they went their way.
And the sons of Jacob left the city of Sarton, and scarcely had they gone two hundred cubits when they met the inhabitants of Tapuach coming against them, who went forth to fight with them, because they had killed Jashub and all his men, and they were minded to recapture from the sons of Jacob all that they had taken from Hazar and Sarton. And the rest of the men of Tapuach fought with the sons of Jacob in that place and the sons of Jacob vanquished them and they fled from before them and the sons of Jacob pursued them into the city of Arbelan and all of them fell before the sons of Jacob. And the sons of Jacob turned upon Tapuach to take away the spoil of the city, and when they approached the city they heard that the people of Arbelan had gone forth to meet them in order to save the property of their brethren. And the sons of Jacob left ten of their men in Tapuach to plunder the city and they went against the inhabitants of Arbelan. And the men of Arbelan went forth with their wives to battle against the sons of Jacob, for their women were skilled in warfare, and they came out about four hundred men and women. And all the sons of Judah shouted with a terribly loud voice and they ran against the inhabitants of Arbelan with a great uproar. And when the people of Arbelan heard the terrible shouting of the sons of Jacob and their roaring like the voice of lions and the roaring of the sea, fear and terror filled their hearts and they were exceedingly afraid of the sons of Jacob; and they fled before them into the city, but the sons of Jacob pursued them to the gates and came over them even in the city. And the sons of Jacob fought with them in the city, and all the women were slinging stones at them and the combat was very hot between them until the evening of that day. And the sons of Jacob could not prevail, and they almost perished in the struggle when they called upon the Lord. And they soon gained strength and the sons of Jacob smote all the inhabitants of Arbelan with the edge of the sword, men women and children. For when the women saw that all their men were dead they ascended upon the roofs of the city, and cast stones upon the sons of Jacob, thick as rain, and therefore the sons of Jacob hastened and returned into the city, and smote all the women with the edge of the sword, and they took all the spoil, flocks, herds and cattle. And the sons of Jacob did unto Machanaimah even as they had done unto Tapuach, Hazar and Shiloh, and then they turned and went thence on their way.
And on the fifth day the sons of Jacob heard that the inhabitants of Gaash had assembled against them to battle, because they had slain their king and their princes. For they had fourteen princes in the city of Gaash, and the sons of Jacob had killed them all in the first encounter. And on that day the sons of Jacob put on their instruments of war, and they advanced to battle against the inhabitants of Gaash. And in Gaash lived a very powerful people, of the sons of the Amorites, and Gaash was a city stronger and more fortified than any of the cities of the Amorites, and it had three walls. And when the sons of Jacob came to Gaash they found the gates of the city locked, and about five hundred men standing upon the outer wall. And a numerous people, even like the sand upon the sea shore, lay in ambush for the sons of Jacob, outside of the city and in its rear. And when the sons of Jacob came near to open the gates of the city, behold, those people that lay in ambush in the rear of the city, came forth from their places and they surrounded the sons of Jacob, so that they were all in the midst of the people of Gaash and they were attacked from either side. And the men that stood upon the wall cast down upon them arrows and stones. And when Judah saw that the people of Gaash were too many for them he uttered a terrible and tremendous shout, and all the men of Gaash were frightened through the noise of Judah’s shrieking, and the strength of his shouting caused many to fall from the wall, and all those that were in the city and those outside thereof were in fear of their lives. And the sons of Jacob once more approached the gates of the city, and the men of Gaash cast upon them stones and arrows from the top of the wall, and made them to flee from the gate. And the sons of Jacob turned against those men of Gaash that were outside of the city and they smote them in a horrible manner, as if they were smiting against pumpkins, and none of them could stand against the sons of Jacob, for they were frightened and terrified by Judah’s shouting. And the sons of Jacob killed all those men that were outside of the city and then they attempted again to enter the city, and to fight under the walls of the city, but they succeeded not. For all the inhabitants of Gaash, that were in the city, had surrounded the walls on either side and the sons of Jacob could not come near the city to fight with them. And as the sons of Jacob approached one corner, to fight under the wall, the people threw upon them arrows and stones like a rain storm, and they fled from under the wall.
And when the people of Gaash saw that the sons of Jacob could not prevail, they taunted the sons of Jacob, saying: What hath happened to you in the war that you cannot succeed. Can you do to the mighty city of Gaash as you have done to the other cities of the Amorites which are less powerful? Verily to those feeble ones amongst us you could do those things to slay them in the gates of the city, for they had no strength, when you terrified them with your powerful shrieking, but will you be able to fight in this place? Verily here you must die all of you, and we will avenge on you the cause of the cities which you have destroyed. And the inhabitants of Gaash taunted the sons of Jacob greatly cursing their God, and still casting stones and arrows upon them from the wall. And when Judah and his brothers heard these words, their anger was greatly excited, and Judah became zealous of his God concerning that matter and he called out saying: Oh Lord help us and our brethren. And he ran from the distance, sword in hand, and by reason of his great strength he sprang from the ground and mounted the wall and his sword fell from his hand. And Judah shouted tremendously upon the wall, so that many of the men that were upon the wall were terrified, and fell down from the wall and died, and those remain ing upon the wall, seeing Judah’s strength were greatly afraid of their lives and they fled into the city to save themselves. And some of them, seeing that Judah had no sword, became emboldened and they approached to slay him and to throw him from the wall to his brothers. And twenty men of the city came to their assistance, and they surrounded Judah, shouting at him and coming near him with drawn swords. And Judah became terrified and he cried out to his brothers from the top of the wall. And Jacob and his sons drew the bows from under the wall and slew three men upon the top of the wall. And Judah continued crying, and he exclaimed: Oh Lord help us, oh Lord save us. And his loud crying upon the wall was heard at a great distance. And after thus crying, Judah shouted once more and the men around him were greatly terrified at Judah’s voice, and they threw away the swords from their hands and fled. And Judah seized the swords which they had thrown away and he fought with them and slew twenty of their men that were upon the wall. And about eighty men and women ascended the wall, surrounding Judah; but the Lord filled their hearts with fear of Judah and they dared not approach him.
And when the people upon the wall saw that twenty of their men were dead, they rushed all toward Judah with their drawn swords, but they could not approach him for fear of his great strength. And one of the most powerful men, by the name of Arud came near striking with his sword at Judah’s head, but Judah placed his shield quickly against his head and the sword struck the shield and flew in twain. And the powerful man, after having struck Judah, ran for his life, and he slipped and fell from the wall amongst the sons of Jacob under the wall, and the sons of Jacob smote him and killed him. And Judah’s head pained him from the blow of that heroic man, and he was nearly dead from that blow. And Judah cried out in the agony of his pain, and when Dan heard him his anger kindled within him. And Dan also took a run from the distance and sprang from the ground upon the wall with his great strength and burning wrath. And when Dan mounted the wall all the men upon it that surrounded Judah fled hastily, and ascended the second wall, throwing stones and arrows at Judah and Dan from the second wall, in order to drive them away. And the arrows and stones struck Dan and Judah, and they were almost slain upon the wall, and whithersoever they turned they were attacked by stones and arrows from the second wall. And Jacob and his sons were still at the entrance of the city, under the first wall, but they could not use their bows against the people of the city, for they could not be seen by them from the second wall. And when Dan and Judah saw that they could no longer stand the attack of the stones and arrows from the second wall, they both jumped over to the top of the second wall. And when the people of the city, upon the second wall, saw that Dan and Judah were amongst them they cried out in their fear and descended between the walls. And Jacob and his sons heard the shouting from the people of the city, and they were in great anxiety concerning Dan and Judah on they second wall, whom they could not see. And Naphtali went with his strength, excited by wrath, and he jumped upon the first wall, to ascertain the cause of that great shouting heard from the city. And meantime Issachar and Zebulun approached to break the doors of the city, and they opened the gates and entered the city. And Naphtali sprang from the first wall to the second wall and came to his brothers' assistance. And when the people of Gaash, that were upon the second wall, saw that Naphtali was the third one who had come to assist his brothers, they fled and descended into the city,
and Jacob with all of his young men came over them in the city. And Judah and Dan and Naphtali also descended from the wall into the city and they pursued the inhabitants of the city. And when the inhabitants of the city had all descended, the sons of Jacob came over them from all sides, and being surrounded and attacked from front and rear, the sons of Jacob smote them terribly, and they killed of them about twenty thousand men and women; not one could stand against the sons of Jacob. And the blood flowed terribly through the city even like a brook of water, and it flowed out of the city reaching the desert of Beth horin. And when the people of Beth-horin saw at the distance the blood flowing from the city of Gaash, seventy of their men ran to see the blood, and they reached the place whence it had come. And they traced the blood to the walls of the city of Gaash, and they saw the blood issuing from the city and they heard the terrible crying from the inhabitants of Gaash which ascended unto heaven, while the blood was always increasing and flowing like a brook of water. And the people said: Verily that is the work of the Hebrews who are still waging war against all the cities of the Amorites. And these men ran back hastily to Beth horin grasping their weapons and crying out to the inhabitants of Beth-horin to girt on their instruments of war and to come and fight against the sons of Jacob. And when the sons of Jacob had finished smiting the people of Gaash, they marched through the city to take spoil from the slain. And when they came into the heart of the city they were met by three mighty men who had no swords in their hands. And one of those three men seized upon Zebulun, whom he saw to be a lad and of small stature, and dashed him against the ground with all his might. And Jacob ran to him with his sword and smote him below the loins cutting him in twain, and the body fell upon Zebulun. And the second of those powerful men approached Jacob to fell him to the ground, but Jacob turned and shouted at him, and Simeon and Levi came and smote him upon the hips with their swords and felled him to the ground. And the powerful man rose from the ground with all his might excited by wrath, but ere he stood upon his feet Judah came and struck him with his sword over the head, and his skull was split and he died. And when the third powerful man saw that his companions were slain, he ran away from the sons of Jacob. And the sons of Jacob pursued him through the city,
And the sons of Jacob were greatly afraid of those men, for they had never tried to fight in the dark, and they were greatly terrified. And the sons of Jacob cried unto the Lord, saying: Oh Lord grant us thy help and deliverance, that we should not die by the hands of these uncircumcised ones. And the Lord heard the prayer of the sons of Jacob, and he caused great terror and confusion to possess the people of Beth-horin, and they fought in the darkness of night one against the other, and they slew one another in great numbers. And when the sons of Jacob ascertained that the Lord hath caused a spirit of confusion to come among those men and that they were fighting among themselves, each one against his neighbor, they passed out from among the ranks of the people of Beth-horin, and they descended the heights and marched on even further, and they rested there securely that night with all their young men. And the men of Beth-horin kept on fighting all night one against his brother and one against his neighbor, and they were crying aloud all over the height, so that the noise was heard at a distance and the earth shook at their shouting, for they were more powerful than any other people of the earth; and all the inhabitants of the cities of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Hivites, and all the kings of Canaan as well as those dwelling on the other side of the Jordan, heard the terrible shouting on that night, and they said: Verily, those are the battles of the Hebrews which they are fighting with the seven cities that approached them, and who can stand up against these Hebrews? And all the inhabitants of Canaan, and all those dwelling on the other side of the Jordan were greatly afraid of the sons of Jacob,
for they said: Behold, as they have done to these cities they may do also unto us, for who can withstand their exceeding strength ? And the great shouting of the Horinites in that night grew always louder, and they smote each other until morning, and a great many of them were slain. And in the morning at the dawn of day, the sons of Jacob rose up and ascended the height and they smote the remaining ones of the Horinites in a terrible manner, and they were all killed upon the height. And on the sixth day the people of Canaan saw from the distance all the in habitants of Beth-horin slain and scattered about upon the height like so many dead lambs and goats. And the sons of Jacob went to Beth-horin and they found the city full of people, even like the sand of the sea, and they fought them, and the sons of Jacob smote them until evening. And the sons of Jacob did unto Beth horin as they had done to Tapuach, and to Gaash, and to Hazar and to Sarton and to Shiloh, and they took the spoil of Beth-horin together with the spoils of the other cities, and they went back to their place in Shechem on that day. And the sons of Jacob had reached their home in the city of Shechem on the sixth day, and they remained outside of the city, resting themselves from the fight, and they tarried there that night. And all their servants, and all the spoils taken from the cities they left outside of Shechem, for they said: Perhaps there are some other ones yet to come and fight against us, to besiege us in Shechem. And Jacob with his sons and their servants, remained on that day and on the day following, in the section of the field which Jacob had bought from Hamor for five shekels, and all their spoil was with them, abundant like the sand of the sea shore. And all the inhabitants of the land saw them from the distance, and they were all afraid of the sons of Jacob after they could do these things, the like of which no king had ever done since times of yore. And the seven kings of the Canaanites concluded to make peace with the sons of Jacob, for they were in great fear of their lives. And on the same day, which was the seventh day, Japhia king of Hebron sent secretly his messengers to the king of Ai, and to the king of Gibeon, and to the king of Shalem, and to the king of Adulam, and to the king of Lahush, and to the king of Hazar, and to all the Canaanitish kings that were under their hands, say ing: Come up to me that we go to the sons of Jacob and I will make with them a covenant of peace, lest your lands will be made waste by their swords, as it hath been done with the city of Shechem and the surrounding cities of which you have heard and seen. And if you come to me do not come with many men, but let each of the kings come with three of his chief princes and with every prince three of his servants. And come all of you to Hebron and we will go together to the sons of Jacob, and entreat them to establish with us a covenant of peace. And all these kings did according to the message of the king of Hebron, for they were all subject to his power and order, and all the kings of Canaan assembled to go to the sons of Jacob, and to make peace with them. And the sons of Jacob returned into the section of the field before Shechem, for they did not trust in the words of the kings of the land. And the sons of Jacob tarried ten days in the portion of the field, but no one came to make war against them, and when they saw that there was no probability of war, they assembled and returned into the city of Shechem. And the sons of Jacob dwelt in Shechem. And all the kings of the Amorites assembled at the end of forty days from all their places, and they came to Japhia king of Hebron. And the kings that came to Hebron, to make peace with the sons of Jacob, were twenty-one kings, and the num ber of princes that came with them was sixty-three and their men one hundred and eighty-nine, and all of them camped upon Mount Hebron, and the king of Hebron met them with three princes and nine men, and these kings concluded to go to the sons of Jacob to make peace with them. And they said unto the king of Hebron: Go thou, with thy men before us, and speak in our behalf unto the sons of Jacob, and we will come after wards and submit to thy words. And the king of Hebron did so. And when the sons of Jacob heard that all the kings of Canaan had assembled themselves and camped in Hebron, they sent four of their servants as spies, saying: Go ye and spy those kings and observe and examine their men, whether they be few or many, and if they be few in numbers then count them all and return unto us. And the servants of Jacob went in secrecy unto those kings, and did as they were commanded by the sons of Jacob. And they returned on the same day, saying: We have come unto those kings and they are but few in numbers, and we counted them and there are of them only two hundred and eighty-six, the kings and their men. And the sons of Jacob said: If they are only few in numbers then we will not go out to them all of us. And in the morning the sons of Jacob arose and they selected sixty-two of their men and ten of Jacob’s sons went forth with them. And they girt on their instruments of war, for they said: They are coming to battle with us, as they knew not that they came to sue for peace.
And the sons of Jacob with their servants went to the gates of Shechem to meet those kings, and Jacob their father was with them. And when they came forth from the city, behold the king of Hebron with three of his princes and nine men came up the road towards the sons of Jacob; and the sons of Jacob lifted up their eyes and they saw from the distance Japhia, king of Hebron, with his princes coming against them. And the sons of Jacob posted themselves on the place of the gates of Shechem and did not advance. And the king of Hebron continued coming nearer to the sons of Jacob, he and his princes, until they had reached them, and he and his princes bowed down to the ground before the sons of Jacob, and the king of Hebron and his princes seated themselves before Jacob and his sons, and the sons of Jacob said unto him: What hast thou with us, oh king of Hebron; wherefore comest thou unto us to-day, and what desirest thou of us? And the king of Hebron said unto Jacob: I pray thee, my lord, all the kings of the Canaanites have come unto thee to-day to sue for peace. And when the sons of Jacob heard these words they would not incline to them, for they had no faith in his words, for they imagined the king of Hebron spoke unto them with deceit. And the king of Hebron noticed in the words of Jacob's sons that they believed him not and he drew nigh unto Jacob, saying: I pray thee, my lord, but verily these kings came for peace unto you, for they did not come with all their men, nor have they any weapons upon their per sons, as they came to sue for peace of my lord and his sons. And the sons of Jacob replied unto the king of Hebron, saying: Send thou thy messengers that those kings come before us alone and if they appear without instruments of war then we will be convinced that they have come for peace. And Japhia dispatched one of his men, and all the kings came before the sons of Jacob, and they bowed down before the sons of Jacob to the ground and they seated themselves before Jacob and his sons and they spoke unto them, saying: We have heard of all that ye have done unto the kings of the Amorites, with your strong swords and with your powerful arms so that no man could stand against you and we were in great fear of you for our lives lest we fare like unto them, and therefore we have come unto you to establish a covenant of peace between us. And now do grant us such a covenant of peace and of truth that you will not touch us even as we have never touched you. And the sons of Jacob knew now beyond doubt that they came to sue for peace, and the sons of Jacob hearkened unto them and they formed a treaty of peace with them. And all the sons of Jacob swore unto them never to touch them and all the kings swore likewise to the sons of Jacob. And the sons of Jacob made them their subjects from that day on.
And afterwards these kings appeared before Jacob with their men, and gifts were in their hands for Jacob and his sons, and they bowed down to the ground before Jacob and his sons. And these kings urged the sons of Jacob and entreated them to restore to the seven cities of the Amorites all the spoil they had taken from them. And Jacob’s sons did so, and they returned all the captives and all the spoil they had taken, and they sent them away and each returned to his city. And the kings bowed down once more before Jacob and his sons and they gave them many more gifts in those days. And the sons of Jacob sent away these kings and their men and they left in peace for their cities, and Jacob and his sons returned likewise unto their place in Shechem. And from that day on there was peace between the sons of Jacob and the kings of the Canaanites, until the children of Israel came into Canaan to inherit it.
The sin of not honoring his mother was greater than the sin of not honoring his father, since people would curse the belly of a woman such as Rebeccah who had produced an Esau. Nachmanides already pointed out that the Torah does mention the death of Deborah, Rebeccah's nursemaid, whereas it does not mention the death of Rebeccah herself; this was to prevent people from cursing the mother who had given birth to an Esau. Nachmanides believes that to report Rebeccah's death might have been in bad taste, seeing that her favorite son could not attend her funeral whereas her other son Esau hated her. Rebeccah's husband Isaac was blind at the time of her death and could not perform the last rites on her. It would have been insulting to Rebeccah's memory to have the Torah mention that she had to be buried by the local Hittites. Nachmanides claims to have found something along these lines in Devarim Rabbah on Parshat Ki Tetze. Rebeccah was buried at night in order to save her embarrassment because her next of kin did not bury her. This is why Jacob named the tree אלון בכות, (plural instead of בכיה, which would have suggested weeping only for the death of Deborah). [I have not found this Midrash where it is supposed to be. Rabbi Chavell attributes this statement to a Tanchuma. Ed.] In view of these commentaries, we must understand the vision Jacob had at that time as a visit by G–d to Jacob in his capacity as a mourner; G–d simply visited him to console him over the loss of his mother Rebeccah. Knowledge of the fact that Esau was the only one who attended Rebeccah's funeral would cause people to consider Rebeccah as a source of curses. The Torah's main purpose was certainly not to confer honour on Deborah. This is what the allusions in our verse are all about. Thus far Nachmanides. [Actually there is more in Nachmanides. Ed.]We thus find that though G–d's blessing of Jacob-Israel in 35,11 includes a very important prophecy, and accords Israel a hitherto unattainable level of spiritual achievement; conversely it also alludes to a penalty that he will incur as a result of the circumstances surrounding the death of his mother.
את מספר ימיך אמלא, “I will let you enjoy the full number of days of your lives.” You will die at a ripe old age, ready to do so as was described at the death of Avraham and Yitzchok [Genesis 25,8 and Genesis 35,29. Ed.] Concerning the lifetime of the wicked, Solomon quotes G-d as saying: ושנות רשעים תקצורנה, “but the years of the wicked will be shortened;” (Proverbs 10,27).
ויקברו אותו יצחק וישמעאל בניו , “and his sons Yitzchak and Ishmael buried him.” Seeing that Ishmael was the senior of the brothers, the Torah should have mentioned his name first. The fact that the Torah did not do so shows that our sages were correct when they said (Baba Batra 16) that Ishmael had become a penitent while Avraham was still alive and that he had acknowledged Yitzchak’s status as Avraham’s major descendant. When Yitzchak died, the Torah writes: “Esau and Yaakov his sons buried him” (Genesis 35,29). Clearly, the contrast between what is written here and what is written there must tell us something, seeing Esau was a non-penitent firstborn born of the same mother as had given birth to Yaakov. Though he had “sold” his birthright, the Torah still lists Esau there as the elder brother.
OLD AND FULL OF YEARS. He witnessed the fulfillment of all the desires of his heart and was sated with all good things. In a similar sense is [the verse written in connection with Isaac’s life], and full of days, (Further, 35:29.) which means that his soul was sated with days, and he had no desire that the future days should bring something new. This is as it is said of David: And he died in a good old age, full of days, riches and honor. (I Chronicles 29:28.) This is a story of the mercies of the Eternal (Isaiah 63:7.) towards the righteous ones, and of their attribute of goodness by virtue of which they do not desire luxuries, just as it is said of them, Thou hast given him his heart’s desire, (Psalms 21:3.) and not as it is said of other people, He that loveth money shall not be satisfied with money, (Ecclesiastes 5:9.) and as the Rabbis have commented thereon: (Koheleth Rabbah 1:34.) “No man leaves the world having amassed half of his desires. If he has a hundred, he desires two hundred. If he succeeds in acquiring two hundred, he desires to make of it four hundred, as it is said, He that loveth money shall not be satisfied with money.” (Ecclesiastes 5:9.) In Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis have said: (62:3.) “The Holy One, blessed be He, shows the righteous in this world the reward He is destined to give them in the Coming World, and their souls become full and they fall asleep.” (I.e., they die without pain.) The Sages were stirred by this and they explained the verse which says, and full of years, with this vision [of the reward that G-d shows the righteous before they die].
AND DEBORAH REBEKAH’s NURSE DIED. I do not know why this verse has been placed between the verse, And he called the place El-beth-el (Verse 7 here.) and the following verse, And G-d appeared to Jacob again. (Verse 9 here.) Scripture thus interrupts one subject which occurred at one time and in one place for when Jacob came to Luz, that is Beth-el, (Verse 6 here.) he built an altar there and he called the place El-beth-el, (Verse 7 here.) and G-d appeared to him there and He blessed him. (Verse 9 here.) Why then was this verse concerning Deborah’s death placed in the midst of one subject? A feasible answer is that which our Rabbis have said, (Bereshith Rabbah 81:8.) namely that the verse alludes to the death of Rebekah, and therefore Jacob called the name of that place, Alon-bachut (the oak of weeping), for the weeping and anguish could not have been such for the passing of the old nurse that the place would have been named on account of it. Instead, Jacob wept and mourned for his righteous mother who had loved him and sent him to Paddan-aram and who was not privileged to see him when he returned. Therefore G-d appeared to him and blessed him, in order to comfort him, just as He had done to his father Isaac following the death of Abraham. (Above, 25:11.) With reference to both of them the Sages have said (Sotah 14 a; Bereshith Rabbah 82:4.) that He gave them the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners. Proof for this is that which is said below, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, (Verse 27 here.) for had Rebekah been there, Scripture would have mentioned “unto his father and unto his mother” for it was she who sent him. to Paddan-aram and caused him all the good, for Isaac commanded him to go there at her advice. Now Rashi commented: “Because the time of her death was kept secret in order that people might not curse her — the mother who gave birth to Esau — Scripture also does not make mention of her death.” This is a Midrash of the Sages. (Tanchuma Ki Theitzei 4.) But neither does Scripture mention the death of Leah! Instead, we must say that the intent of the Sages was to explain why Scripture mentions Rebekah’s death by allusion, connecting the matter with her nurse. Since Scripture did refer to it, they wondered why the matter was hidden and not revealed. And the justification for the curse stated by Rashi is not clear since Scripture mentioned Esau at the death of Isaac, And Esau and Jacob his sons buried him. (Verse 29 here.) It is, however, possible to say that Rebekah’s death lacked honor, for Jacob was not there, and Esau hated her and would not attend; Isaac’s eyes were too dim to see, (Above, 27:1.) and he did not leave his house. Therefore, Scripture did not want to mention that she was buried by the Hittites. I found a similar explanation in Eileh Hadvarim Rabbah, (I found this not in Midrash Rabbah but in Tanchuma Ki Theitzei, 4.) in the section of Ki Theitzei Lamilchamah, (Deuteronomy 21:10.) where the Sages say: “You find that when Rebekah died, people said, ‘Who shall go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac is confined to the house and his eyes are dim. Jacob is gone to Paddan-aram. If wicked Esau shall go before her, people will say, “Cursed be the breast that gave suck to this one.’” What did they do? They took out her bier at night. Rabbi Yosei bar Chaninah said, ‘Due to the fact that they took out her bier at night the Scriptures mentioned her death only indirectly. It is this which Scripture says, And he called its name Alon-bachut, two weepings, [one for Deborah and one for Rebekah]. Thus Scripture says, And G-d appeared unto Jacob… and blessed him. (Verse 9 here.) What blessing did He give him? He gave him the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners.’” Thus far the Midrash. Now because Esau was the only one present at her burial, they feared the curse, and they did not view the burial as an honor to her, this being the significance of the Scriptural hint. Deborah was in Jacob’s company because after accompanying Rebekah to the land of Canaan, she had returned to her country, and now she was coming with Jacob in order to see her mistress. It may be that she was engaged in raising Jacob’s children out of respect for Rebekah and due to her love for her, and thus she resided with him. Now it is possible that she is not “the nurse” of whom it is said, And they sent away Rebekah their sister, and her nurse, (Above 24: 59.) but that she was another nurse who remained in the house of Laban and Bethuel, and now Jacob brought her with him to support her in her old age out of respect to his mother, for it was the custom among the notables to have many nurses. It is improbable that the old woman would be the messenger whom his mother had dispatched to Jacob [to have him return to the Land of Israel], as Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan would have it. (Mentioned by Rashi in this verse. A preacher in the city of Narbonne, Provence, France, who lived in the second half of the eleventh century, Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan, compiled a collection of Agadic material on the book of Genesis. The book itself, which had a great influence upon Rashi and other writers, has been lost except for the quotations made by other scholars.)
The Talmud states that Yishmael repented and became a righteous man (Baba Batra 16b), and the proof text for this is quite telling. The rabbis point to the fact that Avraham was buried by “Yitzchak and Yishmael” (Bereshit 25:9). This is compared to Yitzchak’s burial, which was performed by “Esav and Yaakov” (Bereshit 35:29). In the first case, the text lists the younger brother first, whereas in the second the older brother comes first. The rabbis extrapolate from the order of the names that by the time Avraham was buried, Yishmael recognized his own inferiority to Yitzchak. On the face of it, that does not make someone into a righteous man. One could be a murderer, a thief or all sorts of other things and still recognize the superiority of a Yitzchak. Apparently, however, this act of subordination is what determined Yishmael’s righteousness.
Genesis 35:1-29
Several brief notices round out Yaakov’s return to Canaan. First (vv.1–7) there is the return to Bet-El, where he builds an altar and has the “foreign” gods of his household people put away—thus fulfilling his promise in Chap. 28. This passage is built upon the Hebrew word El, God (related actually to an earlier Northwest Semitic name for a god). Apparently a second version of Yaakov’s name change is recorded in vv.9–15. As in the case of Avraham, seed and land are promised by God. The land can be given to him and “to your seed after you” only upon his return. Finally, spread out through the chapter are the accounts of three deaths: Devora, Rivka’s nurse (v.8—a veiled reference to Rivka’s own death?), Rahel (vv.16–20), and finally Yitzhak (vv.28–29). Yaakov’s youth is over, with the dramatic break with those close to him in that period.
ותמת דבורה, “Deborah died, etc.” Nachmanides writes that he does not know why this piece of information was included by the Torah at this point between Yaakov naming the site of the altar Beyt El, and the blessing G’d gave Yaakov when he added the name Yisrael to his previous name. Possibly, the reason was, as our sages suggest, that the news of Deborah’s death was meant to tell Yaakov that his mother Rivkah had died, and that this explains why Yaakov called the site of Deborah’s interment אלון בכות,”the oak of mourning.” Yaakov wept tears for his mother’s death when burying Deborah. He was especially saddened by the fact that he had not been granted a reunion with her after all these years. As soon as he had stopped mourning for his mother, G’d appeared to him and complimented him. (verse 9) Rashi claims that the reason why the precise date of Rivkah’s death has not been revealed was to prevent people to use that date to curse the womb that had produced a person as depraved as Esau, although the date when Leah died has also not been revealed by the Torah. The reason why the sages did not attribute any special reason to the omission by the Torah of the date on which Leah died, was that only the fact that the Torah made a point of mentioning when a servant of Rivkah died, without also at least telling us when her mistress died, calls for further investigation. Nonetheless this is not a good enough reason. The Torah did not omit reporting the death of Yitzchok who had sired Esau, but even reports that Esau partook in his father’s funeral. (Genesis 35,29) It is possible that the Torah omitted a direct report of Rivkah’s death and burial as it was not surrounded by honour, seeing that her son Yaakov did not attend the funeral and her son Esau hated her, and her husband Yitzchok who was practically blind, could not perform the rites, probably was even unable to leave his house. The Torah did not want to report that the Hittite neighbours of Rivkah had to bury her. This would have drawn attention to the lack of honour bestowed on her during her funeral.
[6] Once more there is Isaac to whom was granted the higher gift of self-learnt knowledge. He too abandoned all such bodily elements as had been interwoven with the soul, and is added and allotted to another company; but not this time, with the others, to a people, but to a ‘race’ or ‘genus,’ as Moses says (Gen. 35:29). For genus is one, that which is above all, but people is a name for many.
And from where do we derive that Ishmael repented in Abraham’s lifetime? From the incident involving Ravina and Rav Ḥama bar Buzi, who were sitting before Rava, and Rava was dozing while they were talking. Ravina said to Rav Ḥama bar Buzi: Is it true that you say that any death with regard to which the word gevia, expire, is mentioned is the death of the righteous? Rav Ḥama bar Buzi said to him: Yes. For example: “And Isaac expired [vayyigva], and died” (Genesis 35:29). Ravina objected: But with regard to the generation of the flood it states: “And all flesh expired [vayyigva]” (Genesis 7:21), and there they died for their wickedness. Rav Ḥama bar Buzi said to him: We say this only when both gevia and asifa, gathering, are used; when these two terms are mentioned together they indicate the death of a righteous person.
The Gemara asks: But perhaps the verse listed them in the order of their wisdom; that is to say, perhaps in fact Ishmael preceded Isaac but the Torah did not list them in that order. The Gemara answers: But if that is so, consider that the verse states: “And Esau and Jacob, his sons, buried him” (Genesis 35:29). What is the reason that the verse there did not list them in the order of their wisdom? Rather, since Ishmael allowed Isaac to precede him, it is clear that he made Isaac his leader, and since he made him his leader, learn from it that he repented in Abraham’s lifetime.
Yitzchok expired and died. He was gathered to his people old and in the fullness of days. His sons, Eisov and Yaakov buried him.
And Izhak expired and died and was gathered to his people, old and full of days, and Esau and Jakob his sons buried him.
| וְאֵ֛לֶּה תֹּלְד֥וֹת עֵשָׂ֖ו ה֥וּא אֱדֽוֹם׃ | 1 R | This is the line of Esau—that is, Edom. |
ואלה תולדות עשו, “and these are the descendants of Esau;” the prefix ו in the word: ואלה is to remind the reader that since the Torah had already listed the 12 sons of Yaakov, the time had come to list the descendants of Esau.
THE SAME IS EDOM. He is the father of Edom. (The Hebrew literally reads, he is Edom, which I.E., based on verse 9, interprets as, he is the father of Edom (Krinsky). Filwarg interprets it as, both Esau and his descendants are called Edom. Our verse teaches that Esau is Edom and verse 9 (which reads, Esau the father of the Edomites) that Esau’s descendants are called Edom.) Do not be surprised that Scripture here calls the daughter of Elon the Hittite whom Esau married Adah, while earlier it refers to her by the name of Basemath (Gen. 26:34), for she had two names. (See I.E.’s comments on Gen. 26:34.) We find the same with the mother of Abijah. (I Kings 15:2 and II Chron. 11:20 gives her name as Maacah; II Chron. 13:2 gives her name as Micaiah.) Indeed, Abijah himself (II Chron. 11:20) is called Abijam in the Book of Kings (I Kings 15:1) and Abijah in Chronicles (II Chron. 11:20). (According to Krinsky. For an alternate interpretation see Weiser and Cherez.) The Bible refers to them by two different names because both Abijah and his mother had two names each.
These are the names of Esau’s sons (v. 10) refers to his grandchildren. (Esau’s children are listed in verses 4 and 5, his descendants in verses 10-18. Hence the introduction to this list, viz., These are the names of Esau’s sons, must refer to his grandchildren. Krinsky suggests that there is a scribal error and that the reference is to And these are the generations of Esau in verse 9.)
הוא אדום, who is identical with Edom, etc. This statement is repeated three times in this paragraph. Seeing that G'd has sworn to destroy Edom the Torah had to tell us that Esau is identical with Edom. The Torah also mentioned the town where Esau lived in verse 8; according to Talmudic practice when a statement is not needed in the context in which it is written it may be applied to another context; in this instance the Torah means the town Esau lived in. In verse 19 the Torah also mentions the sons of Esau once more, identifying them with Edom to tell us that all of Esau's descendants will go up in flames at the time when the prophet's assurance (Ovadiah 18) that "Israel will become a flame and Esau the straw to be consumed" will materialise. The reason they are all included is that the Torah has described them all as Edom. All of this is hinted at in Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim 3,5 which describes that in the future Esau will wrap himself in a Talit and occupy a seat amongst the righteous. G'd, however, will remove him from there. Please read what I have written in this connection on verse 31.
ואלה...הוא אדום. Similar to על כן קרא שמו אדום, “this is why he called his name Edom in 25,30. This reference to Esau as Edom also occurs again in verse 8 of this chapter, i.e. עשו הוא אדום, “Esau is identical with Edom,” because the nation called after its founding father Esau is known as מלכות אדום, Kingdom of Edom. What the Torah means here is to alert us that the nation known today (whenever this portion is read) as Edom, was in reality descended from Esau. The Torah lists separately Esau’s descendants that were born to him while he still made his home in the land of Canaan, and those that were born after he had migrated to the land of Seir. The latter is the land G’d assigned to Esau as his inheritance.
Wenn in diesem Geschlechtsregister Namensverschiedenheiten in Vergleich mit anderswo Genannten vorkommen und solche Namensdifferenzen auch noch in andern historischen Teilen der Schrift sich finden, so wollen wir nur daran erinnern, wie wir ja schon bei den wenigen Gliedern des abrahamitischen Hauses eine verhältnismäßig sehr große Zahl von Doppelnamen finden: Abram, Abraham, Sarai, Sara; Esau, Edom; Jakob, Jisrael; Benjamin, Benoni; es kann daher auch nicht so sehr auffallen, wenn etwa Ada und Basmat identische Namen der Tochter Elons, Ahalibama und Jehudit etc. identisch wären.
ואלה תולדות, a reference to developments in the clan started by Esau, both in people, possessions and political influence. The word תולדות in this context is analogous to “מה ילד היום,” “what the day brings.” (Proverbs 27,1)
עשו הוא אדום, someone always addicted to realise all his material desires, satiate his lust. [the author interprets this as the justification for the Torah repeating this information which we had been given in already 25,30. Ed.] The overpowering desire of Esau for what attracted his eye was demonstrated when he could not remember the name “lentils” when he was tired, demanding to be given from “this red, red stuff.”
These are the descendants of Esau who is Edom. As mentioned earlier, Esau was nicknamed Edom after the red [ adom ] stew he requested from Jacob (25:25–30). Presumably, the name was also due to his red hair.
The Satan is Samael, his dominion is in the liver, about which it is stated: (Gen. 36:1) ... Esau is Edom. The veins of the liver are its hosts and camps, and the liver takes all the defilements and sins of the veins. It is this that is written: (Lev. 16:22) And the goat will carry upon it, all ‘their sins’ (’avonotam) , to an uninhabited land... ‘their sins’ is composed of ’avonot tam (sins-of the-perfect-one) , of that: (Gen. 25:27) perfect (tam) man Jacob – to an uninhabited (ge-zeirah) land (Lev. 16:22) – that place of: (Dan. 4:14) the decree (ge-zeirah) of the watchful-ones.
And of ‘the other side’, there is a candle of darkness of hell (gehinom) , and it has three colours. The colour red is the liver: (Gen. 36:1) ... Esau is Edom. The gall bladder is green, the spleen is the colour black, and of it is stated: (Gen. 27:1) ... and his eyes were dimmed from seeing...
Chapter (58) 59: Prophets [1] The vision of Obadiah. "Thus says the Lord God concerning Edom (Jeremiah 49:7): We have heard a report from the Lord, and a messenger has been sent among the nations: 'Rise up! Let us rise against her for battle!'" (Jeremiah 49:14). When Jacob, our father, saw the leaders of Esau, he became afraid and began to say, "Who can stand up against all of them, so many kings and leaders, and I am but one person? How can I stand up against all of them?" Then the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "Do not be afraid. Look at what is behind you." "These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph" (Genesis 37:2). "Who can stand up against all of them?" "The smallest one among your children." "And the House of Jacob shall be fire and the House of Joseph a flame" (Obadiah 1:18). It is compared to a goldsmith who was sitting and doing his work, and his disciple was with him. The disciple raised his eyes and saw many camels loaded with straw. He began to wonder and said to his teacher, "Who can stand up against all of them?" His teacher replied, "One spark from the furnace can burn them all." So the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Jacob, "Are you afraid of them? One spark from you can burn them all," as it is stated, "Behold, they shall be as stubble, the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame" (Isaiah 47:14). This refers to Joseph, as it is stated, "And the House of Joseph shall be a flame" (Obadiah 1:18). Therefore, "and he (Jacob) descended" (Genesis 36:1), the descent (interpreted as) the worst (possible scenario) that Jacob loses them all, and the descent of your children is combined against Esau. Even Obadiah, the lowest of all the prophets, takes revenge against Edom, as it is stated, "The vision of Obadiah. "Why has Yaakov descended?" (Obadiah 1:18)
And these are the generations of Aaron and Moses on the day that God spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai (Numbers 3:1). Anyone with whom the Omnipresent engages to establish a nation or a family tree from him, the Omnipresent would also engage with him to write generations in his regard, as you find twelve instances of generations in the verses. The first: “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 2:4); “this is the book of the generations of Adam” (Genesis 5:1); “these are the generations of Noah” (Genesis 6:9); “these are the generations of the sons of Noah” (Genesis 10:1): “these are the generations of Shem” (Genesis 11:10); “these are the generations of Teraḥ” (Genesis 11:27); “these are the generations of Ishmael” (Genesis 25:12); “Isaac” (Genesis 25:19); “Esau” (Genesis 36:1); “Jacob” (Genesis 37:2). These are ten generations with which the Holy One blessed be He engaged to create the world and to establish nations. And there are two people that the Omnipresent wrote their generationst, one for the royal dynasty and one for the priestly dynasty: “These are the generations of Peretz” (Ruth 4:18), to establish the royal dynasty from him, and “these are the generations of Aaron and Moses"(Numbers 3:1), for the priestly dynasty.
How thoroughly rifled is Esau, (Esau I.e., the Edomites, descendants of Jacob’s twin brother; cf. Gen. 36.1.) How ransacked his hoards!
These are the descendants of Eisov, also known as Edom.
These are the genealogies of Esau, who is called Edom.
| עֵשָׂ֛ו לָקַ֥ח אֶת־נָשָׁ֖יו מִבְּנ֣וֹת כְּנָ֑עַן אֶת־עָדָ֗ה בַּת־אֵילוֹן֙ הַֽחִתִּ֔י וְאֶת־אׇהֳלִֽיבָמָה֙ בַּת־עֲנָ֔ה בַּת־צִבְע֖וֹן הַֽחִוִּֽי׃ | 2 P | Esau took his wives from among the Canaanite women—Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah daughter of Anah daughter of Zibeon the Hivite (Hivite Cf. v. 20, “Horite.”) — |
עשו לקח את נשיו מבנות כנען וגו, “Esau had taken his wives from the daughters of the Canaanites, etc.;” here the Torah fails to mention the daughter of Beeri, although in Genesis 26,34 we have been told that Esau took Yehudit who was a daughter of Beeri, a Hittite as a wife. We must therefore assume that the reason she is not mentioned here is that she died without having provided Esau with any sons. All the sons mentioned in this chapter therefore must have been born by עדה בת אלון, who is identical with the wife called בשמת בת אלון, in Genesis 6,34 She had changed her name, just as had the daughter of Yishmael, which has now been called בשמת, whereas when she had first been introduced she had been called מחלת. (Compare 28,9.)
אהליבמה בת ענה, who according to Rashi is identical with יהודית. If you were to ask: is this not the יהודית בת בארי as we have been told in 26,34? How could she now have been the daughter of ענה? Moreover, if we deal here with a woman who was a bastard, why did Rashi not say that she was the combined product from these two fathers as he explained concerning ענה בת צבעון? We are forced to answer that בארי and ענה were one and the same person.
בת ענה בת צבעון. In this paragraph you find that ענה was a brother of צבעון, as is written: ושובל וצבעון וענה (and Shoval and Tzivon and Anah.” (verse 20.) You also find written in verse 24 that “these were the sons of Tzivon and Ayah and Anah;” this is what Rashi referred to that Tzivon must have slept with his own mother and from this carnal union Anah was born. In other words, he was both his son and his (half) brother. This is why the Torah wrote the unusual phrase: הוא ענה, “this is the Anah,” i.e. the one we have read about earlier. (Mentioned in verse 20) It is also possible to say that the meaning of the words בת ענה בת צבעון, really is that he was the grandson, that Tzivon was the grandfather. It is not unusual in the Torah for grandchildren being described as the children of their grandfather. Examples cited are: בת מטרד בת מי זהב, in verse 39 of our chapter. There is an opinion voiced in the Talmud Baba Batra folio 115, that ענה is not the name of a male but of a female because the Torah wrote successively: בת ענת בת צבעון, “daughter of Anat, daughter of Tzivon.” If you were to counter that earlier we have read about הוא ענה אשר מצא את הימים, “he was the Anah who discovered the species yemim,” so how could that have been a female? We would have to answer that she inherited in lieu of Ayah who was a male, and whose brother was a brother of Anah. The fact that “he” is not listed among the sons who founded or became leaders of thousands, i.e. alufim, would lend support to the opinion that we are dealing with a female who could not qualify for such a rank
AND OHOLIBAMAH THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH, THE DAUGHTER OF ZIBEON THE HIVITE. We find in our chapter a man called Anah who is the brother of Zibeon (v. 20). We further read that Zibeon had a son called Anah (v. 24). Our verse thus relates that Zibeon and his son Anah, or perhaps Zibeon and his brother Anah, slept with the same woman and the offspring did not know who their father was. (Hence the Bible lists two men, Anah and Zibeon, as being Oholibamah’s father.) However, it is also possible that Oholibamah was the daughter of Anah the son of Zibeon, and Scripture lists her as being the daughter of Anah and Zibeon in order to distinguish between Anah the son of Zibeon and Anah the brother of Zibeon. (Had Scripture merely said, “Oholibamah daughter of Anah” we would not know which Anah the Bible is talking about. Cherez explains that Scripture could state that Oholibamah was Zibeon’s daughter, when in fact she was his granddaughter because grandchildren are considered children.) Some say that our chapter speaks of a Korah the son of Adah (Verses 15 and 16 list the chiefs of the sons of Esau from his wife Adah, among them the chief of Korah. Thus Korah must be Adah’s son.) and Korah the son of Oholibamah. (In verse 14 it is related that Oholibamah bore Korah. Thus our chapter speaks of two Korahs.) However, I believe that both are one and the same person. Korah was the son of Oholibamah. The reason he is listed among the chiefs of Eliphaz (Adah’s son. See note 8.) is that he lived among them. It is also possible, since he was Oholibamah’s youngest son, that his mother died when he was still a child and that Adah raised him along with her own family and Scripture includes him with her children. Our case is similar to the five sons of Michal (II Sam. 21:8). (The five sons of Michal were really the children of Merab. Cf. San. 19b., “Michal bore these five children? Did not Merab give birth to them?” The Talmud answers, “Merab bore them but Michal raised them. Hence they are called her children.”) Korah thus became Adah’s son. Scripture similarly says that Amalek was a son of Adah (Verse 16 lists the chief of Amalek among the children of Adah. However, verse 12 states, And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek. Thus Amalek was the son of Timna, not the son of Adah.) because he was the son of the handmaid of her husband. (This comment presents a problem. Verse 12 state that Timna was Eliphaz’s concubine, not Esau’s concubine. Cherez posits a scribal error; i.e., in place of her husband, read her son. Weiser suggests that I.E. had a tradition that Timna was first Esau’s concubine and then Eliphaz’s concubine, hence I.E.’s statement, “concubine of her husband.” The Bible lists Amalek among Adah’s children because Adah helped raise him (Weiser).)
[CHIEF.] The meaning of alluf is a prince or chief. However, this is not the meaning of alluf (docile) (I.E. translates alluf as ox. Ke-kheves alluf does not mean like a great sheep, but rather like a lamb or like an ox.) in ke-kheves alluf (like a docile lamb) (Jer. 11:19). In the latter verse the caf prefixed to keves (lamb) also pertains to alluf; i.e., the verse is to be read as if written ke-kheves ke-alluf (like a lamb, like an ox). The latter is normal Hebrew usage, (It is normal Hebrew usage to place two cafs in succession, meaning like this or like that.) as can be seen in I went about as though it had been my friend (ke-re’a) or my brother (ke-ach) (Ps. 35:14).
Cf. v. 20, “Horite.”
עשו, these wives are not now described as having the names which had introduced them to the reader in 26,34 where they were called Yehudit and Bosmat. Each of these women was known by two names. This is a common occurrence throughout Scripture. Similarly, Tzivon had been introduced earlier as Beeri (26,34) and Bosmat in verse 3 of our chapter had previously been introduces as Machalat. (28,9)
ADAH THE DAUGHTER OF ELON. She is identical with Basmath the daughter of Elon, (Above, 26:34.) and she was called Basmath because she burned incense (besamim) to the idols. And Oholibamah, (mentioned here), is identical with Judith. (Above, 26:34.) In order to deceive his father, the wicked Esau changed her name to Judith (Jewess) to suggest that she had abandoned idol-worship.
עשו לקח את נשיו מבנות כנען, people who read the text carefully cannot help noting that when Esau’s wives’ names are mentioned for the first time in 26,34 they were referred to as יהודית בת בארי החתי and בשמת בת אלון החתי, as well as מחלת בת ישמעאל. In our paragraph no one by the name of בת בארי is mentioned at all, neither the woman’s name nor her father’s name. However אלון as well as ישמעאל the fathers of two of Esau’s wives have been mentioned here also. The names of the daughters have been inverted as happens in many instances. בשמת daughter of אלון is here referred to as עדה בת אלון whereas. It is therefore reasonable to assume that יהודית בת בארי died childless, whereas the other two wives of Esau bore children for him as is enumerated here. Esau took אהליבמה בת ענה בת צבעון החוי as a wife after his move to Seir, when he wanted to strengthen his political ties with the local inhabitants through intermarriage with them. This is why the Torah gave such a detailed account of Oholivamah’s genealogy. Timnah, concubine of Eliphaz, Esau’s firstborn, was also from the original inhabitants of the region of Mount Seir, The reasom why she is mentioned ast, is that the marriage of Esau to Oholivamah occurred last. Chronologically, she belonged to an earlier generation.
עדה בת אילון ADAH THE DAUGHTER OF ELON — She is identical with Basemath daughter of Elon (cf. 26:34) and she was called Basemath because she offered spices (בשמים) as incense to idols.
אהליבמה OHOLIBAMAH is identical with Judith. He (Esau) changed her name to Judith (Jewess), suggesting that she had abandoned idol-worship, so that he might deceive his father.
בת ענה בת צבעון THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH THE DAUGHTER OF ZIBEON — If she was the daughter of Anah she could not have been the daughter of Zibeon, for Anah was the son of Zibeon as it is said (v. 24) “And these are the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah”! Scripture thus tells us that Zibeon took his daughter-in-law, Anah’s wife, and of them twain Oholibamah was born (so that being a daughter of Anah’s wife she is called also his daughter). This text informs you that these were all of illegitimate birth (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev 1).
ואת אהליבמה בת ענה. She was a member of the tribe of the Chori. She became Esau’s entry card to the whole region of Mount Seir. This is why the Torah reports already in verse 8 that Esau now settled in Mount Seir. His own children and grandchildren subsequently wiped out all the other members of that tribe that had not intermarried with his descendants. This is the reason why the Torah repeats in verse 9 ואלה תולדות עשו אבי אדום בהר שעיר, to inform us obliquely that in the interval Esau had conquered all these people and that Timna became his son’s concubine. Esau’s descendants now became אלופים, “great chiefs.”
In order to mislead his father. Question: Why did Eisov not call Bosmas, [too,] by a good name in order to trick his father? In Parshas Toldos (26:34), it should have mentioned that name, if she had it. The answer is: Eisov indeed called her by another, non-idolatry name. But [in Parshas Toldos], Scripture itself calls her Bosmas, denoting idolatry. This is because Scripture goes on to say (27:1), “Yitzchok’s eyesight faded and he could not see.” Rashi there explains that this was due to the smoke of these wives [who burned incense to idols]. And if Scripture would have called her by a different name there, we would ask: Where do we find [any hint] that they burned incense [to idols]? Thus Scripture calls her by the name of Bosmas (incense), to indicate this. See there. (Maharshal) [You might ask]: Yehudis was the daughter of Be’eri the Chittite (26:34), while Oholivomoh was the daughter of Anoh the Chivite, [as it says here. How then could Rashi say that Yehudis and Oholivomoh are the same? The answer is:] Anoh and Be’eri is the same person with two names. Although Scripture connects him here to the Chivites and there to the Chittites, it is possible that his father was a Chittite, and his mother, a Chivite. You might ask: How does Rashi know that Yehudis is Oholivomoh? Perhaps Yehudis died, and Oholivomoh is another wife? Re’m answers: Because it is written, “Eisov took his wives,” rather than, “Eisov took wives.” This implies they were the same wives who were mentioned before.
Esau took his wives from the daughters of Canaan, as stated above (26:34–35): Ada, daughter of Eilon the Hitite, and Oholivama, daughter of Ana, daughter of Tzivon the Hivite.
“And Basemath daughter of Ishmael” [36:2]. Esau took a wife called Basemath, the daughter of Ishmael. Rashi asks a question here. We find that Esau took the daughter of Ishmael who was called Machlat and here she is called Basemath. The explanation is that there are three whose transgressions are forgiven. One is a convert who converts; all of their transgressions are forgiven. The second one is one who achieves greatness and leadership. The third one is when one takes a wife. That is why he called his wife Machlat, because his transgressions were forgiven.
The category of apostates (Minim) also includes the following: (See Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Teshuvah, Ch. 3 ibid.; Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1; Tamud Bavli, Sanhedrin 90a; Talmud Yerushalmi, Pe’ah 1:1; and elsewhere.) This category includes even a person who is only an apostate in regard to a single commandment and transgresses only that one commandment as an act of rebellion; or even if he only does so to satisfy his lust; and similarly, one who casts off the yoke of Heaven, meaning that he denies the fundamental truth of HaShem’s-יהו"ה existence and states that there is no God; and likewise, one who says that the Torah is indeed from Heaven, but “I cannot stand it,” meaning “I do not fulfill it;” or alternatively, one who says that the Torah is not from Heaven, even if he only is referring to a single verse, or a single grammatical aspect, such as missing letters or additional letters, or denies even one exegetical matter, such as a single Kal VaChomer or a single Gzeira Shava transmitted by our sages; Some also include those who deny the Oral Torah or matters that are established by the Sages; (Like Chanukah and Purim) This category also includes one who says that the resurrection of the dead is not from the Torah, meaning that it is not hinted at in the Torah, even though he believes both in the Torah and the resurrection of the dead; Also, one who interprets Torah falsely, such as Menasheh, who would expound the Torah scornfully and falsely, saying things like “There was no reason for Moshe to write the verse, (Genesis 36:2) ‘And Lotan’s sister was Timna,’” and the like; (Mishnah Avot 3:11; Sanhedrin 99b; Yoma 85b, and Rashi there.) Also, one who publicly violates the commandments of the Torah high-handedly, like Yehoyakim; (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 103b; Mishneh Torah, Teshuvah, Ch. 3 ibid.) One who abrogates the covenant of circumcision (Brit Milah), meaning that as an act of rebellion, he does not circumcise himself, or alternately, he stretches his foreskin to look uncircumcised; One who himself sins and also causes others to sin such as Yeravam, which even includes transgressing minor prohibitions; (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 107b) Also, infidels (Apikorsim), that is, those who treat a Torah scholar with contempt, to their faces; (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 99b) and also one who sits before his master and says, “this thing is forbidden,” or “this thing is permissible,” in the form of a statement, rather than in the form of a question; Also one who ridicules his master when he expounds something that seems to be an exaggeration, and he does not believe his words; Also one who treats Torah scholars with contempt, even not to their face, such as those who say “Those Rabbis…” in a degrading manner, or similarly, those who say, “With what have the Rabbis benefited us? They read the Torah for their own benefit, and study the Mishnah for their own benefit etc.,” (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 99b ibid.) or like those who say, “With what have the Rabbis benefited us? Never have they permitted a raven for us, nor have they prohibited a dove for us.” (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 100a – That is, they say, “Of what benefit is their Torah study, if they merely tell us matters explicitly stated in Torah.” (Rashi)) Also included is one who addresses his master by name, and does not respectfully address him as “my master and teacher;” Likewise, one who disgraces his fellow before a Torah scholar; and those who betray others to the Gentile authorities, whether they turned a Jew into the hands of the Gentile authorities to be beaten, or whether they only betrayed him monetarily to the Gentile authorities; Likewise, a communal leader who imposes excess fear upon the community out of pride, rather than for the sake of the Name of HaShem-יהו"ה; (See Talmud Bavli, Rosh HaShanah 17a) One who disgraces the Festivals, in that he intentionally performs labor during Chol HaMo’ed as a show of disgrace and that he does not believe that it is forbidden, rather than for personal benefit; (Mishnah Avot 3:11) One who publicly embarrasses his fellow in his presence; One who derives honor from the shame of his friend, and it seems to me, that this too is if it is his presence; One who reads extraneous literature, such as the book of Ben Sira and the books of Ben La’anah, which are nonsensical books that draw a person’s heart and cause him to neglect his Torah study; (The indication by the commentaries is that these are books that were written by apostates in the style of Torah, and other books of that nature, which may lead the reader to think that they are Torah, yet they are not Torah, and are completely contrary to Torah.) The same applies to books of apostacy, such as those of the priests and ministers of the nations; However, books such as that written by Homer (The indication by the commentaries is that this refers to literature that is like that of the Greek writer and poet Homer, which are either clearly known fiction or the natural scientific wisdoms of the nations, and are considered mundane, like one who reads a letter, and are thus not in this same category of grave transgression as the false and misleading literature mentioned before. They therefore are not cause for loss of the coming world, as with the prior category. Even so, as the Talmud there concludes citing King Solomon (Eccl. 12:12), “Beyond these my son, be warned,” – “They are given to develop reason, but not for toiling in.”) and other similar books, are considered to be mundane, and are as if he is merely reading a correspondence, as stated in the Jerusalem Talmud; (Talmud Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 10:1) One who whispers incantations over an injury, or even if he recites a verse over it and spits, (Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1; Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 90a) irrespective of whether it is the verse, (Exodus 15:26) “I will not bring any of the diseases upon you,” or whether it has any other mention of illness, healing, or the Name of Heaven, but even if it is a verse such as, (Leviticus 1:1) “HaShem-יהו״ה called to Moshe etc.”; (Mishneh Torah, Avodah Zarah 11:12; Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De’ah 179:8) One who pronounces the Name HaShem-יהו״ה according to its letters outside the Temple, (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 101b) which the Jerusalem Talmud (Talmud Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 10:1 – His title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י) explains means that he does not mention Him by His title, in accordance to the verse, (Exodus 3:15) “This is My Name forever, and this is My remembrance from generation to generation.” However, in our Talmud (Talmud Bavli, Avodah Zarah 18a) we learn that this is specifically if he does so publicly; One who disgraces the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, meaning that he recalls words of Torah in a filthy place; (Talmud Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 10:1 and elsewhere.) Likewise, one who reads the written Torah, but pays no heed to the words of the Mishnah, which explain the written Torah; Similarly, one who studies Torah but does not teach it, the exception being the secrets of the Torah, about which it states, (Proverbs 27:26) “The lambs (Kvasim-כבשים) shall be for your clothing,” meaning, (Talmud Bavli, Chagigah 13a) “Matters that are the secrets of the world (Kivshono shel Olam-כבשונו של עולם) should be hidden under your clothing.” It is only fitting to teach them to the pious (Chassidim) of the generation, who are worthy of being taught; Similarly, one who is capable of engaging in Torah study but does not engage in it, and instead engages in business and other worldly matters; One who gossips (Rechilut), meaning that he takes the words of one friend and brings them to another, and this applies even if they are not words that cause any shame or ill repute, and even if they are true, like what occurred with Doeg the Edomite and David; (Samuel I 22:9-10; Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 106b) One who speaks evil speech (Lashon Hara), in that he speaks of his fellow’s shamefulness, even if it is true; The slanderer (Motzi Shem Ra) who relates false matters about his fellow to disgrace his name; Anyone who violates these three, that is, the gossiper, one who speaks evil speech and the slanderer, it is considered as if they have denied the primary foundation of HaShem’s-יהו״ה existence, and these are so severe that they are equal to the three cardinal sins of the Torah, these being idolatry, forbidden relations, and murder; One who lends to his fellow Jew with interest and did not return the interest to him will not rise upon the resurrection of the dead; (See Baal HaTurim to Leviticus 25:36) One who transgresses the Shabbat is judged in purgatory (Gehinom) for all generations; (Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 24, 69b) One who intentionally does not bear children and dies childless is excised from this world and will not have life in the coming world. (Talmud Bavli, Brachot 10a)
“Oholivama bore Yeush, and Yalam, and Koraḥ; these are the sons of Esau, who were born to him in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 36:5). “Oholivama bore…” – that is what is written: “How has Esau been searched?” (Obadiah 1:6). Rabbi Simon said: Like the peeling of an onion. (Just as one peels away the layers of an onion and exposes what is underneath, the Torah lists the genealogical records of Esau to reveal their secrets (Yefeh To’ar). ) Why to that extent? “I have exposed his hidden places” (Jeremiah 49:10) – in order to expose the mamzerim among them. How many mamzerim did he produce? Rav said three. (They were Ana (see below, 82:15), Oholivama (see Rashi, Genesis 36:2), and Timna (see Rashi, Genesis 36:12). Alternatively, the reference is to the three sons of Oholivama mentioned in this verse (Yefeh To’ar). ) Rabbi Levi said four. (He includes the Koraḥ mentioned in this verse, or according to the second approach mentioned above, he includes Timna. ) Rabbi Binyamin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Koraḥ mentioned here was a mamzer. (Koraḥ is mentioned as a son of Esau’s wife Oholivama in this verse, and as a son of Esau’s son Elifaz (Genesis 36:16), indicating that he was the illegitimate child of Oholivama and Elifaz (Rashi, Genesis 36:5). )
(Fol. 6'2b) If the Lord hath instigated thee against me (I Sam. 26, 19). R. Elazar said: "Thus spoke the Holy One, praised, be He! unto David, 'Art thou calling me instigator? I will cause thee to stumble even with that which school children know'; for it is written (Ex. 30, 12.) When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel of those who are to he numbered, then shall each man pay a ransom for his soul [which means that Israel should not be counted unless a ransom is given for that act]. Immediately after this it happened (I Chr. 21, 1.) And Satan moved against Israel and enticed David. It is also written (II Sam. 24, 1.) He instigated David against them to say ' Go number Israel and Judah,' and since he counted them without taking a ransom from them, it is written immediately thereafter And the Lord sent a pestilence into Israel from morning even to the time appointed. What is meant by From morning even to the time appointed? Samuel, the senior, and son-in-law of R. Chanina. said in R. Chanina's name: "From the time of the slaughter of the perpetual-daily-morning-offering until the sprinkling of its blood." And R. Jochanan said: "Until noon," And He said to the angel, that destroyed among, the people great (Ib. ib. 16). What is meant by great? R. Elazar said: "Thus said the Holy One, praised be He! 'Take me the greatest of them in whom there is [merit enough] with which to pay their debts (sins). At that moment Abishai b. Zeruyah. who was the equal of the majority of the Sanhedrin, died. But as he was destroying, the Lord looked on and bethought Himself (I Chr. 21, 15). What did He see? Rab said: "He saw our father Jacob," for it is written (Gen. 32, 3.) And when Jacob saw them (Ra'ah) he said, etc. Samuel said: "He saw the ashes of Isaac, for it is said (Ib. 22. 8.) God will show us the lamb for them." R. Isaac Napbcha said: "He saw the atonement money [which was donated for the construction of the Tabernacle], for it is said (Ex. 31, 16.) And thou shall take the atonement money"; and R. Jochanan said: "He saw the Temple, for it is written (Gen. 22, 14.) On the mount of the Lord it shall he seen." Upon the same point R. Jacob b. Ide and R. Samuel b. Nachmeini differ. One said, "He saw the atonement money,"' and the other said "He saw the Temple." The following statements will prove the correctness of the opinion of the one who said that "He saw the Temple"; for it is said (Ib. ib.) As it is said to this very day. On the mount of the Lord it shall he seen.
The land of Egypt is to earth what the מקום ערוה, seat of the reproductive organs, is to man. This is why Ezekiel 23, 20 describes Egyptians as ejaculating seminal discharge that resembles that of horses, and generally describing them as debauched. [The theme is that it is the nature of the earth itself which contributes to the debauchery of its inhabitants. Ed.] Jacob's descendants were exiled to Egypt because in that country it was easiest to transfer their share of the serpent's pollution to their surroundings. Once they had disposed of those pollutants they could emerge purified. Joseph was especially suited to start such a process because he had demonstrated by his previous behavior how to maintain the Holy Covenant with G–d entered into by Abraham when he circumcised himself. The evil influence of the serpent's pollution remained only in the descendants of Esau. The reason the Torah presents us with such a long list of Esau's descendants at the end of פרשת וישלח, is to inform us that they were all ממזרים, bastards. Rashi already comments in this manner on Genesis 36, 2. Esau went to the land of Se-ir because he did not want to undergo the exile experience in either Egypt or the land of Canaan (where he would not have been sovereign, seeing that Israel owned that land). Had he been prepared to undergo that experience, he, too, could have rid himself of the negative influence of the original serpent.
ויאמר ה' אלי: אל תצא את מואב, “the Lord said to me: do not harass Moav!” He addressed me in the singular mode, but meant for this commandment to include the whole nation. The reason for this command was because Moses was going to be buried in the territory of Moav. G-d issued instructions not to harass in one way or another, three nations, Seir, Edom, and Moav. Their territories were not to be violated. (B’chor shor) We know that the territory of Seir was not to be violated as this nation was also known by the name of Chivi, as mentioned in Genesis 36,2: אהליבמה בת ענה בת צבעון החוי. One could argue that this Chivi was one of the seven nations that G-d had promised to the Israelites. In order to forestall such claim, the Torah added in our chapter in verse 12: that the Chorim used to dwell in that region originally, but they had been supplanted by the descendants of Esau who had wiped out that population just as the Israelites wiped out the Canaanite nations when they received the Holy Land fromG-d. We are to realise that basically that land belonged to the Chorim. They were not part of the seven Canaanite tribes. The reason they were called חוי, as explained in the Talmud tractate Shabbat folio 85, is that the original inhabitants the Chori, were able through their sense of smell to determine which kind of soil was most suitable to plant what kind of crop on. The Chivi, on the other hand, were able to taste the soil and determine what to grow on that particular soil. Moav, their land had originally been called the land of the Refaim, (Verse 11) and it is possible that it had been given to Avraham as stated in Genesis 15,20, so that the Israelites had a certain right to claim it as their ancestral land. The Moabites used to call the previous inhabitants of that land: Eymim. Apparently, that was their original name, and they were not identical with the Refaim given to Avraham, so that the Israelites had absolutely no prior claim to that land. Ammon. The land occupied by the Ammonites were also part of the Refaim, (verse 20) In order that no one should be able to claim it as belonging to or designated for Israel, Moses tells us what the names of the original inhabitants used to be, such as Zamzumim. They are not to be confused with the Refaim given to Avraham. A different approach: The Israelites were specifically warned not to enter into any hostilities with these three nations, although they had been included in G-d’s promise to Avraham’s descendants in chapter 15 in the Book of Genesis. The peoples referred to as: Keyni, K’nizi, and Kadmoni, are simply different names for the people more commonly known as: Ammon, Moav and Edom. By using the expression: ונשמרתם מאד, “be extremely careful no to, etc.,” Moses impresses the seriousness of the sin to contravene this warning. The Israelites did not need to be warned concerning any other nations in that region, as they had never for a moment entertained any hostile designs against them, their lands not having been promised to Avraham. Rashi comments that the promise to Avraham of the lands of the last three nations mentioned in the covenant between the pieces in Genesis chapter 15, was not meant to be fulfilled until the coming of the Messiah.
ארצה שעיר, “towards the land of Seir.” This land had originally belonged to “Seir,” but when Esau married Oholivamah, daughter of Ana, he inherited this land courtesy of his wife whose maternal links had been Ana, a daughter of Tzivon as stated in Genesis 36,2. Esau had moved there from the land of Canaan to spend more time with his wives to whom he felt greatly attached. Eventually this land was named after him, i.e. “field of Edom.” This term reminds everyone of Esau’s primary vocation as hunter in the field.
THE EMIM ABODE THEREIN FORMERLY etc. “You [Moses] might think that this is the land of the Rephaim which I gave to Abraham (Genesis 15:20.) because the Emim, who are Rephaim, dwelled there formerly, but this [the land of the Moabites] is not the land [that I promised to Abraham], because I drove out those Rephaim from before the children of Lot and settled them in place of the Rephaim. Those Emim were considered Rephaim, (In our texts of Rashi this is marked as a comment upon Verse 11: “They also were accounted Rephaim, even as the Anakim (giants).” This is interpreted by Rashi to mean: “The Emim who formerly lived in the lands of Ammon and Moab were accounted as Rephaim, that is, the Anakim, (giants). But those lands of Ammon and Moab were not the land of the Rephaim which I promised to Abraham.” Therefore Moses was not to wage war against the lands of Ammon and Moab.) like Anakim (giants) who are called Rephaim [from the root raphoh — weak] because the hands of everyone who sees them become ‘weak.’ Emim [from the root eimah — fear] are so called because their ‘dread’ lays upon people.” This is Rashi’s language. And similarly he wrote [further, in connection with the land of Ammon of which Scripture states], That also is accounted a land of Rephaim: (Further, Verse 20.) “because the Rephaim dwelled there formerly, but that [land] is not what I gave to Abraham.” But I wonder at the words of the Rabbi! Why should Scripture explain to us concerning the land of Ammon and Moab that it is not the land of Rephaim which He gave to Abraham? Was it to state that it was not due to Israel and was not part of the land which G-d swore to their fathers to give them? [That could not be the reason! On the contrary,] Scripture states only, because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession (Verse 19.) meaning that, although it was part of Abraham’s inheritance, the Holy One, blessed be He, gave it to the children of Lot for Abraham’s sake. As Rashi himself wrote: (Here on Verse 5.) “[The lands of] two nations [from among the ten nations originally given to Abraham — Genesis 15:19-21], I gave to the children of Lot [Ammon and Moab] as a reward because Lot went with Abraham to Egypt (Genesis 13:1.) and kept silent concerning what Abraham said about his wife, ‘she is my sister.’” Moreover, the Rabbi himself wrote with reference to Esau: (Here on Verse 5.) “[The lands of] ten nations (Ibid., 15:19-21: the Kenite, and the Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite; and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Rephaim; and the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Girgashite, and the Jebusite.) I gave to Abraham. Seven of them will be yours. [Concerning the lands of] the Kenite, and the Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite — which are Ammon and Moab, and Mount Seir — one [i.e., Mount Seir] belongs to Esau, and two of them to the children of Lot.” And if so, the lands of Ammon and Moab, and Mount Seir were certainly of the inheritance of Abraham; why then did the Holy One, blessed be He, say to Moses that he should not think that this [land of Ammon and Moab] is the land of Rephaim which was given to Abraham? What difference is there between [the lands of] the Kenite, and the Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite [which were promised to Abraham but given to the children of Lot and Esau], and [the land of] the Rephaim [which was also promised to Abraham]? (In other words, Rashi wrote of the lands of the Kenite, etc., that, notwithstanding the fact that they were of the inheritance of Abraham, they were still given to the children of Lot for the reason stated by Rashi that Lot protected Abraham’s secret in Egypt. Similarly we could say that the land of the Rephaim, too, was originally destined for Abraham, but that G-d gave it to another nation. Therefore, on what does Rashi base his assertion that this land was not the land of Rephaim promised to Abraham?) Moreover, the expression Rephaim dwelled there ‘l’phanim’ (of old) (Further, Verse 20.) indicates that it belongs to them because they dwelled there before anyone else, as in the verse ‘l’phanim’ (of old) Thou didst lay the foundation of the earth (Psalms 102:26.) [thus raising another question on Rashi’s assertion: If the Rephaim lived there “of old,” why was this land given to the children of Lot]? But the interpretation of the verses is the opposite of the Rabbi’s [Rashi’s] words. It was because the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, Be not at enmity with Moab etc. because I have given Ar unto the children of Lot for a possession, (Verse 9.) Scripture tells that the land was indeed due to the seed of Abraham except that He gave it to the children of Lot. Scripture further says that in that land there dwelled of old a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakim, (Verse 10 before us.) and, therefore, the Moabites called them ‘Emim’ (Verse 11.) because of the great “dread” which they cast upon those who saw them. Now G-d, in honor of Abraham, performed a miracle for the children of Lot. They defeated [the Emim] and drove them from before them; it is therefore not proper to take from them by force the land which G-d gave them through a miracle. ‘Yeichashvu’ [They were also ‘yeichashvu’ Rephaim] (Verse 11.) is an expression of importance and esteem, similar to the following: he was despised, and we did not ‘chashavnuhu’ (esteem him); (Isaiah 53:3.) who shall not ‘yachshovu’ (regard) silver?; (Ibid., 13:17.) for how little is he ‘nechshav’ (esteemed)? (Ibid., 2:22.) and so many others. And in the language of the Sages we find the expression adam chashuv (an esteemed person). (Berachoth 19a.) This is why Scripture placed the statements in proximity to [the verse that discussed the lands of Ammon and Moab, the children of Lot]. And in Seir the Horim abode formerly. (Verse 12.) It declares that for the same reason He stated [for restraining Israel from attacking] Moab, He likewise withheld them [Israel] from attacking the land of Seir. Because formerly it also belonged to the Horim, and it was part of the gift to Abraham — for the Horite is identical with the Hivite, and they [the Hivites] were of the children of Canaan, as it is said, Esau took his wives of the daughters of ‘Canaan’ etc. and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon ‘the Hivite’ (Genesis 36:1.) and Zibeon was of the sons of Seir ‘the Horite,’ the inhabitants of the land. (Ibid., Verse 20.) So, also, wherever the inheritance of Israel is mentioned, the Hivite is always included with the Canaanite among the seven nations, (See further, 7:1, etc.) because the Hivite is enumerated as the sixth son among the children of Canaan. (See Genesis 10:17.) You will also see this in the narrative of the war of Amraphel which he fought against the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zebaiim, and Zoar, (See ibid., 14:8-9.) who were Canaanite kings. They [Amraphel and his associates] smote ‘the Rephaiim’ in Ashteroth-karnaim, (Ibid., Verse 5.) and ‘the Horite’ in their mountain, Seir, (Ibid., Verse 6.) for the Horite and the Rephaim belonged to the Canaanite kings. It is possible that [the Horite] was called Hivite [from the term chivi — a snake] because he was like a serpent in the way. (Ibid., 49:17.) He was also called the Horite from the noun ‘chor’ (the hole of) the asp. (Isaiah 11:8.) For names [like Horite, Hivite] preserve the meaning and change letters, like Zerach (Zerah) (Numbers 26:13. The Hebrew word Zerach means “shining.”) and Tzochar (Zohar), (Exodus 6:15. Tzochar and Zerach both are names for the same son of Simeon.) of the expression: and ‘tzochar’ (white) wool; (Ezekiel 27:18.) ‘tzchoroth’ (white) asses, (Judges 5:10. Ramban thus shows that the names Zerach and Tzochar (from the words “shining” and “white”) both refer to the same person although the letters in the names interchange.) [and in the case of the Horite and Hivite, the names were chosen to suggest the treacherous, snake-like nature of the people]. They also assign new names to praise [someone]. Thus the name Ya’akov (Jacob), an expression of guile or of deviousness, (Genesis 27:36. — Ibid., 32:29 [Jacob’s name changed to Israel].) was changed to Israel [from the word sar (prince)] and they called him Yeshurun (Jeshurun) (Further, 32:15.) from the expression whole-hearted ‘v’yashar’ (and upright). (Job 1:1.) Thus Scripture is stating that the Horites [whose land was] given to Abraham (Since the Horites are identical with the Hivites, as explained above, and the Hivites were children of Canaan, and the Canaanite is among the ten nations whose lands were given to Abraham (Genesis 15:21), it follows that the land of the Horites was given to Abraham.) dwelled formerly in Seir, and the children of Esau who are of the seed of Abraham succeeded them and dwelled in their stead by a miraculous event. The Horites were a populous nation in their land and the children of Esau came to dwell there and overpowered them just as Israel did to the remaining nations [in the land that was] promised to Abraham, that G-d gave them in His great power. Thus G-d divided [the lands of] all these [ten] nations among the seed of Abraham — one to Esau, and the balance to Israel who was the firstborn son. (See Exodus 4:22.) It is therefore not proper to steal from Esau what G-d caused him to inherit, since G-d would be angry with anyone who would forcibly take from him [Esau] the inheritance that He, blessed be He, caused him to inherit, just as He would be wroth with him who would forcibly take the Land from Israel after He caused him [Israel] to inherit it, just as it says, As for all Mine evil neighbors, that touch the inheritance which I have caused My people Israel to inherit. (Jeremiah 12:14.) This is the sense of the expression mentioned here, as Israel ‘did’ unto the Land of his inheritance, (Verse 12. This would seem to indicate that at the time that Esau conquered his land, Israel had already conquered theirs. But Israel had, at that time, not taken possession of any land.) when it was not yet done! [But the meaning thereof is as explained: that just as G-d would be wroth with him who would rob Israel of his inheritance after He will have given it to him, in the same way, He does not give Israel the right to take the land of Esau after having given it to him.] Similarly He further said with reference to [the land of] the children of Ammon that it is of the land of the Rephaim [which G-d gave to Abraham] (Genesis 15:20.) for that, too, belonged first to the Rephaim. The Ammonites called them Zamzummim, (Further, Verse 20.) from the expression ‘z’mamo (his evil scheme) do not further, (Psalms 140:9.) except that [the letters zayin and mem] are doubled [in the name “Zamzummim”], which thus indicates “the people from whom nothing is withheld which they purpose to do.” (See Genesis 11:6.)
AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE TO ELIPHAZ ESAU’s SON. Because Scripture was not particular to tell us the names of the mothers of all the others, our Rabbis have interpreted that this was to tell us of the esteem in which Abraham our father was held, i.e., how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [and Lotan was one of the chieftains of Se’ir]. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife, would that I might become your concubine,” as Rashi has written. It is possible that the five sons of Eliphaz, mentioned in the preceding verse, were generally known as his children since he had begotten them from his wives. But Amalek, [born of Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz], was not known among his brothers, [who were the recognized children of Eliphaz], and he might have been included among Esau’s children because he was his descendant. Therefore, Scripture found it necessary to say that his mother so-and-so, to whom Amalek was known to have belonged, bore him to Eliphaz, but he is not listed among the descendants of Esau and did not dwell with them on mount Se’ir. Only the sons of the mistresses, and not the son of a concubine, are called Esau’s seed, since the son of the handmaid will not be heir with his sons, in keeping with the practice of his father’s father. (Above, 21:10.) Now concerning the descendants of Esau, we have been commanded not to abhor them (Deuteronomy 23:8.) or take their land. (Ibid., 2:5.) This refers to all his known sons who dwell in Se’ir, as they are called Edomites by his name, but the son of the concubine is not part of the descendants of Esau, and he did not inherit together with them in their land, and in fact with respect to him we have been commanded to the contrary, i.e., to abhor him and blot out his name. (Ibid., 25:19.) Now Rashi wrote further: “In the book of Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) Scripture enumerates Timna among the children of Eliphaz! This implies that he lived with Se’ir the Horite’s wife and from this union Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. And this is why Scripture says, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [since Lotan’s father was Se’ir the Horite]. And the reason why Scripture does not enumerate her among Se’ir’s children is that she was Lotan’s sister maternally but not paternally.” But I do not agree with this since in the book Chronicles, it should have said, “and Timna his daughter.” (See further, 46:15: “and Dinah his daughter.”) Why should Scripture enumerate the woman among the sons? Perhaps Scripture is not particular about this when a matter is known for so we find there in Chronicles: And the sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Miriam. And the sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu, etc. (I Chronicles 5:29.) [Scripture thus enumerates a woman among the sons.] If so, it is fitting that we say that this Timna was the daughter of Eliphaz, who had been born to him of the wife of Se’ir the Horite after the death of her husband, and she was thus Lotan’s sister from one mother. Eliphaz took her as a concubine, this being permissible to an idolater. (Sanhedrin 55b.) Or we shall say, in accordance with the opinion of our Rabbis [that Timna was illegitimate, as explained above in the words of Rashi], that the Timna mentioned in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) is identical with Timna the chieftain mentioned further on, (Verse 40 here.) for he is enumerated there in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) among the sons of Eliphaz, just as Korah is enumerated there (I Chronicles 1:35.) among the sons of Esau [while here in Verses 15-16 Korah is listed among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude that he was illegitimate, as was Timna]. Furthermore, Korah is listed here in Verse 5 as the son of Oholibamah [and Esau, and further in Verse 16 he is enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude] that both Korah and Timna were illegitimate, born of one father, and enumerated with the children of another, for it is far-fetched to say that the woman Timna was enumerated among the sons, as was suggested above. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is feasible to conjecture that Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, after having given birth to Amalek [as stated in our present verse], gave birth to a son, and she had hard labor and died. As her soul was departing she called his name Timna so that her name be remembered, while his father Eliphaz called him Korah. Scripture, however, does not ascribe this son Timna to Timna his mother in order not to prolong the account for the intent is only to enumerate Amalek by himself. However, the sons of Eliphaz were seven, [as they are enumerated here in Verses 15-16, and Korah is among them]. Now Scripture enumerates there the chieftains who were the sons of Eliphaz in the order of their importance. Therefore, it gave Kenaz and Korah precedence over Gatam [although the order of their birth as stated in Verse 11 was: Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz]. I have an additional opinion concerning this verse in connection with that which our Rabbis have said in the Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules by which Agadah (The part of Rabbinic teaching which explains the Bible homiletically, as opposed to the Halachic (or legal) interpretation, which is governed by the famous thirteen principles of interpretation mentioned by Rabbi Ishmael. This Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules” for Agadah was collated by Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.) is explained.” There they mentioned this rule: “There should have been one arrangement for [two verses, meaning that there are verses which should really be combined] but the prophets divided them for some reason! An example is the verse which says, For a multitude of the people, etc.” (For a multitude of the people… had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the passover otherwise that it is written. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying: The good Lord pardon, (II Chronicles 30:18). And then in Verse 19 it continues: His whole heart he hath set to seek G-d, the Eternal, the G-d of his fathers, though not according to the purification that pertaineth to holy things. Now Verse 18 does not explain whom G-d should pardon, while Verse 19 does not explain “who set his heart, etc.” Combining the two verses makes the sense clear. Hezekiah prayed that the good Lord pardon every one who, though he had not cleansed himself according, etc., had set his whole heart to seek G-d.) Those who pursue the plain meaning of Scripture apply this to other verses. And so too this verse says: (And) the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam and Kenaz, (This concludes Verse 11, while And Timna begins Verse 12. Ramban combines the two verses into one, with the result that Timna is also enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz.) and Timna. Then Scripture returns to say, there was a concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son, and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek, but Scripture does not mention the name of the concubine. But in truth she was Timna, as it is said, Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) and this is the reason that Scripture did not mention her name here since it did not want to say “and Timna” twice, once in reference to the male chieftain and once in reference to the female concubine. Thus Eliphaz had seven sons, [who are enumerated in Verses 11-12: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek], and they are the same chieftains ascribed to Eliphaz in Verses 15-16, but they changed the name of this youngest son of Eliphaz — namely Timna — to Korah because his name was like that of the concubine and so that he should not be thought of as her son. He was named Korah upon his ascending to the position of chieftain. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Korah the son of Esau’s wife Oholibamah is counted twice; [in Verse 5 he is mentioned as Oholibamah’s son while in Verse 16 he is listed as Adah’s son], because he was the youngest of Oholibamah’s sons, [as indicated in Verse 5 where he is mentioned last. Upon his mother’s death] Adah raised him, [which explains why he is mentioned among Adah’s children in Verse 16]. So also the verse, the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, (II Samuel 21:8.) as our Rabbis have said. (Sanhedrin 19 b: “But they were really Merab’s children! [See I Samuel 18:19.] It is because Merab gave birth to them. However Michal raised them; therefore, they are called by her name.”) According to this opinion [of Ibn Ezra, i.e., that because Adah raised Korah he is counted among her children], the explanation of Scripture in the book of Chronicles (I, 1:36), [where it mentions seven sons of Eliphaz, and among them, and Timna and Amalek, while here in Verses 11-12, it mentions only six sons of Eliphaz, is as follows: The expression in Chronicles, and Timna and Amalek, means] that Timna gave birth to Amalek, the sense of the verse thus being, “and to Timna, Amalek.” The letter lamed meaning “to” is missing just as in the verse: And there were two men that were captains of bands Saul’s son, (II Samuel 4:2.) which means “to Saul’s son.” [Thus it was Timna who was his mother, but because Adah raised him he is enumerated here in Verse 12 among the sons of Adah]. The correct interpretation however is, as I have suggested, [that Timna, Lotan’s sister, bore Amalek to Eliphaz], and the verse stating, And these are the sons of Adah — [namely, Verse 16, which mentions Amalek among them], refers to the majority of the names mentioned there, for Amalek was not her son. Similarly the verse, These are the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Padan-aram, (Above, 35:26.) does not apply to Benjamin, [who was born in the Land of Israel, although he is mentioned in the enumeration which follows].
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ANAH: DISHON AND OHOLIBAMAH THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH. Such is the way of Scripture when referring to daughters, as in the expression, and his daughter Dinah. (Further, 46:15.) Now this Anah was the fourth son of Se’ir the Horite, enumerated above, (Verse 20 here.) after Zibeon his brother, for the section enumerates seven sons (Verses 20-21 here.) of Se’ir the Horite in the order of their birth. This Anah had another son also called by the name Dishon as was his uncle, (Verse 21 here.) and he had a daughter called Oholibamah, which was also the name of her relative, the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon. (Verse 2 here.) This is why Scripture says concerning Esau’s wife, Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, (Verse 2 here.) in order to relate that she was the daughter of Anah who had found the mules, and granddaughter of Zibeon, not Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the son of Se’ir the Horite, Zibeon’s brother. However, in the opinion of some of our Rabbis (Pesachim 54a.) there is in this entire section only one man called Anah, and he was Zibeon’s son. (Verse 24 here.) Since Zibeon committed incest with his mother, the wife of Se’ir the Horite, Scripture thus enumerates Anah among Se’ir the Horite’s sons (Verse 20 here.) because people considered him as Se’ir’s son and called him “Anah the son of Se’ir,” and he grew up among his sons because Se’ir thought he was his son. Scripture, however, enumerates him a second time as Zibeon’s son (Verse 24 here.) in keeping with the true facts. This is the interpretation of the symbolizing interpreters as is mentioned in Tractate Pesachim, (Pesachim 54a.) but it is not the consensus of opinion in the Gemara and is not at all the plain meaning of Scripture.
ובשעיר ישבו החורים, “and the Chorim used to live in the region of Se-ir.” The same considerations that are responsible for the Israelites not being allowed to make war or even harass the Moabites, (although their lands were on their route to the Holy Land, even) also are the ones why they must not at this time encroach on the land of Edom. That land had at one time been the land of the Chorites, who were identical with the tribe Chivi, mentioned in chapter 15 of Genesis above. Esau, Avraham’s grandson, had received it as a sort of dowry when he married the great-grand-daughter daughter of Tzivon, a prominent Canaanite belonging to that tribe. (Genesis 36,2) Tzivon, as mentioned there, was a son of the original Se-ir. It is possible that the reason why the Torah refers to that tribe as Chivi, was because in that neighbourhood there was a type of snake by that name that the people had to be on guard against. Various types of snakes including one by that name are referred to in Isaiah 11,8 where the lair חור of certain types of snakes such as פתן is mentioned. Compare especially Genesis 49,17 נחש עלי דרך. It is not unusual, historically, to find that names of certain places, landmarks and such, reflect a past association with some animal. Certain letters underwent repositioning when such places or animals were named. What was known as חוי may have been changed to חורי, so that the tribe known as חורי in the days of Avraham may have become the חווי in the days of his grandson Eau, or vice versa. During Avraham’s time these people lived in what later became known as Se-ir. It was most certainly something miraculous that the relatively few descendants of Esau should have dispossessed a far more numerous and well entrenched tribe. Moses may have referred to all these details to underline that possession of the descendants of Esau, Edom had been divinely assisted when settling in that region. It would not do to attack them, the time was not ripe for this in G’d’s timetable. G’d would retaliate against people who deprive others of their homeland unless instructed by Him to do so. He does likewise to nations who dispossess Israel of its ancestral heritage without having been bidden by Him to do so. This may be why Moses says כאשר עשה ישראל meaning as “Israel is going to do to Esau,” i.e. in the future, seeing that up until then Israel had not done any of this. [When G’d has promised, He will keep His promise, so that the promise by G’d that Israel would dispossess the Canaanites is described as fact rather than mere hope or even expectation. Ed.] Moses makes similar reference to the land of the Ammonites,
“Esau took Oholibamah” [36:2]. Rashi writes here. Esau’s wife was called Oholibamah and Esau gave her the name Yehudit. That is, so that his father Isaac should think that Esau had pious Jewish wives. (Rashi, Genesis, 36:2.)
The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that when the Sages have an accepted tradition it is a substantial matter, meaning that the tradition is reliable? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “You shall not cross your neighbor’s border, which they of the old times have set in your inheritance that you shall inherit” (Deuteronomy 19:14)? It means that you shall not cross the border that the early generations set, establishing the parameters necessary for each plant. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: The early generations set? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: What is the meaning of that which was written: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite who inhabit the land, Lotan and Shoval and Zibeon and Ana” (Genesis 36:20)? And is everyone else inhabitants of the heavens, that it was necessary for the verse to emphasize that these inhabit the land? Rather, it means that they were experts in the settlement of the land, as they would say: This tract of land that is the full length of a rod is fit for olive trees; this full length of a rod is fit for grapes, this full length of a rod is fit for figs. And the members of this tribe were called Horites [ḥori] since they smelled [heriḥu] the earth to determine what is fit to be grown there. The allusion is based on a transposition of the letters ḥet and reish. And in explanation of why the early inhabitants of Seir were called Hivites [ḥivi] (see Genesis 36:2), Rav Pappa said: Because they would taste the earth like a snake [ḥivya] and determine what should be grown there according to the taste. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said that they were called Horites [ḥori] because they became free [benei ḥorin] of their possessions when the children of Esau drove them from their lands. Their primary name was actually Hivites.
Eisov took his wives from the daughters of Canaan: Adah, the daughter of Eylon, the Chittite, and Oholivomoh, the daughter of Anoh, daughter of Tzivon, the Chivite.
Esau took wives of the daughters of Kenaan, Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittah, and Ahalibama the daughter of Ana, the daughter of Sibeon the Hiva,
| וְאֶת־בָּשְׂמַ֥ת בַּת־יִשְׁמָעֵ֖אל אֲח֥וֹת נְבָיֽוֹת׃ | 3 P | and also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth. |
ואת בשמת בת ישמעאל אחות נביות, “and Bosmat daughter of Ishmael, sister of Nevayot.” The Torah makes clear on this occasion that the basic name of Ishmael’s daughter was Bosmat, even though she was referred to as Machalat in Genesis 28,9. This lends support to the words of our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 67,13 that Esau intended to convert Machalat, and that G’d forgave him all his sins. (this מחילה, pardon, was alluded to in the name מחלת). Three kinds of people qualify for total forgiveness for their past sins: A convert to Judaism; a person who is promoted to high public office; a person who marries a woman. The source for this statement is the verse describing Esau as marrying Machalat.
BASMATH ISHMAEL’s DAUGHTER. But elsewhere Scripture calls her Mahalath! (Ibid., 28:9.) I have found in the Agadic Midrash on the Book of Samuel: (Chapter 17.) There are three persons all of whose sins are pardoned: a proselyte on conversion, one who is exalted to a high position, and a man on his marriage. It derives the proof for the latter case from here. The reason she was called Mahalath, [from the word mechilah (pardon)], is that Esau’s sins were pardoned when he married her. All this, [including the comment on Verse 2 above], is the language of Rashi.But Rashi has not explained the reason why the father of Oholibamah, who, according to Rashi, is identical with Judith, is there (Above, 26:34.) called Be’eri and here called Anah. And Basmath Ishmael’s daughter is here a proper name while there, (Above, 26:34.) according to Rashi, is an adjectival noun on account of her burning the incense! And in Bereshith Rabbah, the Sages have said: (67:10.) “Esau set his mind to repent. Mahalath means that the Holy One, blessed be He, did pardon him for his sins. Basmath means that he was content [with his well-born wives and his decision to repent].” Thus according to the Midrash, both names (Mahalath and Basmath) are descriptive, and their proper names are unknown. For this reason Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra has said that she had two names, Adah and Basmath. Also in the case of Abijah, [king of Judah, we find that his mother had two names, Micaiah — II Chronicles 13:2 - and Maacah - ibid., 11:20].It is possible to say that those two women [mentioned above, 26:34, i.e., Judith and Basmath], died childless perhaps as a punishment because they were a bitterness of spirit unto Isaac and to Rebekah. (Above, 26:35.) Esau then married his wife’s sister Adah, the daughter of Elon, and another woman by the name of Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah. But as regards Ishmael’s daughter, sister of Nebaioth, [who was originally called Mahalath] , (Ibid., 28:9.) because of the repugnance of her name, [which suggests choli, (sickness)] in the Sacred Language, Esau called her by the honorable name of his first wife Basmath, derived from the word besamim (spices). This was because she was beloved by him since she was of his family and was not evil in the eyes of Isaac his father. (Ibid., 28:8.)
בשמת בת ישמעאל BASE-MATH ISHMAEL’S DAUGHTER — But elsewhere (28:9) she is called Mahalath! We find in the Agadic Midrash on the Book of Samuel (Ch. 17) that there are three classes whose sins are pardoned: a proselyte, one who is exalted to a high position and a man on his marriage. It derives the proof for the latter case from here; viz., the reason why she was also calleth Mahalath (pardon) was because his (Esau’s) sins were pardoned on his marriage to her (Megillah 17a; cf. also Genesis Rabbah 63).
אחות נביות SISTER OF NEBAIOTH — because he gave her in marriage after Ishmael’s death she is called after his name (Nebaioth’s sister).
After marrying two Canaanite women, Esau subsequently acquiesced to his parents’ desire that he take a wife from the family, and he married his cousin Basmat, daughter of Ishmael, sister of Nevayot.
“Esau saw that the daughters of Canaan were objectionable in the eyes of Isaac his father” (Genesis 28:8). “Esau went to Ishmael, and took Maḥalat the daughter of Ishmael, son of Abraham, sister of Nevayot, in addition to his wives, as his wife” (Genesis 28:9). “Esau saw that the daughters of Canaan (Ḥet was considered a Canaanite.) …Esau went to Ishmael” – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: He gave consideration to converting. (The reference is to repenting.) “Maḥalat” – as the Holy One blessed be He forgave [mahal] him for his iniquities. “Basmat” (Genesis 36:3) – as his mind was now satisfied [nitbasma]. Rabbi Elazar said: Had he divorced the first ones, it would have been correct, but, “in addition to his wives” – pain upon pain. Another matter, thorn upon thorn – it was an addition to a full house. “Jacob departed from Beersheba, and went to Haran” (Genesis 28:10). Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Aivu: “In the transgression of the lips is an evil snare, but the righteous emerges from trouble” (Proverbs 12:13). “In the transgression of the lips is an evil snare” – due to the rebellion that Esau and Ishmael rebelled against the Holy One blessed be He, and angered him, and, likewise, his wives angered Him, they encountered a snare. “But the righteous emerges [vayetze] from trouble” – this is Jacob, “Jacob departed from Beersheba, and went to Haran.”
[He also took] Bosmas, the daughter of Yishmael, the sister of Nevayos.
and Basemath the daughter of Ishmael whom Nebaioth her brother gave to him.
| וַתֵּ֧לֶד עָדָ֛ה לְעֵשָׂ֖ו אֶת־אֱלִיפָ֑ז וּבָ֣שְׂמַ֔ת יָלְדָ֖ה אֶת־רְעוּאֵֽל׃ | 4 P | Adah bore to Esau Eliphaz; Basemath bore Reuel; |
Ada bore Elifaz to Esau, his firstborn son; and Basmat bore Re’uel;
(Gen. 21:1:) THEN THE LORD VISITED SARAH. Let our master instruct us: If there is a quarrel between someone and his friend, how is there atonement for him on the Day of Atonement? (PR 38.) Thus have our masters taught (in Yoma 8:9): FOR TRANSGRESSIONS THAT ARE BETWEEN SOMEONE AND THE OMNIPRESENT, THE DAY OF ATONEMENT ATONES. FOR < TRANSGRESSIONS > THAT ARE BETWEEN HIM AND HIS COMPANION, THE DAY OF ATONEMENT DOES NOT ATONE UNTIL HE MAKES PEACE WITH HIS COMPANION. (Cf. Matthew 5:22f.) If he went to make peace, and he did not accept, what should he do? R. Jose, the son of a Damascene woman, said: (As Buber points in a note, R. Jose’s statement belongs further down in the paragraph, where it is found in PR 38.) This would be a ready sign (Gk.: semeion.) for you. Every time that you show mercy to your companion, there is one showing mercy (i.e., the Omnipresent) to you. But if you do not show mercy to your companion, there is no one showing mercy to you. (Mark 11:25; Matthew 6:14-15; 18:23-35; Matthew 6:12//Luke 11:4.) What should he do? R. Samuel ben Nahman said: Let him bring ten people and set them in a single line. Then let him say before them: My brothers, there has been a quarrel between me and such and such a person. So I went to make peace with him, but he did not accept. Immediately the Holy One sees that he has humbled himself before him, and he has mercy on him. (yYoma 8:9 (45c); cf. Yoma 87a.) Thus it is stated (in Job 33:27): LET HIM DRAW UP A LINE (YShWR) (The midrash understands YShWR as a verb related to the noun shurah (“line”) and vocalized yeshawwer.) OF PEOPLE AND SAY: I HAVE SINNED AND PERVERTED THAT WHICH WAS RIGHT (yashar). (This word also is related to YShWR (“line”).) What < else > is written there (in vs. 28)? SO HE REDEEMS HIS SOUL FROM GOING INTO THE PIT. It is also written (in Prov. 28:13): BUT WHOEVER CONFESSES AND FORSAKES < HIS TRANSGRESSIONS > SHALL OBTAIN MERCY. R. Judah said: The one who confesses in order to forsake < transgressions > shall obtain mercy. Now you find it to be so (in Scripture). All the days that Job was angry with his companions and his companions with him, strict justice was extended against him. Thus it is stated (in Job 30:4): BUT NOW THOSE WHO ARE YOUNGER THAN I LAUGH AT ME. He said to Eliphaz: And are you not a son of Esau? (The midrash identifies Job’s companion with the Eliphaz mentioned in Gen. 36:4, 10-12, 15-16;I Chron. 1:35-36.) If your father had persisted in begging me to have him eat with my dogs, I should have refused him. (Thus Job 30:1 continues:) WHOSE FATHERS I REFUSED TO SET WITH THE DOGS OF MY FLOCK. Then his companions said: Are you the only venerable one? We also have venerable ones, as stated (in Job 15:10): (WE ALSO HAVE) [WITH US ALSO ARE] BOTH THE OLD AND THE VENERABLE, < OLDER THAN YOUR FATHER >. Then, when the Holy one appeared to them and said to them: Why are you persisting? Come and make peace with Job. Thus it is stated (in Job 42:8): NOW THEREFORE, TAKE SEVEN BULLS AND SEVEN RAMS, < GO UNTO MY SERVANT JOB, AND SACRIFICE A BURNT OFFERING FOR YOURSELVES. > THEN LET MY SERVANT JOB PRAY FOR YOU. < When the Holy One had so spoken >, they immediately went and did so. What is written there (in vs. 10)? AND THE LORD RESTORED THE FORTUNES OF JOB. When? (Ibid., cont.:) WHEN HE PRAYED FOR HIS FRIENDS. So < it was with > Abimelech (according to Gen. 20:17): THEN ABRAHAM PRAYED < UNTO GOD; AND GOD HEALED ABIMELECH >…. The Holy One said: Abraham has sought mercy for Abimelech; I will visit him. Immediately (there follows in Gen. 21:1): THEN THE LORD VISITED SARAH.
Woe to the kingdom of Esau when the Holy One sees its works and arises to exact retribution from it. We have found in the case of Egypt that, when the Holy One exacted retribution from them, he exacted retribution from them in the early morning. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 14:24): THEN IT CAME TO PASS IN THE MORNING WATCH < THAT THE LORD LOOKED DOWN AT THE HOST OF THE EGYPTIANS FROM THE PILLAR OF FIRE AND THE CLOUD AND CONFOUNDED THE HOST OF THE EGYPTIANS >. What is written about Assyria (in II Kings 19:35)? < SO IT CAME TO PASS IN THAT NIGHT > THAT THE ANGEL OF THE LORD WENT OUT AND SMOTE < ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND > IN THE CAMP OF ASSYRIA…. In the case of Media it was at the hands of Mordecai and Esther. In the case of Greece it was at the hands of Mattathias and his sons. But in the case of Edom the Holy One said: There is no creature who will exact retribution from it. I myself will exact retribution against it. Where is it shown? (In Obad. vs. 1-2:) THE VISION OF OBADIAH. THUS SAYS THE LORD GOD TO EDOM: WE HAVE HEARD TIDINGS FROM THE LORD…. < BEHOLD I WILL MAKE YOU SMALL AMONG THE NATIONS >…. R. Berekhyah said: What did Obadiah see exacting retribution from Edom? He saw that, < if > the Holy One gives back recompense to those who love him, how much the more < would he do > so for those who hate him. So the Holy Spirit says through Eliphaz the Temanite (in Job 4:1-2): THEN ANSWERED ELIPHAZ THE TEMANITE (Eliphaz is identified as Esau’s eldest son in Gen. 36:4, 10-12, 15; 1 Chron. 1:35-36. Teman was a district of Edom.) AND SAID: IF ONE TRIES YOU IN SOMETHING, DO YOU FIND IT TOO MUCH? (This translation fits the context here better than a more traditional one, which would read, IF ONE VENTURES A WORD WITH YOU, WILL YOU FIND IT TOO MUCH?) Eliphaz said to Job: Here you say: In what way am I not like Abraham? Thus have you said (in Job 30:19): < GOD > HAS CAST ME INTO THE MUD, AND I HAVE BECOME LIKE DUST AND ASHES. (Cf. Gen. 18:27, according to which Abraham said: AND I AM DUST AND ASHES.) Do you think that he is comparing you to him? R. Berekhyah said: Transpose the text and interpret it. (Job 30:19a:) AND I HAVE BECOME LIKE DUST AND ASHES < means >, "And he judges you like the generation of the dispersion (i.e., of the Tower of Babel), of which it is written in Gen. 11:3): NOW THEY HAD BRICKS FOR STONE < AND BITUMEN FOR MORTAR >. (Job 30:19a:) < GOD > HAS CAST ME INTO THE MUD. Eliphaz said to him: Are your works like < those of > Abraham? Abraham was tried in ten trials and endured all of them, but you < have only been > in one trial. (Job 4:2-3:) IF ONE TRIES YOU IN SOMETHING, DO YOU FIND IT TOO MUCH? < … > HERE YOU HAVE INSTRUCTED MANY. You would comfort all who were suffering. When a blind person came to you, you would say to him: The Holy One already knows what he is going to do. After all, he < was the one who > made that person blind. You also used to console him and say to him: If you had built a house and did not want to open windows, who would have protested your right? So the Holy One is going to be glorified in you, as stated (in Is. 35:5): THEN THE EYES OF THE BLIND SHALL BE OPENED. When a deaf person would come to you, [you would comfort him and say to him:] If you want to make a juglet, (Gk.: kothon.) < but > did not want to make ears for it, who would protest your right? So the Holy One is going to be glorified in you, as stated (in ibid., cont.): AND THE EARS OF THE DEAF SHALL BE OPENED. To a lame person you would say (in ibid., vs. 6): THEN THE LAME SHALL LEAP LIKE A DEER. So you would comfort him. (According to Job 4:4:) YOUR WORDS HAVE UPHELD THE STUMBLING. But now that it affects you, you are dismayed! (Job. 4:5:) BUT NOW THAT < TROUBLE > HAS COME UNTO YOU, YOU FIND IT TOO MUCH…. (Job 4:6:) IS NOT YOUR GODLY FEAR YOUR CONFIDENCE? After all, you have said: I am a righteous person; so why does he punish me? Have you ever seen a righteous person perishing? (Job 4:7:) PLEASE RECALL, WHAT INNOCENT ONE HAS PERISHED … ? Because Noah was righteous, he was saved from his generation. Abraham was saved from the furnace; Isaac was saved from the knife; Jacob was saved from the angel; Moses was saved from Pharaoh's sword. (Job 4:7:) PLEASE RECALL, WHAT INNOCENT ONE HAS PERISHED … ? He delivered Israel from Egypt, but he destroyed the Egyptians (according to Job 4:8): AS [I HAVE SEEN], THOSE WHO PLOW EVIL AND SOW TROUBLE, REAP IT. So what happened to them (according to vs. 9)? BY THE BREATH (NShMT) OF GOD THEY PERISH. It is so stated (in Exod. 15:10): YOU BLEW (NShMT) WITH YOUR WIND, AND THE SEA COVERED THEM. Also < with reference to > all the wicked who are going to arise, (according to Job 4:10) < there is > A LION'S ROAR AND A FIERCE LION'S VOICE. Job said to him (to Eliphaz): Please look at your father, Esau. He said to him: I am not concerned with him. (According to Ezek. 18:20): {THE} [A] SON SHALL NOT BEAR THE FATHER'S GUILT…. (Job 4:11:) THE STRONG LION PERISHES FOR LACK OF PREY. This < strong lion > is Esau in that he perishes for lack of < good > works. (Ibid., cont.:) AND THE OFFSPRING OF THE LIONESS ARE SCATTERED. These < offspring > are his chieftains. Job said to him: Now in your case, what do you have for yourself? (Job 4:12:) NOW A WORD WAS SECRETLY BROUGHT UNTO ME. I am a prophet. My only concern with him is to rebuke you (according to vs. 13) IN OPINIONS (The Hebrew word here is a homonym of the reading in Masoretic Text, which denotes THOUGHTS.) FROM NIGHT VISIONS. The Holy One said [to Eliphaz]: You have rebuked my servant Job through a vision. I am raising up a prophet from you who will exact punishment from your father's house (the Edomites) through a vision. [It is so stated (in Obad., vs. 1): THE VISION OF OBADIAH.] So R. Samuel bar Nahmani said: What did Obadiah see, since he only prophesied against Edom? The Holy One said: Esau grew up between two righteous people (Jacob and Rebekah. So Sifre, Numb. 27:1 (133).) without learning from their works; but Obadiah dwelt between two wicked people (Ahab and Jezebel. So Sifre, Numb. 27:1 (133); Rashi on Sanh. 39b. See also Jerome’s introduction to his commentary on Obadiah.) without learning from their works. Obadiah would come and exact punishment from Esau. Ergo (in Obad., vs. 1) THE VISION OF OBADIAH. And what is written in his prophecy (in vs. 18)? THE HOUSE OF JACOB SHALL BE FIRE, AND THE HOUSE OF JOSEPH A FLAME, AND THE HOUSE OF ESAU SHALL BE STRAW; THEY SHALL BURN IT AND CONSUME IT, AND THERE SHALL BE NO SURVIVOR TO THE HOUSE OF ESAU; FOR THE LORD HAS SPOKEN.
Adah bore to Eisov, [his son] Eliphaz, and Bosmas bore Reueil.
And Adah bare to Esau Eliphaz, and Basemath bare Reuel.
| וְאׇהֳלִֽיבָמָה֙ יָֽלְדָ֔ה אֶת־[יְע֥וּשׁ] (יעיש) וְאֶת־יַעְלָ֖ם וְאֶת־קֹ֑רַח אֵ֚לֶּה בְּנֵ֣י עֵשָׂ֔ו אֲשֶׁ֥ר יֻלְּדוּ־ל֖וֹ בְּאֶ֥רֶץ כְּנָֽעַן׃ | 5 P | and Oholibamah bore Jeush, Jalam, and Korah. Those were the sons of Esau, who were born to him in the land of Canaan. |
ואהליבמה ילדה את יעיש, and Oholibama bore Yayish. This name is spelled יעיש but is read as if it had been spelled יעוש.
ואהליבמה ילדה וגו׳ AND OHOLIBAMAH BARE etc. — This Korah was an illegitimate child for he was the son of Eliphaz (cf. vv. 15, 16, 18) who had taken his father’s wife — Oholibamah, the wife of Esau — for he is enumerated also amongst the chiefs of Eliphaz at the end of this section (Genesis Rabbah 82:12).
This Korach was of illegitimate birth and was fathered by Eliphaz... Re’m asks: How does Rashi know this? Perhaps there were two Korachs. He answers: Korach is not mentioned among Eliphaz’s sons but among Oholivomoh’s sons, [implying he was not publicly known as Eliphaz’s son]. Yet later, he is mentioned among the chiefs of Eliphaz. This implies he was of illegitimate birth.
and Oholivama bore Yeush, Ya’elam, and Korah; these are the sons of Esau, who were born to him while he still lived in the land of Canaan.
את עדה בת אילון החתי, “Ada, daughter of the Hittite Eylon;” Rashi claims that Ada was identical with Bosmas, seeing the latter had acquired that nickname as she was in the habit of burning up a lot of fragrant incense to please the idol she worshipped. Nachmanides notes that Rashi failed to explain why Be-eri, the father of Oholiav who is called here Anah, is called Be-eri elsewhere. Furthermore, seeing that Bosmas was a daughter of Ishmael, this clearly was a proper name and not a nickname as we know from verse 3. On the other hand, the Bosmas who is described as the daughter of Eylon was nicknamed because of her burning incense frequently. Ibn Ezra claims that she simply was known by two names, as was her father. It is possible that the two first named women died without having had children, perhaps because they were reported of being so disrespectful to Yitzchok and Rivkah, as reported in Genesis Esau subsequently married a sister of his deceased wife whose name was Oholivamah, daughter of Anah. But the daughter of Ishmael, a sister of Nevayot, was renamed Bosmas the name of her predecessor, as her original name has a negative connotation in Hebrew [מחלת= the sickly one, or ‘the sickness.” Ed.] Esau was very fond of her as she stemmed from his own family, (1st cousin) and was not displeasing in the eyes of his father Yitzchok.
“Oholivama bore Yeush, and Yalam, and Koraḥ; these are the sons of Esau, who were born to him in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 36:5). “Oholivama bore…” – that is what is written: “How has Esau been searched?” (Obadiah 1:6). Rabbi Simon said: Like the peeling of an onion. (Just as one peels away the layers of an onion and exposes what is underneath, the Torah lists the genealogical records of Esau to reveal their secrets (Yefeh To’ar). ) Why to that extent? “I have exposed his hidden places” (Jeremiah 49:10) – in order to expose the mamzerim among them. How many mamzerim did he produce? Rav said three. (They were Ana (see below, 82:15), Oholivama (see Rashi, Genesis 36:2), and Timna (see Rashi, Genesis 36:12). Alternatively, the reference is to the three sons of Oholivama mentioned in this verse (Yefeh To’ar). ) Rabbi Levi said four. (He includes the Koraḥ mentioned in this verse, or according to the second approach mentioned above, he includes Timna. ) Rabbi Binyamin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Koraḥ mentioned here was a mamzer. (Koraḥ is mentioned as a son of Esau’s wife Oholivama in this verse, and as a son of Esau’s son Elifaz (Genesis 36:16), indicating that he was the illegitimate child of Oholivama and Elifaz (Rashi, Genesis 36:5). )
(Genesis 45:8) "So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh." I am like a creditor to him, as it is stated (Exodus 22:24), "Do not impose interest upon him." Just as the way of a creditor is to lend to a borrower (Proverbs 22:7), in the book of Rabbi Meir, it is written, "And he has made me a father," as it says, "which the Lord, your God, gives you" (Deuteronomy 15:2). This is a legal judgment derived from the full texts written in the Torah, which emerged from Jerusalem during the Sabbatical year and ascended to Rome, and the scrolls were stored in the synagogue of Asvyros. "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good" (Genesis 1:31). "For a man and his wife, leather tunics" (Genesis 3:21). "I will descend now and see their outcry" (Genesis 18:21). "The Lord who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth" (Genesis 24:7). "And he sold his birthright" (Genesis 25:33). "Behold, now, I am old; I do not know the day of my death" (Genesis 27:2). "The fragrance of a field that the Lord has blessed" (Genesis 27:27). "And Oholibamah bore Jeush" (Genesis 36:5). "Eliphaz, the son of Esau" (Genesis 36:10). "These were the sons of Oholibamah, the wife of Esau" (Genesis 36:14). "They arose and went down to Egypt" (Genesis 43:15). "And I buried her there on the way" (Genesis 48:7).And he has made me a father to Pharaoh." And here are the names that came down to Egypt (Genesis 46:8). "So shall you say to the children of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel" (Exodus 19:3). "The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses" (Exodus 12:37). "For it is a sign between Me" (Exodus 31:13). "Five for the planks on one side" (Exodus 26:27). "We have no barricade against it." "And the priest shall take from its blood" (Leviticus 4:34), for if it is a lamb. "And when the zav becomes purified with living water" (Leviticus 15:13). "One lamb of the first year without blemish" (Leviticus 14:10). "All who come to join the ranks must be counted in their census" (Numbers 4:3). "From the first of your dough, you shall give" (Numbers 15:20). "Avenge the vengeance of the children of Israel" (Numbers 31:2). "And they came to Moses and to the congregation of the children of Israel" (Numbers 12:1). "The heads of the families of the house of Joseph approached" (Numbers 36:1). "But I have not the power to go up" (Deuteronomy 1:26). "And they shall inherit it, they and all the people of the land" (Numbers 32:22). "To give us into the hands of the Amorites" (Deuteronomy 1:27). "Nor take a mother upon her young" (Deuteronomy 22:6). "Brimstone and salt burning" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "Like the upheaval of Sodom and Gomorrah" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "I said, I would scatter them" (Deuteronomy 32:26). So they are written in the Torah that emerged from Jerusalem.
אלה תולדות יעקב, “the following describes events and problems which Yaakov encountered in his life.” [by the way, Seforno, who lived hundreds of years later than Rash’bam, also accepts the interpretation described as nonsensical by Rash’bam. Ed.] This exegesis is nonsense. Whenever the expression תולדות occurs in the Bible, sometimes this word introduces the names of the grandsons of the party referred to, such as in Genesis 6,9 where the Torah after describing the righteousness of Noach tells us that Noach had three sons and proceeds to give us their names. The names of the sons could not be the purpose of the story there, as we had been told earlier in 5,32 that Noach at the age of 500 sired three sons and we were already told their names. The Torah then continues to describe mankind’s ongoing corruption and that Noach was the only one with whom G’d was pleased. When the Torah commences a second time with the line אלה תולדות נח in 6,9, clearly the Torah does not mean to repeat itself, but it leads to the Torah telling us of Noach’s grandchildren, something that is reported in greater detail in 10,1 under the heading of “and these are the generations of the sons of Noach.” [Perhaps the reason for the repetition of אלה תולדות בני נח in chapter 10, is that if, as the author says, the grandchildren were meant already in chapter 6, now after the deluge, the task of these children to generate a new mankind began in earnest, whereas up to that point they were charged with merely surviving the deluge. Ed.] Just as the Torah reported the growth and development of mankind after the deluge until we have a total of 70 such descendants of Noach being named, so in chapter 36,6 we have been told of the descendants of Esau who have been born in the land of Canaan, i.e. the land in which his father lived. After that, the Torah reported Esau’s further development in Mount Seir, commencing with verse 9 of that chapter. The Torah reports the development of Yaakov’s family in a parallel manner, 35,23 extending through verses 26-27 and listing all his children who had been born in exile, while he was in Padan Aram with Lavan. Now the Torah continues with the words אלה תולדות יעקב, concentrating forthwith on the grandchildren who combine to make up a total of 70 prior to the descent of the family to Egypt. Details of the birth of these various grandchildren are being provided, beginning with the chronicle of what happened to Joseph, who at 17 years of age experienced traumatic events, as a result of which his older brother Yehudah separated from the other brothers and started his own family in Keziv and Adulam, siring three sons, and grandsons respectively, i.e. Shelah, Peretz and Zerach. The history of Yaakov’s family became complicated further with Joseph having been brought to Egypt as a slave where Menashe and Ephrayim were born for him. Having attained high office, Joseph invited his father and family to join him in Egypt so that ultimately 70 members of Yaakov’s family wound up in Egypt. Moses had to record all this in order to substantiate his claim in Deuteronomy 10,22 that “your fathers descended to Egypt when they numbered only 70 persons.”
Oholivomoh bore Yeush, Yalom, and Korach. These are the sons of Eisov that were born to him in the land of Canaan.
And Ahalibama, bare to Esau Jehus, and Jaalam, and Korach. These are the sons of Esau who were born to him in the land of Kenaan.
| וַיִּקַּ֣ח עֵשָׂ֡ו אֶת־נָ֠שָׁ֠יו וְאֶת־בָּנָ֣יו וְאֶת־בְּנֹתָיו֮ וְאֶת־כׇּל־נַפְשׁ֣וֹת בֵּיתוֹ֒ וְאֶת־מִקְנֵ֣הוּ וְאֶת־כׇּל־בְּהֶמְתּ֗וֹ וְאֵת֙ כׇּל־קִנְיָנ֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֥ר רָכַ֖שׁ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנָ֑עַן וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ אֶל־אֶ֔רֶץ מִפְּנֵ֖י יַעֲקֹ֥ב אָחִֽיו׃ | 6 P | Esau took his wives, his sons and daughters, and all the members of his household, his cattle and all his livestock, and all the property that he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to another land because of his brother Jacob. |
Genesis 25,17. Concerning Rashi’s comment based on Rabbi Chiya that the reason that the lifetime of Yishmael was listed in the Torah is to show that Yaakov spent 14 years hiding in the academy founded by Shem and subsequently headed by his great-grandson Ever; surely it is strange that this piece of information was of such significance that the Torah had to write about it, albeit as an allusion! Why did the Torah not simply write that Yaakov hid there instead of adding a paragraph of seven verses detailing Yishmael’s descendants?! The intention of the Torah was to illustrate the influence of a tzaddik in elevating people in his immediate proximity to a spiritually higher level. It also demonstrates that when a tzaddik loses this ability to elevate his environment spiritually he has to go into hiding instead, as through his failure he arouses G’d’s wrath at the wicked and his remaining in their environment would expose him to the judgment G’d has in store for them. Isaiah 26,20 makes this point when he writes: חבי כמעט רגע וגו', “hide for a brief moment and lock the doors behind you!” (Compare the Zohar’s I 182, comment on this verse) This was also the reason why Elijah hid during the years of famine that he had decreed (Kings I 17,2) so that the ravens had to bring him food. At that time it was beyond Elijah’s powers to spiritually elevate the people of his generation. Eventually, as described in the same Book, Elijah was commanded by G’d to come out of hiding, as by that time the ground had been prepared for his message to resonate among some of the people. His success is recorded in King’s I 18,39, although, alas it was short-lived. It is a fact that for a while at least, Yaakov’s encounter with Esau resulted in a spiritual elevation of his brother Esau, who even wanted to share the world with him. The reason why Yaakov succeeded partially with Esau though failing with Yishmael, was that Esau was his twin brother, as opposed to Yishmael who was only his uncle. [Esau voluntarily vacated the land of Israel (Canaan) in order not to compete with his brother. (Genesis 36,6-8) Ed.] When the Torah lists the years Yishmael lived, it was to inform us that he lived that many years only on account of his nephew Yaakov’s merit. If Yaakov had been able to bring about a spiritual reawakening of his uncle, he would not have had to hide.
Genesis 27,38. “do you really have only one blessing that you can dispense, my father?;While there is a rule that life as well as blessings originate from one holy source, this rule brings in its wake the possibility that the “left” side of the emanations can also be the seat of life, as when G’d created the universe He arranged that the forces of evil and those of good be at par with one another least on the surface. [Otherwise freedom of choice granted to man would be meaningless. Ed.] Both the Ari z’al and others preceding him, including Rashi, stated that holiness is also known as אחת, “a state of unity.” Rashi points out that when the descendants of Yaakov set out on their journey to Egypt and their names had been listed individually, the Torah (Genesis 46,27) concluded the list with כל הנפש, “the sum total of the soul,” (singular) when referring to this family. On the other hand, when the Torah reports Esau and his family leaving the Holy Land in order to settle in the region of Seir, (Genesis 36,6) Esau’s descendants are referred to as נפשות, “souls” (pl.). Such nuances in the Torah reveal to us that not all souls originate in the same region of the diagram portraying the emanations.Genesis 27,38. “do you really have only one blessing that you can dispense, my father?”;While there is a rule that life as well as blessings originate from one holy source, this rule brings in its wake the possibility that the “left” side of the emanations can also be the seat of life, as when G’d created the universe He arranged that the forces of evil and those of good be at par with one another least on the surface. [Otherwise freedom of choice granted to man would be meaningless. Ed.] Both the Ari z’al and others preceding him, including Rashi, stated that holiness is also known as אחת, “a state of unity.” Rashi points out that when the descendants of Yaakov set out on their journey to Egypt and their names had been listed individually, the Torah (Genesis 46,27) concluded the list with כל הנפש, “the sum total of the soul,” (singular) when referring to this family. On the other hand, when the Torah reports Esau and his family leaving the Holy Land in order to settle in the region of Seir, (Genesis 36,6) Esau’s descendants are referred to as נפשות, “souls” (pl.). Such nuances in the Torah reveal to us that not all souls originate in the same region of the diagram portraying the emanations. When Esau, at this point questions his father if he has only ברכה אתת, he asks whether his father cannot dispense a blessing for people whose origin is not in the holy section of the emanations, the section known as אחת. He feels, that surely seeing that he is his father’s son, his father must also be able to have reserved a blessing for him! By asking this question he contradicted the words of his father who had told him that the blessing he had already bestowed on Yaakov that made him senior to his older brother, i.e. הוה גביר לאחיך, made this impossible. If he were to give Esau a similar blessing he would in effect deprive Yaakov of the blessing he had just given him. When Yitzchok heard what Esau demanded of him, seeing that he had told him that in his blessing he had made Yaakov the senior of the two, he realized the full extent of Esau’s wickedness, and that is why he added, now, without reservation, גם ברוך יהיה, “he shall also remain blessed!” Up until that moment Yitzchok had not realized that Esau was a product of the סטרא אחרא, the “left side” of the scheme of emanations. Having found that out, he now gave Esau a blessing that was in keeping with the “blessings” perceived as such by souls that originate in that realm, i.e. על חרבך תחיה, “seeing that you are loyal to the principle that might is right,” the principle espoused by people whose souls originate in the left side of the emanations, people who believe in the survival of the fittest, Yitzchok could only bless his son Esau by wishing him “success” (death) when he would be involved in such lethal encounters. He meant it in the sense that “until you pay the price with your physical life you will not be able to secure for yourself any life in the hereafter”. When such people lose their lives when engaged in what they perceive as a “holy” war, they may redeem themselves and secure life in the hereafter. [This editor has often wondered it the concept of our sages of a Mashiach ben Yoseph, a messiah who will die in battle before the advent of the Mashiach ben David, the ultimate redeemer, may not originate among the gentiles and earn his right to his hereafter in the manner just described. Ed.] Genesis 27,40. Let us turn now to the next part of Yitzchok’s “blessing” to Easu, the words והיה כאשר תריד ופרקת עולו מעל צוארך, “but when you humble yourself you will be able to remove the his yoke from around your neck.” According to Or Hachayim on our verse the word והיה in the above verse is to be interpreted as a form of joy, שמחה. Contrary to the accepted translation of this line, Rashi understands the word תריד, as “when you will suffer pain.” According to Proverbs 11,10 באבוד רשעים רנה “when the wicked perish there is jubilation.” Isaiah 1,3 speaks about the ox recognizing his owner. The fact is that when the ox wears a yoke he does not recognize (in the sense of welcoming) his master voluntarily, but only because he is forced to wear a yoke. When the yoke is removed he will honour his master by still respecting and welcoming him. Something parallel occurs in history about the Israel/Esau relationship. As long as the Temple in Jerusalem was standing, the gentile nations paid reluctant respect to the Jewish people. Nowadays, when there is no longer a Temple in Jerusalem, the yoke which had restrained the Gentiles has been lifted from them, although their obligation, as a free willed creature created in the image of G’d to respect G’d’s people has not been lessened. G’d, after all, created this universe only for the sake of His people, the Jewish people. According to Isaiah 40,17 כל האומות כעין נגדו מאפס ותוהו נחשבו לו, “All nations are as naught in His sight; He accounts them as less than nothing.” This is in essence what Yitzchok told Esau when he said ופרקתו עולו מעל צווארך, “even when you will divest yourself of the yoke of Yaakov, in times when the Jewish people are in exile, as Rashi explains, you will only remove this yoke from your neck, i.e. temporarily during the time Israel is in exile, but inherently, your duty toward G’d, whose representative on earth the Jewish people are, will continue, just as an ox knows his master regardless if he is restrained by a physical yoke or not.” Upon hearing this, Esau raised his voice and wept, feeling frustrated that his father would not give him a blessing that would neutralize the one he had given to Yaakov. He had fully understood all the implications of the few words Yitzchok had said to him.
לך אל ארץ, “he went (emigrated) to a land.” Esau conquered the land of Seir from the people known as Chorim. Rashi explains what motivated Esau to leave the land of Canaan voluntarily. If you were to counter that at the beginning of this portion it is written: ארצה שעיר שדה אדום, “that Yaakov had dispatched his messengers to ”the land of Seir otherwise known as the field of Edom, (which gives the reader the impression that Esau had already taken possession of that land at that time) and it entitles us to think that Esau already lived there, we have to assume that up until the period mentioned in our verse here he had lived alternately both in the land of Canaan and in the land of Seir. It was only after Yaakov had returned to the land of Canaan and the brothers had been reconciled, that Esau vacated the land of Canaan, thus acknowledging that this would become the land possessed as ancestral home by the descendants of Yaakov.
מפני יעקב אחיו, “on account of Yaakov, his brother.” Seeing that he had sold the birthright to Yaakov, thus making Yaakov the legal heir of Yitzchok, he left for a foreign country to show that he did no longer dispute Yaakov’s claim to that land.
וילך אל ארץ מפני יעקב אחיו, “he went to a (different) country on account of his brother Yaakov.” The plain meaning of the verse is that Esau went to the land of Seir which was his real home at that time, just as the Torah had mentioned already in Genesis 33,16: “Esau returned on that day on his way to Seir.” We have independent support for the fact that Esau resided in Seir in 36,8: “Esau resided in the mountain of Seir.” Ibn Ezra comments on this that this mountain is adjacent to the land of Israel as the Torah reports in Deut. 2,8: “we by-passed our brothers the sons of Esau who reside in Seir.” We also have Deut. 1,2 where Moses speaks of “eleven days march from Mount Chorev by way of Mount Seir.” This mountain is not identical with the country in which the Edomites live in nowadays, i.e. the land of Greece.
ואת כל בהמתו, a generic term including all of his livestock.
וילך אל ארץ, to a land where previously he had been living on an ad hoc basis before Yaakov had returned from Lavan. Now, after Yaakov’s return, he decided to move there permanently. כי היה רכושם רב, the reason that Esau moved now was 1) because the combined herds of Yaakov and Esau were extensive, and Esau feared he would ultimately be forced to leave the land of Canaan as G’d had promised it to Yaakov’s children as their inheritance. After all, his father Yitzchok had said to him in 27,39 that whereas his inheritance would be משמני הארץ, “of the fat places of the earth,” nothing had been said to him indicating that he would own part of the land of Canaan. Perhaps his father had even told him that Mount Seir would be his. The Torah refers to this land as being Esau’s by right in Deuteronomy 2,5 as well as in Joshua 24,4. His claim to this region was therefore not only that of a conqueror, but one which had Divine approval.
AND ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES, AND HIS SONS, AND HIS DAUGHTERS. This journey took place after his brother had returned from Haran and established himself in the land of Canaan, as it says here, and he went into a land away from his brother Jacob. It is possible that this was also after the death of their father. Now when his brother Jacob was still in Haran, Esau was already in Se’ir, as is written above! (32:4.) But the explanation of the matter is that Esau went to Se’ir in the days of the chieftains of the Horites, the inhabitants of the land, (Verse 20 here.) and he became a lord with a following of four hundred men (Above, 32:7.) while his children and family remained in the land of Canaan. It is possible that Esau had some land there in another location, in the plain, not on mount Se’ir. Therefore Scripture speaks of him as living in the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom. (32:4.) And after his brother returned to the land of Canaan he vacated before his coming for he knew that the land of Canaan was the inheritance of his brother which his father had given him in his blessing. So he took his sons… and all the souls of his house — a multitude of people — and went to Se’ir to settle there. He then fought with the sons of Se’ir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land, (Verse 20 here.) for perhaps they feared him, and they did not permit him to enter their territory into mount Se’ir, where the fortifications were. However, he settled in the field of Edom, in his original location, and the Eternal destroyed them from before them, and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead, as it said in Mishneh Torah. (Deuteronomy 2:21.) It therefore says there, Because I have given mount Se’ir unto Esau for a possession. (Ibid., 2:5.)
AND HE WENT INTO A LAND. According to Onkelos, the meaning of this expression is “into another land.” But Rashi explained, “He went to stay wherever he could find room” for he went to no particular country but sought a country where he would find room to settle, until he came to mount Se’ir and settled there. In my opinion, the correct interpretation is that Scripture is saying: “And he went to the land of Se’ir,” the name of the place being omitted from the verse as it is self-understood since it has already been mentioned that he dwelled in the land of Se’ir, and it is understood that he led his family there, and right nearby, it is mentioned, And Esau dwelled in mount Se’ir. (Verse 8 here.) A similar case is found in this verse: He went into the castle of the king’s house, and burnt the king’s house over him with fire, (I Kings 16:18.) which means that house of the king in which he was. Similarly, And he burned the high place and stamped it small to powder, and burned the Asherah, (II Kings 23:15.) which means the high place which belonged to Jeroboam, who was mentioned in the beginning of the verse. So also: And Joab said to the Cushite: Go tell the king… And Cushite bowed down to Joab, (II Samuel 18:21.) [which means “the Cushite” mentioned] ; And an ass and the lion, (I Kings 13:28.) [which means “the ass” mentioned above in Verse 24]. So also: For ships were broken at Etzion-geber, (Ibid., 22:49. ) which means “the ships” [mentioned in the beginning of that verse] ; and there are many similar verses. Here also the expression, And he went into a land, is as if it said, “into the land,” i.e., the land of Se’ir which was mentioned.
מפני יעקב אחיו, seeing that Yaakov had bought the birthright, and by rights he was entitled to inherit the estate of his father Yitzchok, i.e. the land of Canaan. Therefore, Esau decided to vacate that land in favour of his brother.
i.e. no particular country, but into any country), to stay where-ever he could find room.
(6-7) מפני מקניהם — מפני יעקב אחיו. Es werden hier zwei Motive für die Auswanderung Esaus angegeben. מפני יעקב אחיו bezeichnet jedenfalls die Entfernung von Jakob als das eine Motiv. Indem gleichwohl אחיו beigefügt ist, so ist der Grund dieses Wunsches der Entfernung nicht in einem unbrüderlichen Verhältnis zu suchen. Die Vergangenheit war völlig gesühnt. Allein der geistige und sittliche Gegensatz war ein zu großer, als daß sich Esau nicht fern von Jakob viel freier gefühlt hätte. Er hätte es gleichwohl nicht getan, wenn die äußeren Umstände ihr wirkliches Zusammenwohnen gestattet hätten. Allein מפני מקניהם war dies nicht möglich. Im Lande Kanaan hätten sie doch nicht zusammen bleiben können. Ihr beiderseitiges Wirtschaftswesen nahm zusammen einen viel zu großen Raum in Anspruch, als daß sie einen solchen dort, wo sie nur als גרים geduldet waren, hätten okkupieren können. Da sie also jedenfalls מפני מקניהם sich hätten trennen müssen, zog Esau es vor, lieber "אל ארץ" ganz in ein anderes Land zu ziehen, מפני יעקב אחיו, um so völlig außerhalb des genierenden geistigen und sittlichen Einflusses seines Bruders zu kommen. Es steht daher auch wohl absichtlich nicht אל ארץ אדום, sondern אל ארץ, "nach irgend einem Lande", um eben das Motiv deutlicher hervortreten zu lassen, daß die Entfernung von Jakob der Beweggrund war. —
To reside wherever he might find. Otherwise, why does it not mention to which land he went?
However, Esau subsequently took his wives, his sons, his daughters, all the members of his household, his livestock, all his animals, and all his possessions that he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to a land, a different region, due to his brother Jacob,
ויקח עשו את נשיו ואת בניו, “Esau took his wives and his children, etc.” Rashi alerts us to the fact that Esau’s wives took precedence over his children as opposed to his brother Yaakov, even though the Torah also mentions his wives first when his family was introduced to Esau as we know from The only reason Yaakov presented his wives before presenting his children, was on account of his fear at that time, also because they were of tender age and unable to be without their mothers. Such considerations did not apply in our context here. Nachmanides writes that Esau’s migration took place after Yaakov had returned from Charan, and after their father Yitzchok had died. While it is true that Esau had been in Seir also during the period that Yaakov was at Lavan, as has been explained previously, (32,4), the correct sequence of events is as follows: Esau had first gone to Seir during the days of the Alufey Chori who had then resided and ruled in that region. At that time Esau, accompanied by 400 men, had invaded that region leaving his wives and family behind in the land of Canaan. It is quite likely that he conquered part of the low lying areas in that region already at that time, and that this accounts for the reference to the “land of Seir”, as opposed to the “mountain of Seir,” which also appears as שדה אדום, ”the field of Edom.” (32,4) After Yaakov had returned to the land of Canaan, Esau decided to vacate that land which his father had allocated to Yaakov as his inheritance. At that time he conducted a war against the inhabitants of the mountain of Seir Hachori, the predomi- nating tribe of the region.
וילך אל ארץ, “he went to ארץ.” According to Onkelos, the word ארץ is short for ארץ אחרת, “another country.” Rashi explains that Esau simply went in search of any country other than the land of Canaan, finally settling on the land of Seir as his new residence. Nachmanides writes that the Torah simply abbreviated, instead of writing וילך עשו אל ארץ שעיר, the Torah omitting details that it considered as obvious to the reader. This is especially so, since Esau’s having gone to Seir had already been mentioned in chapter 32. There are numerous such abbreviations to be found in the Torah.
Chapter (46) [47] of Prophets. [1] "Jacob fled to the land of Aram" (Hosea 12:13). This means "My people, enter your chambers and shut your doors" (Isaiah 26:20). Look within your heart and see that I have not brought suffering upon you according to your sins. Your inner chamber is your kidneys, as it says, "The light of God is the breath of man, searching all his innermost parts" (Proverbs 20:27). If suffering comes upon you, do not open your mouth and argue against divine justice. Rather, close your doors and remain silent, for "Hide yourself for a moment, until the wrath passes" (Isaiah 26:20). This is because suffering does not linger in the world; it passes, as it says, "Until anger passes by" (Isaiah 26:20). "My people, go within your chambers." When you see that difficult times are approaching, do not stand in their way, but give them space. "Go within your chambers" means, "Look to Me as if to say, 'I submit to Your will.'" When I saw that difficult times were approaching because of your sins, I gave them space, as it says, "He turned His right hand back" (Lamentations 2:3). So too, "My people, go within your chambers," means, "You too, go within your chambers and submit to My will," for anyone who stands against difficult times falls into their hands, as it says, "And they will testify against him, saying, 'Bless God and curse the people,' and they will take him outside the city and stone him to death" (1 Kings 21:13), because he stood against difficult times. But Abraham made room for the hour, and fled from Nimrod king of the Chaldeans, as it is said "Get yourself out of your country..." (Genesis 12:1-4) And the opportunity presented itself and fell into his hands, as it is written, "And Abimelech went to him from Gerar and they said, 'Behold, we have seen...'" (Genesis 26:26-28). Joseph made room for the opportunity when he was being sold to the Ishmaelites and could not say, "I am your brother," but remained silent and made room for the opportunity. And the opportunity presented itself and fell into his hands, as it is written, "And his brothers also went and fell down before him..." (Genesis 50:18). Jacob made room for the opportunity and fled from Esau, as it is written, "And Jacob fled..." (Hosea 12:13), and the opportunity presented itself and fell into his hands, as it is written, "And Esau took his wives and went to the land away from Jacob his brother..." (Genesis 36:6). Therefore, it is said to you, "Come into your chambers, my people..." (Isaiah 26:20).
Chapter (57) 58: Torah [1] And Jacob dwelt in the land (Genesis 37:1). This is what the scripture says: "The eternal God is thy dwelling-place, and underneath are the everlasting arms" (Deuteronomy 33:27). At that time, when Israel dwelt securely, he relied upon the Lord alone (Deuteronomy 33:28). You do not know who preceded, whether it was the dwelling place or the God who preceded, but then David came and explained through Moses, "A prayer of Moses, the man of God. 'O Lord, You have been our refuge in every generation.'" (Psalm 90:1), meaning that God never preceded His creatures, as it says, "Who hath first given to Me, that I should repay him?" (Job 41:3). "And underneath are the everlasting arms" (Deuteronomy 33:27). R. Berechiah said that the Holy One, blessed be He, said: "Although I have created the world and maintain it, when there are righteous men below, it is as if they were maintaining the world," hence "underneath are the everlasting arms." "And He will thrust out the enemy from before thee, and say: Destroy" (Deuteronomy 33:27), this refers to Esau (and his chiefs), for it is written, "And Esau took his wives" (Genesis 36:6). "And He will thrust out" and rely upon the Lord alone, "and Israel dwelt securely" (Deuteronomy 33:28).
[3] Another interpretation: "And Jacob dwelled." What is written above, "And Esau took" (Genesis 36:6). This corresponds to "In your distress, when all these things have befallen you in the end of days, you will return to the Lord, your God, and hearken to His voice" (Deuteronomy 4:30), which refers to the angels, as it says, "And Jacob said when he saw them" (Genesis 32:3). All of them will be uplifted, as it says, "And they shall lift up their wings" (Isaiah 40:31). This refers to Esau (and his chieftains) who went to a land because of his brother Jacob (Genesis 36:6), "The one who trusts in Me shall inherit the land" (Isaiah 57:13). This refers to Jacob and his sons, and Jacob dwelled. - [edit. also refers Legends of Jews 1:3 and Psalm 90:3 'Return, ye children of men.']
“Truly, all the wealth that God salvaged from our father, it is for us and for our children. And now, everything that God said to you, do” (Genesis 31:16). “Jacob arose, and placed his sons and his wives upon the camels” (Genesis 31:17). “Truly, all the wealth that God salvaged from our father…arose and placed his children” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: “The heart of the wise inclines to his right, and the heart of a fool to his left” (Ecclesiastes 10:2). “The heart of the wise inclines to his right” – this is Jacob, as it is stated: “Jacob arose, and placed his sons” and then, “and his wives.” “And the heart of a fool to his left” – this is Esau: “Esau took his wives” (Genesis 36:6), and then, “and his sons, and his daughters” (Genesis 36:6). “He led all his livestock, and all his property that he attained, his acquisitions that he acquired, which he attained in Padan Aram, to come to Isaac his father, to the land of Canaan” (Genesis 31:18). “He led all his livestock, and all his property that he attained, his acquisitions that he acquired” – what he acquired from the acquisitions of Laban. “Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and Rachel stole the household idols that were her father’s” (Genesis 31:19). “Had gone to shear his sheep” – everywhere that shearing is stated, it makes an impression. (It leaves a negative impression, as was the case with Judah (Genesis 38:12), Naval (I Samuel 25:4), and Absalom (II Samuel 13:23).) “Rachel stole the household idols that were her father’s” – but her intentions were only for the sake of Heaven. She said: ‘What, am I going to go on my way and leave this elder in his corruption?’ That is why it was necessary for the verse to say: “Rachel stole the household idols that were her father’s.” (She took them for his sake, to remove idolatry from him, not because she wanted them herself.)
“Esau took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all the members of his household, and his livestock, and all his animals, and all his possessions that he acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to a land, due to his brother Jacob” (Genesis 36:6). “Esau took his wives” – “the heart of the wise inclines to his right, and the heart of a fool inclines to his left” (Ecclesiastes 10:2). “The heart of the wise inclines to his right” – this is Jacob, as it is written: “Jacob arose and lifted his children” (Genesis 31:17), and then “his wives” (Genesis 31:17). “The heart of a fool inclines to his left” – this is Esau, as it is stated: “Esau took his wives” and then “his sons.” “And went to a land, due to his brother Jacob” – Rabbi Eliezer said: Due to a promissory note – “That your descendants will be strangers” (Genesis 15:13). (Esau understood that the descendants of Abraham who would inherit the Land of Israel would first suffer great persecution. He did not want to suffer, and was willing to forego the opportunity to inherit the Land of Israel. ) Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Due to the shame. (He was ashamed because he sold the birthright to Jacob.)
“The wicked flee without a pursuer, but the righteous will be secure as a young lion” (Proverbs 28:1) – the wicked flee, but no one pursues them, as it is written: “[Esau took his wives, his sons, his daughters, all the members of his household, his livestock, all his animals, and all his possessions that he acquired in the land of Canaan,] and went to a land” (Genesis 36:6). Rabbi Elazar said: Due to a promissory note. (When God promised the Land of Israel to Abraham, he also stated that his descendants would be oppressed for many years in a strange land (see Genesis 15:6–16). Esau was willing to leave the Land of Israel and his claim to it so as not to have to endure that part of the prophecy. ) Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Due to the shame. (The shame of selling the birthright to Jacob.) “But the righteous will be secure as a young lion” – “Jacob settled.”
“The heart of the wise is to his right, and the heart of a fool is to his left” (Ecclesiastes 10:2). “The heart of the wise is to his right…” – Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa said: [This is analogous] to two people who had two kor, one of wheat and one of barley. One of them said to the other: ‘If yours is of barley mine is of wheat, and if mine is of wheat yours is of barley. In any case, I am taking the one of wheat.’ So, Abraham said to Lot: “If to the left, I will go to the right, and if to the right, I will go to the left [asme’ila]” (Genesis 13:9). Rabbi Ḥanina ben Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is not written here “esmola,” but rather “asme’ila.” (Esmola means, “I will go to the left.” Asme’ila can mean, “I will cause to go to the left.”) Even if you are impertinent, I will cause you to go to the left. (Abraham told Lot: Ultimately, I will go to the right, the direction of the wise, and you will go to the left, which is the direction of the fool.) Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi], when a person would enter for judgment before him, if [the party that lost the case] would obey the ruling that would be fine, and if not, [Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi] would say to a member of his household: ‘Cause him to go left’; (Cause him to understand that he is wrong.) and he would signal and show him that he should strike him from the other side. Another matter: “The heart of the wise is to his right” – this is Jacob, as it is stated: “Jacob arose and placed his sons and his wives [upon the camels]” (Genesis 31:17). (Jacob understood that the main objective of marriage is producing the next generation. Therefore, he tended first to his sons and then to his wives.) “And the heart of a fool is to his left” – this is the wicked Esau, as it is stated: “Esau took his wives, his sons, [and his daughters]” (Genesis 36:6). (Esau prioritized his own pleasure; therefore he tended to his wives and then to his sons. It was not because he was concerned with his wives’ safety that he tended to them first, as he tended to his daughters, who were even more vulnerable, last.)
(Gen. 37:1:) NOW JACOB DWELT IN THE LAND WHERE HIS FATHER HAD SOJOURNED, < IN THE LAND OF CANAAN >. This text is related (to Deut. 33:27): THE ETERNAL GOD IS A DWELLING PLACE. R. Jeremiah said: We do not know (from the Hebrew text of Scripture) whether a DWELLING PLACE is GOD or whether GOD is a DWELLING PLACE. (Gen. R. 68:9 states the problem more clearly: “We do not know whether the Holy One is the place for his world or whether the world is his place.” Similarly, M. Pss. 90:10.) When it says (in Ps. 90:1): A PRAYER OF MOSES, THE MAN OF GOD: O LORD, YOU HAVE BEEN OUR DWELLING PLACE, [here the Holy One is the dwelling place for his world and the world is not his place]. Although the Holy One created his world, he did not dwell in the land but a righteous one; (Cf. MS 1240 from the De Rossi library in Parma: “He did not dwell in the land with < the > righteous.” Perhaps the text should read: “He did not dwell in the land but with the righteous. So Y. Elman in a private communication.) and by their merit < such righteous > ones sustain the world, as stated (in Deut. 33:27, cont.): AND UNDERNEATH ARE THE ARMS OF THE WORLD. (English translations generally render ARMS OF THE WORLD as “everlasting arms,” but here the midrash views the merits of the righteous as supporting the world like the arms of the mythological Atlas.) Come and see how, during all the time the wicked are in the world, the righteous never appear. And so you find that, during all the time Esau was in the land of Israel, Jacob was unable to appear. Esau passed on, as stated (in Gen. 36:6): THEN ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES, < AND WENT INTO A LAND AWAY FROM HIS BROTHER JACOB >. Immediately (one reads in Gen. 37:1): NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >. Therefore, (according to Deut. 33:27, cont.): SO HE DROVE OUT THE ENEMY FROM BEFORE YOU. At that time (according to vs. 28): THUS ISRAEL DWELT SAFELY ALONE.
[(Gen. 37:1:) NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >.] This text is related (to Is. 57:13): WHEN YOU CRY OUT, LET YOUR ASSEMBLED ONES SAVE YOU. What are they? These are the angels who were placed to guard him when he went away to go to Aram-Naharaim, since the angels who minister in the land of Israel do not minister outside the land, nor do those who belong outside the land < minister > in the land of Israel. (So above, 8:3.) So (in Gen. 28:12) Jacob saw < some > ascending and others descending to go abroad with him. Then, when he came to return, the Holy One summoned those angels who had ministered to him in the land. He said to them: Here is Jacob returning. Come on and let us go out for a meeting (Gk.: apante, according to the metathesis suggested by Buber and assumed in the Jastrow lexicon. On apante used for apantesis, see Jud. 4:22 (LXX).) with him {i.e., to the border}. To what is the matter comparable? To a king whose son went away overseas to take a wife. After some time he came to return to his father's house. The king said to his court (’PSYQYN, which probably represents the medieval Latin word for “court,” i.e., obsequium.) {i.e., to his army}: Come and let us go out for a meeting with my son. So, when Jacob came to return to the land of his father, the Holy One called the ministering angels. He said to them: Come and let us go out for a meeting with Jacob. As soon as Jacob raised his eyes, he saw the angels, as stated (in Gen. 32:2 [1]): SO JACOB WENT ON HIS WAY, AND THE ANGELS OF GOD MET HIM…. When Jacob saw them, where is it shown that they ministered to him in the land of Israel? Where it is stated (in vs. 3 [2]): WHEN JACOB SAW THEM, HE SAID: THIS IS GOD'S HOST. It is therefore stated (in Is. 57:13): WHEN YOU CRY OUT, LET YOUR ASSEMBLED ONES SAVE YOU. These < ASSEMBLED ONES > are the angels. (Ibid., cont.:) BUT THE WIND SHALL CARRY THEM ALL AWAY. (Gen. R. 84:1.) These are Esau and his lords, as stated (in Gen. 36:6): < THEN ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES >, AND WENT INTO A LAND AWAY FROM HIS BROTHER JACOB. (Is. 57:13, cont.:) YET THE ONE WHO TAKES REFUGE IN ME SHALL INHERIT THE LAND. This ONE is Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 37:1): NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >.
[(Gen. 37:1:) NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >.] This text is related (to I Chron. 29:15): FOR WE ARE SOJOURNERS BEFORE YOU [AND TRANSIENTS LIKE ALL OUR ANCESTORS]. So are the righteous. The Holy One had made them the essential thing, but they make themselves subordinate. In the case of Abraham, the Holy One had magnified him, as stated (in Gen. 12:2): I WILL BLESS YOU AND MAGNIFY YOUR NAME. And so (in Gen. 13:17): ARISE, WALK ABOUT THE LAND < THROUGHOUT ITS LENGTH AND BREADTH, FOR I AM GIVING IT TO YOU >. < Yet > he says to the children of Heth (i.e., to the Hittites, in Gen. 23:4): I AM AN ALIEN AND A TRANSIENT AMONG YOU. So also with Isaac, the Holy One magnified him, as stated (in Gen. 26:12): SO ISAAC SOWED ON THAT LAND < AND REAPED IN THAT YEAR A HUNDREDFOLD, FOR THE LORD HAD BLESSED HIM >. It also says (in Gen. 26:6): SO ISAAC {SOJOURNED} [DWELT] IN GERAR. And so with Jacob (according to Gen. 36:6): NOW JACOB DWELT IN THE LAND WHERE HIS FATHER HAD SOJOURNED. It is therefore stated (in I Chron. 29:16): FOR WE ARE SOJOURNERS BEFORE YOU AND TRANSIENTS LIKE ALL OUR ANCESTORS.
Another interpretation (of Gen. 28:10): AND JACOB SET OUT. It is written (in Is. 26:20): GO, MY PEOPLE, ENTER INTO YOUR CHAMBERS AND SHUT [YOUR DOORS] BEHIND ME. (The MT reads BEHIND YOU.) HIDE JUST FOR A MOMENT UNTIL MY ANGER PASSES. When you see a fateful hour, do not stand against it but give way to it. Thus it is stated: GO, MY PEOPLE, ENTER INTO YOUR CHAMBERS. Look at me, as it were, for I have perceived an hour < made > fateful through your sins. I did nothing. Instead I gave way to it, as stated (in Lam. 2:3): HE HAS WITHDRAWN HIS RIGHT HAND…. So also you, GO MY PEOPLE. Thus, the one who stands against the hour will fall into its hand; but whoever gives way to the hour will have the hour fall into his hand. Naboth stood against the hour {and stood against it} [and fell into its hand]. When Ahab said to him (in I Kings 21:2): GIVE ME YOUR VINEYARD SO THAT I MAY HAVE IT FOR A VEGETABLE GARDEN. What did he do? He said (in vs. 3): THE LORD FORBID < THAT I SHOULD GIVE YOU MY ANCESTORS' INHERITANCE >. What happened to him? He fell into the hand of the hour, as stated (in vs. 13): AND THE MEN OF BELIAL TESTIFIED AGAINST [NABOTH BEFORE THE PEOPLE…. AND THEY STONED HIM TO DEATH WITH STONES]. Abraham gave way to the hour and fled from Nimrod, the king of the Chaldeans. So the hour returned and fell into his hand when he killed sixteen kings. It is so stated (in Gen. 14:15): THEN HE DEPLOYED < HIS FORCES > AGAINST THEM BY NIGHT. Isaac also gave way to the hour when the Philistines said to him (in Gen. 26:16): GO AWAY FROM US. Immediately < the passage continues > (in vs. 17): SO ISAAC WENT AWAY FROM THERE. Then the hour returned and fell into his hand, as stated (in Gen. 26:26-28): THEN ABIMELECH CAME UNTO HIM FROM GERAR…. SO ISAAC SAID UNTO THEM: WHY HAVE YOU COME UNTO ME …? AND THEY SAID: WE HAVE CLEARLY SEEN THAT THE LORD IS WITH YOU…. Joseph also gave way to the hour. When his brothers sold him, was he not able to say: I am your brother? But he gave way to the hour, and the hour returned and fell before him, as stated (in Gen. 50:18): THEN HIS BROTHERS ALSO WENT AND FELL DOWN BEFORE HIM. Moses gave way to the hour, as stated (in Exod. 2:15): BUT MOSES FLED FROM PHARAOH. So the hour returned and fell into his hand, as stated (in Exod. 11:3): {AND} [ALSO] THE MAN MOSES WAS VERY GREAT IN THE EYES OF PHARAOH'S [SERVANTS] AND IN THE EYES OF HIS PEOPLE. David also gave way to the hour, as stated (in I Sam. 20:1): BUT DAVID FLED FROM NAIOTH. It is also written (in Ps. 3:1): WHEN HE FLED FROM HIS SON ABSALOM. And it is written (in Ps. 57:1): [WHEN HE FLED] FROM SAUL IN THE CAVE. So the hour returned and fell into his hand when Saul said to him (in I Sam. 24:21 [20]): [PLEASE] LOOK, I KNOW THAT YOU SHALL SURELY REIGN AND IN YOUR HAND THE KINGDOM OF ISRAEL SHALL ARISE. So < it was > also < with > Jacob, who fled from the hour. (Hosea 12:13 [12]:) THEN JACOB FLED TO THE LAND OF ARAM. And the hour fell into his hand, as stated (in Gen. 36:6): THEN ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES < … > AND WENT INTO A LAND AWAY FROM HIS BROTHER JACOB. Ergo (in Is. 26:20): GO, MY PEOPLE, ENTER INTO YOUR CHAMBERS.
Esau said: How long will I trouble my brother? He arose and went away, as stated (in Gen. 36:6): THEN ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES…. < AND WENT INTO A LAND AWAY FROM HIS BROTHER JACOB >. What did Jacob do? When his children and his flocks had crossed over into the land of Israel, he arose and sold all that he had brought with him from outside of the land. Then he made it into piles of gold. He said to Esau: You have a share with me in the cave of Machpelah. Now what do you want, to receive these piles of gold or to share < the cave > with me? Esau began by saying: What do I want with < a share > of this cave? This gold is what I want. Now where is it shown that Jacob sold all that he had brought from outside of the land and that Esau took it? Where Joseph said so (in Gen. 50:5): MY FATHER HAD ME SWEAR, SAYING: SEE, I AM DYING. IN MY GRAVE WHICH I DUG < IN THE LAND OF CANAAN, THERE YOU SHALL BURY ME >. R. Huna b. R. Abbin the Priest said: When Jacob wanted to come to the land of Israel, what is written (in Gen. 31:18)? AND HE DROVE ALL HIS LIVESTOCK < AND ALL HIS GOODS THAT HE HAD ACQUIRED … IN PADDAN-ARAM >. Now, when he wanted to go down into Egypt, what is written (in Gen. 46:6)? AND THEY TOOK ALONG THEIR LIVESTOCK AND ALL THEIR GOODS, WHICH THEY HAD ACQUIRED IN THE LAND OF CANAAN. Now, in regard to what he had brought from the land of Aram-Naharaim, where was that? You simply learn from here that Jacob had sold it and given it to Esau. (For an alternative explanation of the same tradition, see Gen. R. 100:5; Exod. R. 31:17; Rashi on Gen. 50:5.) Then would you say that something was lacking? The Holy One simply filled his loss and restored everything to him immediately, as stated (in Gen. 33:18:) NOW JACOB CAME WHOLE.
And Esau took all that his father had left, and he gave to Jacob the land of Israel, and the Cave of Machpelah, and they wrote a perpetual deed between them. Jacob said to Esau: Go from the land of my possession, from the land of Canaan. Esau took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all that he had, [as it is said, "And Esau took his wives… and all his possessions which he had gathered in the land of Canaan], and went into a land away from his brother Jacob" (Gen. 36:6). And as a reward because he removed all his belongings on account of Jacob his brother, He gave him one hundred provinces from Seir unto Magdiel, and Magdiel is Rome, as it is said, "Duke Magdiel, Duke Iram" (Gen. 36:43).
Another matter: “This is the matter” – that is what is written: “Take words with you” (Hosea 14:3). That is what the verse said: “I wash my hands in purity, [and I circle Your altar, Lord], sounding a voice of thanksgiving” (Psalms 26:6–7). Is it, perhaps, to sacrifice bulls and rams? The verse states: “Sounding a voice of thanksgiving.” Because Israel said: Master of the universe, the princes sin, (The reference is to the king; see Leviticus 4:22. ) they bring an offering, and it is atoned for them; the anointed (The reference is to the High Priest; see Leviticus 4:3. ) sins, he brings an offering, and it is atoned for him. We do not have an offering. He said to them: “If the entire congregation of Israel shall err unwittingly.… [they shall bring a young bull as a sin offering]” (Leviticus 4:13–14). They said to Him: We are poor, and we do not have the means to bring offerings. He said to them: I am seeking words, as it is stated: “Take words with you and return to the Lord” (Hosea 14:3), and I will forgive all your sins. “Words” are nothing other than words of Torah, as it is stated: “These are the words that Moses spoke” (Deuteronomy 1:1). They said to Him: But we do not know. (We do not know Torah. ) He said to them: Weep and pray before Me, and I will accept it. When your ancestors were enslaved in Egypt, was it not through prayer that I redeemed them, as it is stated: “The children of Israel groaned due to the work, and they cried out” (Exodus 2:23)? In the days of Joshua, was it not through prayer that I performed miracles on their behalf, as it is stated: “Joshua rent his garments” (Joshua 7:6)? What did I say to him: “Extend the javelin” (Joshua 8:18). (Immediately, the city of Ai fell before them.) In the days of the Judges, through weeping I heard their cry, as it is stated: “It was when the children of Israel cried to the Lord” (Judges 6:7). In the days of Samuel, was it not through prayer that I heard them, as it is stated: “Samuel called out to the Lord on behalf of Israel, and the Lord answered him (I Samuel 7:9)? Likewise, the people of Jerusalem, even though they angered Me, because they wept, I had mercy on them, as it is stated: “For so said the Lord: Sing with joy for Jacob, and exult.… [they will come with weeping and supplications] (Jeremiah 31:6–8). That is, I ask of you neither sacrifices nor offerings, but rather, words, as it is stated: “Take words with you and return to the Lord” (Hosea 14:3). That is why David said: “I wash my hands in purity” (Psalms 26:6). He does not say: “To sacrifice to you” but rather, “sounding a voice of thanksgiving” (Psalms 26:7), that I thank you for the words of Torah. Another matter: “Take words with you” (Hosea 14:3) – Moses said: “The abode of the God of eternity” (Deuteronomy 33:27), this is Israel, as by their merit the world was created and upon them the world stands. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] says: “He drove the enemy away from before you” (Deuteronomy 33:27) – this is Haman, as it is stated: “[Esther said:] A man who is an adversary and an enemy, [this evil Haman]” (Esther 7:6). Why “an adversary and an enemy”? An adversary [to God] above and an enemy [to Israel] below; an adversary to the fathers and an enemy to the children; (Haman descended from Amalek, an old enemy of Israel. ) an adversary to me and an enemy to you. (The phrase in the verse was spoken by Esther to Aḥashverosh. The midrash is asserting that she said that Haman was not just her enemy, he was an enemy to Aḥashverosh as well. ) “And He said: Destroy” (Deuteronomy 33:27) – these are his sons. (God said that Haman’s sons would be destroyed. ) “Israel dwelled securely, alone is the spring [ein] of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:28) – ein is nothing other than prophecy, as it is stated: “For the Lord poured upon you a spirit of deep sleep and He closed your eyes [eineikhem]; [He covered the prophets]” (Isaiah 29:10). Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel said: Great is [God’s] love of Israel, as the Holy One blessed be He changes the law of nature for their benefit, as He rains manna for them from the heavens and causes dew to rise for them from the ground, as it is stated: “The layer of dew lifted” (Exodus 16:14), and likewise, “His heavens drip dew” (Deuteronomy 33:28). (Manna fell from heaven, whereas generally food is grown from the ground. Dew, which was viewed as naturally falling from heaven, came from the ground in addition to coming from heaven. ) When Moses saw the reward given to the righteous, he said to them: “Happy are you, Israel; who is like you, a people saved by the Lord” (Deuteronomy 33:29), people who are served by the Holy One blessed be He. “The shield [magen] of your assistance” (Deuteronomy 33:29) – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Who delivered [migen] your adversaries into your hand” (Genesis 14:20). “And who is the sword of your honor” (Deuteronomy 33:29) – corresponding to Isaac, who extended his neck to the sword. “Your enemies will seek to deceive you” (Deuteronomy 33:29) – corresponding to Jacob, as it is stated: “And went to a land, due to his brother Jacob” (Genesis 36:6). (Esau feared Jacob, but claimed that he left because the land was not large enough for the two of them.) “And you will tread on their high places” (Deuteronomy 33:29) – in the days of Mordekhai, as it is stated: “Haman took the garments and the horse” (Esther 6:11). (Haman took the royal horse and led Mordekhai on a celebratory procession. The Sages relate that in order for Mordekhai to get onto the horse, Haman bent over and Mordekhai stepped on him (see Megilla 16a; Esther Rabba 10:4). ) What caused Mordekhai to achieve this greatness? Say it is because he would constantly pray, as it is stated: “Mordekhai knew everything that was done […and cried a loud and bitter cry]” (Esther 4:1). Even after he saw himself achieve prominence, he never became haughty and never ceased from prayer, but rather, “Mordekhai returned” (Esther 6:12), just as he was initially. (Even after being paraded around in the king’s garment on the king’s horse, Mordekhai returned to his former position at the king’s gate. He did not grow haughty from the experience. ) “The Lord your God will place all these curses” (Deuteronomy 30:7), not on you, but “on your enemies, and on those who hate you, who pursued you” (Deuteronomy 30:7). And will you cease from prayer? No, but rather, what is written thereafter: “You will return and heed the voice of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 30:8), just as Mordekhai did, as it is stated: “Mordekhai returned to the king’s gate” (Esther 6:12), as he returned to his sackcloth and his fasting. That is why it is stated: “Take words with you” (Hosea 14:3). Here, too, it says: “This is the matter,” because the Holy One blessed be He acceded to Aaron only through prayer, as it is stated: “The Lord was incensed with Aaron to destroy him, [and I prayed on behalf of Aaron, as well, at that time]” (Deuteronomy 9:20).
Ḥizkiya taught: “Israel are scattered sheep” (Jeremiah 50:17). Israel is likened to sheep. Just as, if a sheep is struck on its head or one of its limbs all its limbs feel it, so it is with Israel; one of them sins and all of them feel it. “Shall one man sin, [and You will rage against the entire congregation?]” (Numbers 16:22). Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai taught: This is analogous to people who were sitting in a ship. One of them took a drill and began drilling a hole. His counterparts said to him: ‘What are you sitting and doing?’ He said to them: ‘Why do you care? Am I not drilling under myself?’ They said to him: ‘Because the water will rise and flood the ship we are on!’ So too, Job said: “If indeed I erred, with me my error rests” (Job 19:4). His counterparts said to him: “For he adds transgression to his sin, he extends [yispok] among us” (Job 34:37); you extend your iniquities among us. Rabbi Elasa said: A certain gentile asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa: ‘It is written in your Torah: “Incline after the majority” (Exodus 23:2). We are more numerous than you are. Why do you not become like us regarding idol worship?’ He said to him: ‘Do you have children?’ He said to him: ‘You have reminded me of my troubles.’ He said to him: ‘Why?’ He said to him: ‘I have many children. When they sit at my table, this one prays to the god of so and so and that one prays to the god of so and so, and they do not leave until each of them has cracked the skull of the other.’ He said to him: ‘Do you bring them to uniformity?’ He said to him: ‘No.’ He said to him: Before you get us to become [like you], go and bring your children to uniformity.’ He hurriedly went on his way. When he left, his disciples said to him: ‘Rabbi, you rebuffed this one with a broken reed. (It was not a particularly strong response to his question.) What do you respond to us?’ He said to them: ‘Regarding Esau, six people are mentioned in the verse, and [the term] written about them is “souls” in plural, as it is written: “Esau took his wives, his sons, his daughters, and all the souls [nafshot] of his household” (Genesis 36:6). Regarding Jacob, seventy people [are mentioned in the verses], and [the term] written about them is “soul” in the singular, as it is written: “All the souls [hanefesh] who emerged from Jacob's loins were seventy souls [nefesh] and Joseph was in Egypt” (Exodus 1:5). It is, rather, that Esau worshipped multiple gods, and therefore multiple souls are written in his regard. But Jacob worshipped one god, so one nefesh is written in his regard: “All the souls [hanefesh]…were.”
The scoffers of that generation maintained that Sarah had been impregnated by Avimelech and that Isaac was the issue. They claimed that, had Abraham been Isaac's father, it would have been impossible for Isaac to have fathered a son such as Esau who pursued married women to commit adultery with them under the noses of their husbands. Isaac's extraordinary success as well as the fact that he was sanctified on Mount Moriah and not allowed to leave the holy soil of ארץ ישראל, all served to show that he was indeed a true son of Abraham. Of Esau the Torah reports in Genesis 36 6: וילך עשו אל ארץ, "Esau went to a land." He had to leave ארץ ישראל because that land "vomits" people who behave in a grossly incestuous manner. Isaac was the model of refinement in every respect. The reason G–d blessed him in such an extraordinary fashion was to demonstrate the fact to one and all that sexually pure conduct unlocks all the bounty of the land of Israel to those who dwell in it.
ויבא עמלק, “Amalek came;” where did Amalek come from? Our verse must be understood in terms of what we have been told in Genesis 36,6, where Esau and all his clans are reported as having moved away from the land of Canaan, after the reconciliation which included Esau’s ceding the claim to the land of Canaan to his brother Yaakov’s descendants. At that time Rashi explained that Esau, aware of the promise and curse G-d had made toAvraham at the covenant between the pieces in Genesis chapter 15, the promise of taking over the land of Canaan had been made conditional on Abraham’s descendants having been strangers and part of that time even slaves, for 400 years. Esau decided then to forego the promise in order to escape the curse of the 400 year wait. His descendants, one of whom was his grandson Amalek, realised that the 400 years had elapsed and that by now the only thing that was left was the promise. He therefore decided that as the older son of Yitzock’s descendant, to stake his claim by force. He was also aware that his grandfather had been motivated to leave the land of Canaan as he had looked like a great fool for having sold his birthright, which had given Yaakov, as the firstborn, a claim to the land of Canaan. [He believed the time was ripe then, especially while the Israelites were in no man’s land, land that they had no claim to, would not enjoy preferential treatment by G-d in such an encounter.]
וישב יעקב, whereas Esau had moved to another country on account of his brother Yaakov, Yaakov settled near his father in the land in which both he, his father, and his grandfather had only sojourned up until now. He claimed this right as the result of having purchased the birthright from his older brother.
אלה תולדות יעקב, “the following describes events and problems which Yaakov encountered in his life.” [by the way, Seforno, who lived hundreds of years later than Rash’bam, also accepts the interpretation described as nonsensical by Rash’bam. Ed.] This exegesis is nonsense. Whenever the expression תולדות occurs in the Bible, sometimes this word introduces the names of the grandsons of the party referred to, such as in Genesis 6,9 where the Torah after describing the righteousness of Noach tells us that Noach had three sons and proceeds to give us their names. The names of the sons could not be the purpose of the story there, as we had been told earlier in 5,32 that Noach at the age of 500 sired three sons and we were already told their names. The Torah then continues to describe mankind’s ongoing corruption and that Noach was the only one with whom G’d was pleased. When the Torah commences a second time with the line אלה תולדות נח in 6,9, clearly the Torah does not mean to repeat itself, but it leads to the Torah telling us of Noach’s grandchildren, something that is reported in greater detail in 10,1 under the heading of “and these are the generations of the sons of Noach.” [Perhaps the reason for the repetition of אלה תולדות בני נח in chapter 10, is that if, as the author says, the grandchildren were meant already in chapter 6, now after the deluge, the task of these children to generate a new mankind began in earnest, whereas up to that point they were charged with merely surviving the deluge. Ed.] Just as the Torah reported the growth and development of mankind after the deluge until we have a total of 70 such descendants of Noach being named, so in chapter 36,6 we have been told of the descendants of Esau who have been born in the land of Canaan, i.e. the land in which his father lived. After that, the Torah reported Esau’s further development in Mount Seir, commencing with verse 9 of that chapter. The Torah reports the development of Yaakov’s family in a parallel manner, 35,23 extending through verses 26-27 and listing all his children who had been born in exile, while he was in Padan Aram with Lavan. Now the Torah continues with the words אלה תולדות יעקב, concentrating forthwith on the grandchildren who combine to make up a total of 70 prior to the descent of the family to Egypt. Details of the birth of these various grandchildren are being provided, beginning with the chronicle of what happened to Joseph, who at 17 years of age experienced traumatic events, as a result of which his older brother Yehudah separated from the other brothers and started his own family in Keziv and Adulam, siring three sons, and grandsons respectively, i.e. Shelah, Peretz and Zerach. The history of Yaakov’s family became complicated further with Joseph having been brought to Egypt as a slave where Menashe and Ephrayim were born for him. Having attained high office, Joseph invited his father and family to join him in Egypt so that ultimately 70 members of Yaakov’s family wound up in Egypt. Moses had to record all this in order to substantiate his claim in Deuteronomy 10,22 that “your fathers descended to Egypt when they numbered only 70 persons.”
את בניו ואת נשיו HIS SONS AND HIS WIVES — He took the males before the females whereas Esau took the females before the males, as it is said (Genesis 36:6) “And Esau took his wives and his sons etc.” (Genesis Rabbah 74:5)
כל הנפש הבאה ליעקב EVERY SOUL THAT WAS COMING WITH JACOB — every soul that left Canaan to go to Egypt The word הבאה, here, is not a perfect tense, but a participle with a relative present sense — just as (Ester 2:4) “In the evening she (באה) was coming” and (Genesis 29:7) “and, behold, Rachel his daughter is coming (באה)” and therefore the accent is on the last syllable, on the א, because when they left, coming from the land of Canaan, they were only sixty-six. But at the second mention of this word (Genesis 46:27) — “every soul of the house of Jacob, which came (הבאה) into Egypt were seventy” — it is a perfect tense and therefore it is accented on the last but one syllable, on the ב. The reason is, that when they came there, they were seventy, for they found Joseph and his two sons there, and Jochebed was added to their number “between the walls”. According to the view of the Rabbi (i. e. R. Jehudah, cf. Genesis Rabbah 84) who stated that with each of Jacob’s sons a twin-sister was born, we must say that these died before they (Jacob and his family) went down to Egypt, because they are not enumerated here. In Vayikra Rabbah 4:6 I found the following: When he left Canaan (cf. Genesis 36:6) Esau’s family consisted of only six (himself and his five sons), and Scripture calls them “the souls of his house” (in the plural) and this is because they worshipped many gods (each serving a different god and having as it were, a different soul or religious feeling). But the family of Jacob when he came to Egypt consisted of seventy and Scripture calls them “soul”, in the singular, because they all served One God.
אתה ידעת את כל התלאה THOU KNOWEST ALL THE TRAVAIL — It was on this account that your father separated himself from our father, as it is said, (Genesis 36:6), "And he (Esau) went to another land on account of Jacob, his brother” — on account of the bond which devolved upon both of them, and he cast the whole of it upon Jacob (Genesis Rabbah 82:13; cf. Rashi on Genesis 36.7.2).
אחי רבקה, אם יעקב ועשו, “the brother of Rivkah, who was the mother of Yaakov and Esau. Nachmanides explains that the reason why Rivkah is described here by the Torah as “the mother of Yaakov and Esau,” [something that we all know perfectly well, Ed.] is because Yitzchok had commanded Yaakov to select a wife from among the daughters of Lavan, “the brother of your mother.” The Torah is at pains to remind us that Lavan was also the brother of Esau’s mother, and because of this it would have been appropriate for Yitzchok to command Esau also to take a wife from among his uncle’s daughters. However, seeing that the seed of Avraham would be carried on only through Yaakov, there was no point in Esau marrying someone from Lavan’s family. Other commentators feel that the Torah was at pains to give Yaakov precedence over Esau who was biologically his senior, as soon as Yaakov had secured the blessing of his father. The Torah’s mentioning “Yaakov and Esau” in that order, serves as proof that the blessing was indeed fulfilled, and that Yaakov would henceforth be deemed as senior to his brothers, i.e.הוי גביר לאחיך as we read in All of this, in spite of the fact that after Yitzchok’s death the Torah reverts to mentioning Esau first when it reports Yitzchok’s funeral. This was because Esau had never left the land of Israel, attending to his father’s needs, whereas Yaakov had been outside the Holy Land for over 20 years. [I find this difficult as Esau had voluntarily left the Holy Land (Genesis 36,6), not because of his life being in danger and his father having sent him out of the land to get a wife without giving him a dowry, 11 years before his father died. Ed.] Some commentators say that the reason why the Torah repeats these details about Yaakov’s genealogy is in order for you not to be dismayed that from two such righteous parents as Yitzchok and Rivkah, a wicked person such as Esau could have been produced. The Torah does not want us to forget for a moment that Rivkah herself had a brother who was everything but righteous. Our sages have established a rule (based on empirical knowledge, Ed.] according to which most children have a tendency to develop in accordance with their mother’s brother(s).
ארצה שעיר, שדה אדום, “the land Seir, the field of Edom.” Anyone traveling from Charan to the land of Israel travels through the land of Seir. Even though Esau spent most of his time in the land of Canaan, as is clear from Genesis 36,6: “Esau took his wives and went to “a (another) land,” on account of his brother Yaakov,” Yaakov had reason to believe that he would encounter him near his wives, who had come from the land of Seir. Our sages have criticized Yaakov, comparing his conduct to the proverbial “he who grabs the ears of a dog must not be surprised if he gets bitten.” Yaakov’s sending gifts ahead to Esau alerted him to the fact that he was about to approach him. Yaakov’s mistake was repeated during the latter days of the second Jewish commonwealth, when the Romans were invited by a Jewish king Aristobul, descendant of the Maccabees, to conclude an alliance with him. This was the beginning of the collapse of the Jewish commonwealth and of the second Temple, followed by total loss of Jewish independence, such as it had been.
Eisov took his wives, his sons, his daughters, all the people of his household, his livestock, all his animals, and all his possessions that he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and he went to a [different] land away from his brother, Yaakov.
And Esau had taken his wives and his sons and his daughters, and all the souls of his house, and his flocks and his cattle, and all the substance which he had gotten in the land of Kenaan, and had gone into another land; for there fell upon him a fear of Jakob his brother:
| כִּֽי־הָיָ֧ה רְכוּשָׁ֛ם רָ֖ב מִשֶּׁ֣בֶת יַחְדָּ֑ו וְלֹ֨א יָֽכְלָ֜ה אֶ֤רֶץ מְגֽוּרֵיהֶם֙ לָשֵׂ֣את אֹתָ֔ם מִפְּנֵ֖י מִקְנֵיהֶֽם׃ | 7 P | For their possessions were too many for them to dwell together, and the land where they sojourned could not support them because of their livestock. |
AND THE LAND OF THEIR SOJOURNINGS. The meaning thereof is “the city of their sojournings,” which is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac sojourned, (Above, 35:27.) for the land of Canaan could support a thousand times more than Jacob and Esau. But when Esau saw that he could not stay in his city and in his place, he left the entire country to his brother and went his way.
ולא יכלה ארץ מגוריהם AND THE LAND OF THEIR SOJOURNINGS COULD NOT — supply sufficient pasture for the cattle which they had. A Midrashic comment (Genesis Rabbah 82:13) on מפני יעקב אחיו [HE WENT TO A COUNTRY] ON ACCOUNT OF HIS BROTHER JACOB is: on account of the bond of indebtedness involved in the decree, (Genesis 14:13) “thy seed shall be a stranger etc… and they shall afflict them etc.” that was imposed upon Isaac’s descendants. He said, “I shall go hence — I desire no part either in the gift of this land which has been made to him (to my father) nor in the payment of this bond" . Another reason why he went away was on account of the shame he felt at having sold his birthright (cf. Genesis Rabbah 82:13).
Due to the shame that he sold his birthright. Rashi is saying: This is an additional reason [for his leaving].
because their property was too great for living together, and the land of their residence could not support them due to their livestock. Although Isaac was a farmer, his two sons were shepherds. Since both were successful and owned large herds, they were compelled to live far from each other.
ולא יכלה ארץ מגוריהם לשאת אותם, “and the land of their sojourning could not support them (their combined wealth of livestock).” The word ארץ, “land,” is used here very loosely, the reference being to the city of Chevron and its immediate surroundings. The Torah most certainly does not wish to imply that the whole land of Canaan was inadequate for these two families and their livestock. The point was that when Esau saw that he could not remain in his home town as it did not offer a good enough economic base for him, he decided to migrate.
[2] Another thing: And God remembered. "The house of the wicked shall be destroyed" (Proverbs 10:24) - this refers to Esau, who was afraid of the blessings that Jacob had received. He said, "Now he is blessed and has many children, and I have nothing." And so it was, as it is said, "The land could not support them" (Genesis 36:7), and Esau took his wives. "But the desire of the righteous shall be granted" (Proverbs 10:24) - this refers to Rachel, who desired to have a child from Jacob, as it is said, "And Rachel saw" (Genesis 30:1). Jacob also desired a child from Rachel, and everything that he worked for her was for this purpose, as it is said, "I will serve you seven years" (Genesis 29:18), and "they seemed to him but a few days for the love he had for her" (Genesis 29:20). As long as Rachel did not bear a child, Jacob did not want to go to his father's house, because he thought, "If I go to my father's house now, Laban will say to me, 'Since Rachel has not borne children for you all these years, leave her here and go.'" And see how much he desired to have a child from her, for as soon as she gave birth, Jacob said to Laban, "Send me away" (Genesis 30:25). Therefore it is said, "But the desire of the righteous shall be granted."
[(Gen. 37:1:) NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >.] This text is related (to Is. 57:13): WHEN YOU CRY OUT, LET YOUR ASSEMBLED ONES SAVE YOU. What are they? These are the angels who were placed to guard him when he went away to go to Aram-Naharaim, since the angels who minister in the land of Israel do not minister outside the land, nor do those who belong outside the land < minister > in the land of Israel. (So above, 8:3.) So (in Gen. 28:12) Jacob saw < some > ascending and others descending to go abroad with him. Then, when he came to return, the Holy One summoned those angels who had ministered to him in the land. He said to them: Here is Jacob returning. Come on and let us go out for a meeting (Gk.: apante, according to the metathesis suggested by Buber and assumed in the Jastrow lexicon. On apante used for apantesis, see Jud. 4:22 (LXX).) with him {i.e., to the border}. To what is the matter comparable? To a king whose son went away overseas to take a wife. After some time he came to return to his father's house. The king said to his court (’PSYQYN, which probably represents the medieval Latin word for “court,” i.e., obsequium.) {i.e., to his army}: Come and let us go out for a meeting with my son. So, when Jacob came to return to the land of his father, the Holy One called the ministering angels. He said to them: Come and let us go out for a meeting with Jacob. As soon as Jacob raised his eyes, he saw the angels, as stated (in Gen. 32:2 [1]): SO JACOB WENT ON HIS WAY, AND THE ANGELS OF GOD MET HIM…. When Jacob saw them, where is it shown that they ministered to him in the land of Israel? Where it is stated (in vs. 3 [2]): WHEN JACOB SAW THEM, HE SAID: THIS IS GOD'S HOST. It is therefore stated (in Is. 57:13): WHEN YOU CRY OUT, LET YOUR ASSEMBLED ONES SAVE YOU. These < ASSEMBLED ONES > are the angels. (Ibid., cont.:) BUT THE WIND SHALL CARRY THEM ALL AWAY. (Gen. R. 84:1.) These are Esau and his lords, as stated (in Gen. 36:6): < THEN ESAU TOOK HIS WIVES >, AND WENT INTO A LAND AWAY FROM HIS BROTHER JACOB. (Is. 57:13, cont.:) YET THE ONE WHO TAKES REFUGE IN ME SHALL INHERIT THE LAND. This ONE is Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 37:1): NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >.
For their wealth was too great for them to live together. The land in which they lived temporarily could not support them because of their livestock.
for their possessions would be too great for them to dwell together, neither would the land of their sojourning maintain them, on account of their flocks.
| וַיֵּ֤שֶׁב עֵשָׂו֙ בְּהַ֣ר שֵׂעִ֔יר עֵשָׂ֖ו ה֥וּא אֱדֽוֹם׃ | 8 P | So Esau settled in the hill country of Seir—Esau being Edom. |
ויש, wohl: ließ sich vollends nieder. Schon vor Jakobs Rückkehr finden wir Esau in Seir (Kap. 32, 4). Allein er scheint dort noch nicht seinen bleibenden Aufenthalt gehabt zu haben. Seine Familie und sein Besitz waren noch in Kanaan. Erst nach Jakobs Rückkehr zog er völlig nach Seir. Vielleicht findet darin auch das לדרכו seine Erklärung. Er wohnte damals noch nicht in Seir, sondern (Kap. 33, 16) war auf einem Zuge dorthin begriffen, und Jakob stellte ihm (Kap. 33, 14) in Aussicht, sehr bald, noch vor seiner, nämlich Esaus, Rückkehr in Kanaan ihn dort zu besuchen.
Esau settled on Mount Se’ir; Esau who is Edom, and consequently his descendants are called Edomites.
The paragraph commencing with the words "the Lord came from Sinai," (33,2) exemplifies that already prior to that event, nations such as Ishmael and Edom had proved unwilling to accept the Torah. Israel's acceptance was unique among the nations, since no one else was ready to accept the authority of Heaven. This act of voluntary submission made Israel into the "chosen people" even though G'd had displayed fondness for other nations also. See 33,3, "He has fondness for nations, but holiness is all concentrated within you." (Israel) Also the other way around. He is beloved by some people among the nations, converts to Judaism, but on a collective basis as distinct from an individual basis, holiness is found only in Israel. tukku leraglecha, you have submitted to G'd en masse. In turn, you were lifted up by "Your commandments." This is a reference to martyrdom for their religion displayed by Jews when confronted by the chance to save their lives through conversion to Christianity etc. morasha kehillat Yaakov.
“Jacob settled in the land of his father’s residence, in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 37:1). “Jacob settled” – it is written: “Your gathering will save you when you cry out” (Isaiah 57:13). It is taught: His gathering and the gathering of his sons saved him from Esau. (Although originally Jacob was forced to flee from Esau, when he returned with his sons and they gathered in prayer together, Jacob was able to settle in the Land of Israel while Esau left and settled elsewhere (Genesis 36:6–8). ) “But all of them the wind will carry off; futility will take them” (Isaiah 57:13) – this is Esau and his chieftains. “And the one who trusts Me will inherit the land” (Isaiah 57:13) – this is Jacob. “Jacob settled.”
“He drew His bow like an enemy; His right hand stood as an adversary, and he killed all delights of the eye. In the tent of the daughter of Zion, He poured out His fury like fire” (Lamentations 2:4). “He drew His bow like an enemy.” Rabbi Aivu said: They did not go to extremes vis-à-vis the attribute of justice, and the attribute of justice, too, did not go to extremes in their regard. (They did not sin in an extreme fashion and they were not punished in an extreme fashion (Etz Yosef).) They did not go to extremes vis-à-vis the attribute of justice, as it is stated: “The people were like complainers” (Numbers 11:1). “Complainers” is not written here, but rather, “like complainers.” “The princes of Judah were like those who move boundaries” (Hosea 5:10). “Those who move boundaries” is not written here, but rather, “like those who move boundaries.” “For like a wayward cow [Israel has strayed]” (Hosea 4:16), “For a wayward cow” is not written here, but rather, “like a wayward cow.” The attribute of justice, too, did not go to extremes in their regard. “He drew His bow like an enemy.” “An enemy” is not written here, but rather, “like an enemy.” Another matter, “He drew His bow like an enemy.” This is Pharaoh, (When the verse states that God drew His bow like an enemy, the enemy referenced is Pharaoh.) as it is stated: “The enemy said” (Exodus 15:9). “His right hand stood as an adversary,” this is Haman, as it is stated: “A man who is an adversary and an enemy” (Esther 7:6). Another matter, “He drew His bow like an enemy.” This is Esau, as it is written: “Because the enemy said against you” (Ezekiel 36:2). (This chapter in Ezekiel is a continuation of chapter 35, which is directed to Se’ir, which is identified with the offspring of Esau; see, e.g., Genesis 36:8.) “And he killed all delights of the eye,” these are children who are as dear to their parents as their eyeball. The Rabbis say: These are the [members of the] Sanhedrin, who are as dear to Israel as the eyeball. “In the tent of the daughter of Zion, He poured out His fury like fire.” There are four instances of pouring that are for good and four instances of pouring that are for bad. Four instances of pouring that are for good, as it is stated: “Upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, I will pour a spirit of grace and supplication” (Zechariah 12:10). “It will be, thereafter, that I will pour My spirit upon all flesh…. Also upon the slaves and upon the maidservants in those days I will pour My spirit” (Joel 3:1–2). “I will no longer conceal My face from them, as I have poured My spirit upon the house of Israel, the utterance of the Lord God” (Ezekiel 39:29). And four instances of pouring that are for bad, as it is stated: “He poured His fiery wrath upon him” (Isaiah 42:25). In Ezekiel it is written: “As You pour Your fury upon Jerusalem” (Ezekiel 9:8). It is written: “The Lord vented His fury, He poured out His enflamed wrath” (Lamentations 4:11). And this: “He poured out His fury like fire.”
“I am the man who has seen affliction by the rod of His fury” (Lamentations 3:1). “I am the man” – Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina began: “Jeremiah took another scroll and gave it to Barukh son of Neriyahu, the scribe, and he wrote on it from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book that Yehoyakim, king of Judah, had burned in the fire, and many more similar matters were also added to them” (Jeremiah 36:32). The verse need not have stated “similar.” Why does the verse state “similar”? Rav Kahana said: “Many more similar matters were also added to them”: “Matters” – “how does [the greatly crowded city] sit” (Lamentations 1:1), “how [the Lord] has clouded” (Lamentations 2:1), “how has [gold] tarnished” (Lamentations 4:1). (Rav Kahana interprets “matters” to allude to chapters 1, 2, and 4 of Lamentations.) “Many” – “remember, Lord” (Lamentations 5:1). (The word “many” alludes to chapter 5 of Lamentations.) “Similar” – “I am the man,” which is three verses each. (In the third chapter of Lamentations there are three verses for each letter of the alphabet.) That is what is written: “Did I not write it for you three times [shalishim]” (Proverbs 22:20) – words [organized] in a threefold manner. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: What is shalishim? It is mighty men, just as it says: “And shalishim over them all” (Exodus 14:7), and we translate it: “And mighty men were appointed over them all.” (The midrash is referencing Onkelos, an ancient Aramaic translation of the Torah.) Alternatively: Shalishim – “I am the man” – as it is three verses each. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: “I am the man” – it is I who is well versed in suffering, what is pleasing to You is pleasing for me. (This statement is an acceptance of God’s judgment despite being unable to understand the need for such intense suffering (Matnot Kehuna). Others explain differently such that this statement introduces the upcoming analogy, and interpret this line to mean: I have received benefit by having benefited You by accepting Your Torah. Accordingly, this line is bitter and sarcastic, as the speaker complains that the great suffering is due only to Israel’s acceptance of the Torah, which brought them a higher level of accountability than other nations (Etz Yosef).) This is analogous to a king who became angry at the queen and shoved her and expelled her from the palace. She went and concealed her face behind a pillar. (She hoped to catch a glimpse of the king as he passed.) The king was passing and saw her. He said to her: ‘You have been impudent.’ She said to him: ‘My lord the king, is this [treatment] appropriate for me, is this becoming for me, is this befitting of me? No woman accepted you other than me.’ He said to her: ‘It was I who disqualified all the women in favor of you.’ She said to him: ‘If so, why did you enter such and such alleyway, such and such courtyard, and such and such place? Was it not for such and such a woman, and she did not accept you?’ So too, the Holy One blessed be He said to Israel: ‘You have been impudent.’ They said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, is this appropriate for me, is this becoming for me, is this befitting of me? No other nation accepted Your Torah other than me.’ He said to them: ‘It is I who disqualified all the nations in favor of you.’ They said to Him: ‘If so, why did You offer the Torah to all the nations but they did not accept it?’ As it is taught: Initially, He revealed himself to the children of Esau; that is what is written: “He said: The Lord came from Sinai, and shone from Seir for them” (Deuteronomy 33:2), (Seir is the land of Esau; see Genesis 36:8.) but they did not accept it. He offered it to the children of Ishmael, but they did not accept it; that is what is written: “He appeared from Mount Paran” (Deuteronomy 33:2). (Ishmael dwelled in Paran; see Genesis 21:21.) Ultimately, He offered it to Israel and they accepted it, as it is written: “And He came from the holy myriads, from His right, a fiery law to them” (Deuteronomy 33:2), and it is written: “Everything that the Lord has spoken we will perform and we will heed” (Exodus 24:7). Another matter: “I am the man [hagever]” – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It is I who is the man. I am Job, as it is stated: “Who is a man [gever] like Job, who drinks scoffing like water” (Job 34:7). “Who has seen affliction [ani]” – Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: The congregation of Israel said: Since He saw me impoverished of mitzvot, impoverished of good deeds, He brought “the rod of His fury” upon me. Rabbi Berekhya said: He fortified me to withstand them all. What do you find written after the ninety-eight rebukes in the book of Deuteronomy? (See Deuteronomy 28:15–69.) “You are standing today, all of you” (Deuteronomy 29:9), and we translate it: “You exist this day, all of you,” mighty to withstand them all. “He conducted and led me in darkness and not light. Indeed, against me He will again turn His hand all day” (Lamentations 3:2–3). “He conducted [and led] me” in this world, which is called “darkness and not light.” “Indeed, against me He will again turn His hand all day” – Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: This teaches that the Holy One blessed be He despairs of the righteous in this world, but then has mercy on them. That is what is written: “Indeed, against me He will again [turn His hand].”
And he sent Judah before him (Gen. 46:28). Scripture states elsewhere: Behold, I send My messenger, and he shall clear the way before Me (Mal. 3:1). Observe that every misfortune that occurred to Joseph likewise befell Zion. It is written of Joseph: and Israel loved Joseph more than all his children (Gen. 38:3), and of Zion it is written: God loves the gates of Zion (Ps. 87:2). Concerning Joseph it is stated: And they hated him (Gen. 37:8), and about Zion: She hath uttered her voice against Me, therefore I have hated her (Jer. 12:8). With reference to Joseph it is said: For behold, we are binding sheaves (Gen. 37:7), and in regard to Zion: Ye shall come home with song, bearing sheaves (Ps. 126:6). It is written of Joseph: Shalt thou indeed rule over us? (Gen. 36:8), and of Zion: That sayeth unto Zion: “Thy God reigneth” (Isa. 52:7). Joseph: And Joseph dreamed a dream (Gen. 37:5), and Zion: When the Lord brought back those that returned to Zion, we were like unto them that dream (Ps. 126:1). Joseph: Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down to thee? (Gen. 37:10), Zion: They shall bow down to thee with their face to the earth (Isa. 49:23). Joseph: And his brothers envied him (Gen. 37:11), Zion: I am jealous of Zion with great jealousy (Zech. 8:2). Joseph: Go now, see whether it is well with thy brethren (Gen. 37:14), Zion: Seek the peace of the city (Jer. 29:7). Joseph: They saw him from afar off (Gen. 37:18), Zion: Remember the Lord from afar off (Jer. 51:50). Joseph: And before he came near unto them they conspired (Gen. 37:18), Zion: They hold crafty converse against the people (Ps. 83:4). Joseph: And they stripped Joseph of his coat (Gen. 37:23), Zion: They shall strip thee of thy clothes (Ezek. 23:26). Joseph: They took him and cast him into the pit (Gen. 37:24), Zion: They have cut off my life in the dungeon (Lam. 3:53). Joseph: And the pit was empty (Gen. 37:24), Zion: And in the pit there was no water (Jer. 38:6). Joseph: And they sat down to eat bread (Gen. 37:25), Zion: We have given the hand to Egypt, and to Assyria, to have bread enough (Lam. 5:6). Joseph: And they drew near and lifted up Joseph (Gen. 37:28), Zion: Ebed-Melech the Cushite drew him up (Jer. 38:13). Joseph: And Jacob rent his garments (Gen. 37:34), Zion: And in that day did the Lord, the God of hosts, call to the weeping (Isa. 22:12). Joseph: All his sons and all his daughters rose to comfort him (Gen. 37:35), Zion: Strain not to comfort me (Isa. 22:4). Joseph: And the Midianites sold him into Egypt (Gen. 37:36), Zion: The children also of Jerusalem have ye sold unto the sons of the Jevanim (Joel 4:6).
Rabbi Ṭarphon said: The Holy One, blessed be He, rose and came from Mount Sinai and was revealed unto the sons of Esau, as it is said, "And he said, The Lord came from Sinai, and rose from Seir unto them" (Deut. 33:2). And "Seir" means only the sons of Esau, as it is said, "And Esau dwelt in Mount Seir" (Gen. 36:8). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Will ye accept for yourselves the Torah? They said to Him: What is written therein? He answered them: It is written therein, "Thou shalt do no murder" (Ex. 20:13). They replied to Him: We are unable to abandon the blessing with which Isaac blessed Esau, for he said to him, "By thy sword shalt thou live" (Gen. 27:40). Thence He turned and was revealed unto the children of Ishmael, as it is said, "He shined forth from Mount Paran" (Deut. 33:2). "Paran" means only the sons of Ishmael, as it is said, "And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran" (Gen. 21:21). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Will ye accept for yourselves the Torah? They said to Him: What is written therein? He answered them: "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. 20:15) is written therein. They said to Him: We are not able to abandon the usage which our fathers observed, for they brought Joseph down into Egypt, as it is said, "For indeed I was stolen away out of the land of the Hebrews" (Gen. 40:15). Thence He sent || messengers to all the nations of the world. He said unto them: Will ye receive for yourselves the Torah? They said to Him: What is written therein? He said to them: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3). They said to Him: We have no delight in the Torah, therefore let Him give His Torah to His people, as it is said, "The Lord will give strength unto his people; the Lord will bless his people with peace" (Ps. 29:11). Thence He returned and was revealed unto the children of Israel, as it is said, "And he came from the ten thousands of holy ones" (Deut. 33:2). The expression "ten thousands" means the children of Israel, as it is said, "And when it rested, he said, Return, O Lord, unto the ten thousands of the thousands of Israel" (Num. 10:36). With Him were thousands twice-told of chariots, even twenty thousand of holy angels, and His right hand was holding the Torah, as it is said, "At his right hand was a fiery law unto them" (Deut. 33:2).
וישב יעקב, “Yaakov settled down;” this is recorded as something parallel to Esau’ settling down having been reported in Mount Seir in Genesis 36,8. After Esau having settled on what is now ancestral land for him. ( ואתן לעשו את הר שעיר, “I have given to Esau Mount Seir.) (Joshua 24,3) Yaakov is now described as having done something similar on the land promised by G-d to Avraham and his descendants commencing with Yitzchok and Yaakov. G-d had renewed this promise to Yaakov during his first vision in which he saw a ladder to heaven. Both Avraham and Yitzchok had only lived on that soil as sojourners, מגורי אביו; Yaakov’s claim was based on the law of the birthright, something he had purchased from Esau. At this time, when Esau went to the land of Seir, he went as an alien.
According to our approach the Torah informs us of the reason why the names appear once more, i.e. that they had all willingly accepted their destiny to endure exile as distinct from Esau who had decided to leave the land of Canaan by moving to Mount Seir (Genesis 36,8). Bereshit Rabbah 82,13, attributes Esau's move to the decree of G'd mentioned to Abraham in Genesis 15,13 that Abraham's descendants would become strangers in a foreign land. Esau wanted to escape that obligation and that is why he moved away voluntarily at that time. הבאים מצרימה, who arrived in Egypt; they came in order to endure exile; את יעקב, together with Jacob; "with Jacob," i.e. in the same spirit as Jacob, to discharge their duty to become exiles. The Torah wants to prove that the Israelites did not move to Egypt for other reasons and that is why it writes that they came איש וביתו, everyone with his respective family, i.e. they prepared for a lengthy stay; otherwise they would have left their families in the land of Canaan.
אחיך ישראל, אתה ידעת "your brother Israel; you are aware, etc." The reason that Moses underlined the brotherly connection between Edom and Israel was to remind Edom that the discomfort of travel Israel experienced now was not due to recent events but to their respective ancestor and that he considered both Israel and Edom as being involved in this equally. Abraham's descendants were supposed to experience exile according to Genesis 15. However, only the descendants of one of Isaac's sons had paid the price by being enslaved in Egypt. Esau and his descendants had not experienced any of that suffering. The least the Edomites could do now was to display some degree of brotherliness by allowing the Jewish people passage to their own heritage. Compare Bereshit Rabbah 82, on Genesis 36,8 where it is explained that the reason Esau emigrated was that he did not want to pay the debt Abraham had contracted for at the covenant between the pieces.
AND HE WENT INTO A LAND. According to Onkelos, the meaning of this expression is “into another land.” But Rashi explained, “He went to stay wherever he could find room” for he went to no particular country but sought a country where he would find room to settle, until he came to mount Se’ir and settled there. In my opinion, the correct interpretation is that Scripture is saying: “And he went to the land of Se’ir,” the name of the place being omitted from the verse as it is self-understood since it has already been mentioned that he dwelled in the land of Se’ir, and it is understood that he led his family there, and right nearby, it is mentioned, And Esau dwelled in mount Se’ir. (Verse 8 here.) A similar case is found in this verse: He went into the castle of the king’s house, and burnt the king’s house over him with fire, (I Kings 16:18.) which means that house of the king in which he was. Similarly, And he burned the high place and stamped it small to powder, and burned the Asherah, (II Kings 23:15.) which means the high place which belonged to Jeroboam, who was mentioned in the beginning of the verse. So also: And Joab said to the Cushite: Go tell the king… And Cushite bowed down to Joab, (II Samuel 18:21.) [which means “the Cushite” mentioned] ; And an ass and the lion, (I Kings 13:28.) [which means “the ass” mentioned above in Verse 24]. So also: For ships were broken at Etzion-geber, (Ibid., 22:49. ) which means “the ships” [mentioned in the beginning of that verse] ; and there are many similar verses. Here also the expression, And he went into a land, is as if it said, “into the land,” i.e., the land of Se’ir which was mentioned.
Eisov [therefore] settled in Mount Seir. Eisov is Edom.
And Esau dwelt in the mountain of Gabal. He is Esau the prince of the Edomites.
| וְאֵ֛לֶּה תֹּלְד֥וֹת עֵשָׂ֖ו אֲבִ֣י אֱד֑וֹם בְּהַ֖ר שֵׂעִֽיר׃ | 9 P | This, then, is the line of Esau, the ancestor of the Edomites, in the hill country of Seir. |
ואלה תולדות, now the Torah lists the descendants that were born to him while he lived in Mount Seir.
AND THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF ESAU THE FATHER OF EDOM. Scripture comes to mention the generations which his children begot after they went with him to Se’ir for Esau did not beget there. Thus Scripture begins from him by saying that he had already begotten Eliphaz and Re’uel, (Verse 10 here.) and they begot these children in the land of Se’ir. It also mentions together with them the children of Oholibamah, (Verse 14 here.) who were born in the land of Canaan, (Verse 5 here.) even though it does not mention any children that were born to them in the land of Se’ir, (According to Ramban above, the justification for mentioning the birth of Eliphaz and Re’uel was in order to mention their offspring. Why then was the birth of Oholibamah’s children mentioned? The answer is: “in order that they, etc.”) so that they be counted together with their brothers, the sons of Esau, mentioned in the beginning of the section. It is also mentioned because they became chieftains in Se’ir since Scripture mentions all their chieftains.
ואלה תולדות עשו, a reference to his grandchildren, similar to Genesis 10,1 where after the same introduction, the grandsons of Noach are listed by the Torah. [not quite, as the chapter starts with the words ואלה תולדות בני נח. Ed.]
ואלה AND THESE — are the generations that his sons begat after he went to Seir.
And this is the legacy of Esau, father of Edom on Mount Se’ir.
ואלה תולדות עשו, and the following are Esau’s developments.” The Torah proceeds to list biological descendants of Esau born after his migration to Seir, for he himself is not reported to have sired any more children at that time. Still, the Torah relates the descendants by starting with Esau having sired Eliphaz, etc. The children of Oholivamah who had been born in the land of Canaan are also mentioned here once more. By doing so, the Torah made sure they were included in the count with their brothers.
The reason why Joseph has to be dispatched in the future before the arrival of the משיח בן דוד is because he is the natural enemy of Esau inasmuch as he is his exact opposite. Esau is full of the pollutants of the serpent, Joseph, on the other hand, was singularly free of that pollution, as we have explained.
The land of Egypt is to earth what the מקום ערוה, seat of the reproductive organs, is to man. This is why Ezekiel 23, 20 describes Egyptians as ejaculating seminal discharge that resembles that of horses, and generally describing them as debauched. [The theme is that it is the nature of the earth itself which contributes to the debauchery of its inhabitants. Ed.] Jacob's descendants were exiled to Egypt because in that country it was easiest to transfer their share of the serpent's pollution to their surroundings. Once they had disposed of those pollutants they could emerge purified. Joseph was especially suited to start such a process because he had demonstrated by his previous behavior how to maintain the Holy Covenant with G–d entered into by Abraham when he circumcised himself. The evil influence of the serpent's pollution remained only in the descendants of Esau. The reason the Torah presents us with such a long list of Esau's descendants at the end of פרשת וישלח, is to inform us that they were all ממזרים, bastards. Rashi already comments in this manner on Genesis 36, 2. Esau went to the land of Se-ir because he did not want to undergo the exile experience in either Egypt or the land of Canaan (where he would not have been sovereign, seeing that Israel owned that land). Had he been prepared to undergo that experience, he, too, could have rid himself of the negative influence of the original serpent.
These are the descendants of Eisov, the ancestor of Edom [the Edomites] in Mount Seir.
And these are the kindreds of Esau the prince of the Edomites, the place of whose dwelling was in the mountain. of Gabal.
| אֵ֖לֶּה שְׁמ֣וֹת בְּנֵֽי־עֵשָׂ֑ו אֱלִיפַ֗ז בֶּן־עָדָה֙ אֵ֣שֶׁת עֵשָׂ֔ו רְעוּאֵ֕ל בֶּן־בָּשְׂמַ֖ת אֵ֥שֶׁת עֵשָֽׂו׃ | 10 P | These are the names of Esau’s sons: Eliphaz, the son of Esau’s wife Adah; Reuel, the son of Esau’s wife Basemath. |
אלה שמות, first the Torah lists the names of his sons, followed by the names of his grandsons. No grandchildren of Oholvamah are mentioned. This need not mean that she did not have grandchildren, but, since the Torah was concerned with listing the Alufim, men of positions of authority, it is likely that none of Oholivamah’s grandchildren rose to such positions whereas her sons did.
These are the names of all of Esau’s sons, those who were born in Canaan and those born in Se’ir: Elifaz, son of Ada, wife of Esau; Re’uel, son of Basmat, wife of Esau.
(Genesis 45:8) "So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh." I am like a creditor to him, as it is stated (Exodus 22:24), "Do not impose interest upon him." Just as the way of a creditor is to lend to a borrower (Proverbs 22:7), in the book of Rabbi Meir, it is written, "And he has made me a father," as it says, "which the Lord, your God, gives you" (Deuteronomy 15:2). This is a legal judgment derived from the full texts written in the Torah, which emerged from Jerusalem during the Sabbatical year and ascended to Rome, and the scrolls were stored in the synagogue of Asvyros. "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good" (Genesis 1:31). "For a man and his wife, leather tunics" (Genesis 3:21). "I will descend now and see their outcry" (Genesis 18:21). "The Lord who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth" (Genesis 24:7). "And he sold his birthright" (Genesis 25:33). "Behold, now, I am old; I do not know the day of my death" (Genesis 27:2). "The fragrance of a field that the Lord has blessed" (Genesis 27:27). "And Oholibamah bore Jeush" (Genesis 36:5). "Eliphaz, the son of Esau" (Genesis 36:10). "These were the sons of Oholibamah, the wife of Esau" (Genesis 36:14). "They arose and went down to Egypt" (Genesis 43:15). "And I buried her there on the way" (Genesis 48:7).And he has made me a father to Pharaoh." And here are the names that came down to Egypt (Genesis 46:8). "So shall you say to the children of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel" (Exodus 19:3). "The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses" (Exodus 12:37). "For it is a sign between Me" (Exodus 31:13). "Five for the planks on one side" (Exodus 26:27). "We have no barricade against it." "And the priest shall take from its blood" (Leviticus 4:34), for if it is a lamb. "And when the zav becomes purified with living water" (Leviticus 15:13). "One lamb of the first year without blemish" (Leviticus 14:10). "All who come to join the ranks must be counted in their census" (Numbers 4:3). "From the first of your dough, you shall give" (Numbers 15:20). "Avenge the vengeance of the children of Israel" (Numbers 31:2). "And they came to Moses and to the congregation of the children of Israel" (Numbers 12:1). "The heads of the families of the house of Joseph approached" (Numbers 36:1). "But I have not the power to go up" (Deuteronomy 1:26). "And they shall inherit it, they and all the people of the land" (Numbers 32:22). "To give us into the hands of the Amorites" (Deuteronomy 1:27). "Nor take a mother upon her young" (Deuteronomy 22:6). "Brimstone and salt burning" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "Like the upheaval of Sodom and Gomorrah" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "I said, I would scatter them" (Deuteronomy 32:26). So they are written in the Torah that emerged from Jerusalem.
These are the names of Eisov’s sons: Eliphaz, the son of Adah, the wife of Eisov, Reueil, the son of Bosmas, the wife of Eisov.
These are the names of the sons of Esau, Eliphaz bar Adah, wife of Esau; Reuel bar Basemath, wife of Esau.
| וַיִּהְי֖וּ בְּנֵ֣י אֱלִיפָ֑ז תֵּימָ֣ן אוֹמָ֔ר צְפ֥וֹ וְגַעְתָּ֖ם וּקְנַֽז׃ | 11 P | The sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz. |
The sons of Elifaz were Teman, Omar, Tzefo, and Gatam, and Kenaz.
A FIERY LAW UNTO THEM. The Torah, which was given through fire and lightning. (Ex. 20:15.) He (The Gaon.) says that the Lord came…is a prayer. It means, You who came to Sinai and bequeathed the Torah, (To Israel.) Let Reuben live (v. 6). However, this interpretation is far-fetched, for Scripture should read, keep Reuben alive and do not put him to death. (Verse 6 reads yechi re’uven ve-al yamut, the import of which is, may Reuben live, and not die. If Saadiah Gaon’s interpretation was correct the verse would read hachayeh et re’uven ve-al tamito (keep Reuben alive and do not put him to death). In other words, Scripture would have employed the imperative hachayeh (keep him alive) rather than the third person yechi (let him live). It similarly would have employed the second person tamito (you will put him to death) in place of the third person yamut (he will die).) Those who lack faith say that from Seir refers to the religion of the Edomites, (Christianity.) and Paran refers to the faith of the Ishmaelites. (See note 6.) However, these err. Do they not see that Moses commenced at first to bless Israel alone. Scripture thus reads, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel (v. 1). Scripture goes on to say ve-zarach mi-se’ir lamo, the meaning of which is, And rose from Seir unto them. (Israel.) Compare, lamo (for them) in And there is no stumbling for them (Ps. 119:165). (In other words, lamo means unto them.) It appears to me that this chapter is a general blessing to all of Israel. (Verses 2-5.) Moses then goes on to address each tribe and tribe individually. (Verses 6-25.) Then Moses includes them all in the verse which reads, There is none unto God, O Jeshurun (v. 26). Look, (I.E. goes on to explain our verse.) we find that Deborah said, Lord, when Thou didst go forth out of Seir, When Thou didst march out of the field of Edom, The earth trembled (Jud. 5:4). Clearly the field of Edom is not a mountain as the Gaon says, (For a field is not a mountain. The field of Edom (sede edom) is parallel to Seir. If sede edom does not refer to a mountain neither does Seir.) for the Gaon maintains that Sinai, Seir, and Paran are three mountains close to each other or facing each other. Also, the Book of Psalms states, O God, when Thou wentest forth before thy people, When Thou didst march through the wilderness (yeshimon); Selah (Ps. 68:8). Scripture then states, The earth trembled (Ps. 68:9). (We thus see that Jud. 5:4, which speaks of the earth trembling, does not refer to the revelation at Sinai for Ps. 68:8 indicates that the earth trembled in the yeshimon not at Sinai. I.E. comments thus because someone might still insist on identifying the field of Edom with Mount Sinai. It should be noted that I.E. insists that the clause “the earth trembled” in Jud. 5:4 and the similar clause in Ps. 68:9 refer to the same event. See I.E. on Ps. 68:8.) Now the Divine presence did not march through the wilderness (yeshimon) on the day that the Torah was given, for Israel came to the wilderness (yeshimon) after they had passed through the wilderness (midbar) of Paran. (We thus see that Seir is to be identified with Sinai.) Furthermore, Habakkuk says, God cometh from Teman (Hab. 3:3). Teman was one of the sons of Edom, for we read, Teman, Omar (Gen. 36:11). (Are the sons of Eliphaz the son of Esau (Edom).) From Teman means the same as from the field of Edom. Look, all the verses (The verse quoted from Judges, Psalms, and Habbakuk.) speak of war. Let God arise, let His enemies be scattered (Ps. 68:2) is proof of this. Scripture describes God’s saving of His servants in terms of help coming down from heaven, the earth melting, the mountains dissolving, and the heavens quaking. Then the earth did shake and quake (Ps. 18:8) in David’s song is proof of this. I have explained the meaning of even yon Sinai (Ps. 68:9) in its place. (See I.E. on Ps. 68:8. The meaning of Ps. 68:9 is that the earth trembled as Mount Sinai (zeh sinai) did. In other words, the phrase zeh sinai does not imply that what comes before (the earth trembled…) refers to the revelation at Sinai.) The following is the explanation of our verse. The Lord came refers to the glory that entered into Israel. It first entered Israel at Sinai. And rose from Seir means that God did not show His might among the nations all the years that Israel was in the wilderness until Israel came to the field of Edom. Scripture similarly states, in their mount Seir, unto El-paran (Gen. 14:6). Seir and Paran are thus close to each other. The meaning of And rose from Se’ir is thus explained, for mi-seir means from the place of Seir; that is, when Israel came to Seir, God’s glory rose to Israel. He shined forth from mount Paran repeats the idea expressed by and rose from Seir. It means that God here (In Paran and Seir.) showed His shining.
ויעל עמו גם רכב גם פרשים, “also chariots and horsemen went up with him (Joseph).” This was a security escort aimed at Esau and his sons. Joseph was well aware of the wickedness of Esau and his family. Already Flavius Josephus recorded in his history of the Jewish people (chapter 2) that Tzefo, (Genesis 36,11) a son of Eliphaz, oldest son of Esau began a quarrel regarding Yaakov’s right to be buried at Machpelah. This quarrel erupted into open warfare with Joseph and his troops emerging victorious. He captured this Tzefo and brought him to Egypt where he and other supporters of his remained incarcerated until Joseph died. When Joseph died, this Tzefo escaped from prison and migrated to Campagne, ruling over certain Roman tribes until eventually he ruled over all of Greece and Italy. He became the first king in Rome and built the first temple there. This is why the Torah reported here that apart from all the entourage who traveled all the way to Canaan to bestow honour on Yaakov there was a also a sizable military contingent whose purpose was defensive.
The sons of Eliphaz. The text says “Zephi,” with a yod; but in the Torah (Gen 36:11) this appears as “Zepho,” with a vav.
The following names may not be broken up: Yisra’el, Ga’tham, (A name occurring in Gen. 36, 11, 16, 1 Chron. 1, 36. E.V. Gatam.) Poṭifar, Nebukadneẓẓar. (V and H unnecessarily repeat צמיאל, עוריאל, צורישדי.)
The sons of Eliphaz were Teiman, Omar, Tzepho, Gatam and Kenaz.
And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman Omar, Zephu, and Gaatam, and Kenaz, and Timna.
| וְתִמְנַ֣ע ׀ הָיְתָ֣ה פִילֶ֗גֶשׁ לֶֽאֱלִיפַז֙ בֶּן־עֵשָׂ֔ו וַתֵּ֥לֶד לֶאֱלִיפַ֖ז אֶת־עֲמָלֵ֑ק אֵ֕לֶּה בְּנֵ֥י עָדָ֖ה אֵ֥שֶׁת עֵשָֽׂו׃ | 12 P | Timna was a concubine of Esau’s son Eliphaz; she bore Amalek to Eliphaz. Those were the descendants of Esau’s wife Adah. |
Another reason for the need of the word לאמור to appear in the verse under discussion: We have a tradition that every word in the Torah preceded the historical events described in the Torah, so much so that they were recorded even before the universe had been created. We must therefore fall back on the statement of the Kabbalists that, essentially, the written Torah is nothing but a record of the various names of the Creator. The letters in His names have been written in a manner that conceals, so that it required “dressing up” before being released into our “lower” universe, as otherwise we would have been completely stymied in our efforts to unravel the Torah’s meaning. Only a very few people have been privileged to understand the words of the Torah as they are presented to us on a level that transcends their superficial meaning, the peshat. [However, being G’d’s words, also the peshat is not to be belittled, of course. Ed.] When the Torah adds the apparently unnecessary word לאמור, whenever the Torah writes: וידבר ה' אל משה לאמור, “Hashem spoke to Moses, leymor”, this is like giving the reader notice that G’d told Moses to rephrase His words in a manner that the common people should be able to understand. At the same time this word לאמור, served notice that the elite of the people were encouraged to look for more than the plain meaning of the text. The same applies when Moses commenced the song of thanksgiving for the salvation of the Israelites from the last and most dangerous threat of the Egyptians. We are to examine this text in order to discover hidden meanings
And through this the Sha"s in Shabbat (Shabbat 89b) can be explained, that Avraham our Father, Peace be Upon Him, said "they should be erased for the sake of the holiness of Your Name" and Itzchak said "half [of their sins] on me and half on You". Behold, Itzchak is [the symbol of] the characteristic of Gevurah, and was more successful than Avraham [the symbol of compassion] and this is understood from what is written above, that this is the root of judgments, and through the fact that they bring the judgments to their source, [the judgments] are cancelled. [And this is] As we say, the judgments are only sweetened at their root, specifically. ...
ותמנע היתה פילגש, “and Timnah had been a concubine.” After the Torah has provided a list of the principal descendants of Esau, i.e. the ones born by either Adah or Oholivamah, Esau’s major wives, it goes on to mention that Amalek was also a descendant of Esau through his son Eliphaz and a concubine by the name of Timnah. The Torah uses this paragraph to tell us that Amalek, the son of a servant maid was not included in the list of Esau’s true offspring from his proper wives. We know already from Ishmael and Sarah that the son of a servant-woman has no share in the father’s inheritance seeing he is a slave and as such whatever he has belongs to his master. (compare Genesis 21,10). The reason that the Torah had to tell us these details is that the descendants of Seir HaChori intermarried with the descendants of Esau so that their respective families were completely integrated with one another. At a later time the Torah commanded the Jewish people not to harass the descendants of Esau nor to invade and conquer their land. In fact the Torah (Deut. 23,9) deliberately commands us לא תתעב אדומי, “do not despise or reject an Edomite (descendant of Esau)” while at the same time commanding us to wipe out Amalek completely (Deut. 25,19), something which appears contradictory in view of the fact that Amalek is a descendant of Esau/Edom. In order to know which people qualify for treatment according to the commandment in Deut. 23,9 and which are subject to the commandment to destroy Amalek and any memory of it, it was necessary to describe the makeup of the descendants of Esau and the respective mothers who bore his or his sons’ children. When the Israelites left Egypt and Amalek attacked them in no man’s land, these were the Amalekites who were descended from Timnah the concubine of Eliphaz. This Amalek was not considered as a direct descendant of Esau, neither was he the product of any major wife of Esau or his sons. Our sages (Tanchuma Vayeshev 1) claim that Esau slept with the wife of Seir HaChori and that as a result Timnah was born. This is why Timnah had not been included in the count of the sons of Seir, seeing that though she was the daughter of Seir’s wife she was not Seir’s daughter. The Torah teaches that Amalek was the product of an illegitimate union which his mother had indulged in. The Torah underlines this by describing her as a sister of Lotan instead of as a daughter of Seir, Lotan’s father (compare verse 22). Timnah was not only Eliphaz’s concubine but his sister from his father Esau. Eliphaz begat a son from Timnah who died at the birth of that son. They therefore called the son Timnah in order to keep her name alive. This is the reason that you find that name cropping up amongst the descendants of Esau. This is what is meant in verse 40 אלוף תמנע אלוף עלוה. The chieftain in question was a son of Eliphaz from his concubine Timnah. The following paragraph beginning with אלה בני שעיר החורי, was written only in order to avoid us misunderstanding the words “Timnah was a sister of Lotan.” It teaches that this particular Timnah was the sister of chieftains and was interested in intermarrying with the family of Avraham even if it meant to become merely a concubine of one of Avraham’s descendants. This shows in what high regard Avraham’s family was held. Consider the fact that the verse commencing with ותמנע contains eight words totaling forty letters. This is an allusion to the eight times Yaakov addressed Esau as “my lord,” and to the words ארבעים יכנו, in Deut. 25,3 “that the guilty, evil party is to have forty strikes administered against him.”
ותמנע, it is possible that the Timna mentioned here was not a sister of Lotan as opined in the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 82,14) where we were told that this woman’s name and husband is mentioned in order to further illustrate the tremendous esteem in which Avraham had been held internationally at the time. This woman, who was the sister of an Aluf, i.e. a well known dignitary, a man of great prominence, said that seeing she did not have the good fortune to marry a direct descendant of Avraha, she was willing to settle for the lower rank of being a concubine to a son of Esau in order somehow to become a member of this outstanding family.
AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE TO ELIPHAZ ESAU’s SON. Because Scripture was not particular to tell us the names of the mothers of all the others, our Rabbis have interpreted that this was to tell us of the esteem in which Abraham our father was held, i.e., how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [and Lotan was one of the chieftains of Se’ir]. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife, would that I might become your concubine,” as Rashi has written. It is possible that the five sons of Eliphaz, mentioned in the preceding verse, were generally known as his children since he had begotten them from his wives. But Amalek, [born of Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz], was not known among his brothers, [who were the recognized children of Eliphaz], and he might have been included among Esau’s children because he was his descendant. Therefore, Scripture found it necessary to say that his mother so-and-so, to whom Amalek was known to have belonged, bore him to Eliphaz, but he is not listed among the descendants of Esau and did not dwell with them on mount Se’ir. Only the sons of the mistresses, and not the son of a concubine, are called Esau’s seed, since the son of the handmaid will not be heir with his sons, in keeping with the practice of his father’s father. (Above, 21:10.) Now concerning the descendants of Esau, we have been commanded not to abhor them (Deuteronomy 23:8.) or take their land. (Ibid., 2:5.) This refers to all his known sons who dwell in Se’ir, as they are called Edomites by his name, but the son of the concubine is not part of the descendants of Esau, and he did not inherit together with them in their land, and in fact with respect to him we have been commanded to the contrary, i.e., to abhor him and blot out his name. (Ibid., 25:19.) Now Rashi wrote further: “In the book of Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) Scripture enumerates Timna among the children of Eliphaz! This implies that he lived with Se’ir the Horite’s wife and from this union Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. And this is why Scripture says, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [since Lotan’s father was Se’ir the Horite]. And the reason why Scripture does not enumerate her among Se’ir’s children is that she was Lotan’s sister maternally but not paternally.” But I do not agree with this since in the book Chronicles, it should have said, “and Timna his daughter.” (See further, 46:15: “and Dinah his daughter.”) Why should Scripture enumerate the woman among the sons? Perhaps Scripture is not particular about this when a matter is known for so we find there in Chronicles: And the sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Miriam. And the sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu, etc. (I Chronicles 5:29.) [Scripture thus enumerates a woman among the sons.] If so, it is fitting that we say that this Timna was the daughter of Eliphaz, who had been born to him of the wife of Se’ir the Horite after the death of her husband, and she was thus Lotan’s sister from one mother. Eliphaz took her as a concubine, this being permissible to an idolater. (Sanhedrin 55b.) Or we shall say, in accordance with the opinion of our Rabbis [that Timna was illegitimate, as explained above in the words of Rashi], that the Timna mentioned in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) is identical with Timna the chieftain mentioned further on, (Verse 40 here.) for he is enumerated there in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) among the sons of Eliphaz, just as Korah is enumerated there (I Chronicles 1:35.) among the sons of Esau [while here in Verses 15-16 Korah is listed among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude that he was illegitimate, as was Timna]. Furthermore, Korah is listed here in Verse 5 as the son of Oholibamah [and Esau, and further in Verse 16 he is enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude] that both Korah and Timna were illegitimate, born of one father, and enumerated with the children of another, for it is far-fetched to say that the woman Timna was enumerated among the sons, as was suggested above. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is feasible to conjecture that Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, after having given birth to Amalek [as stated in our present verse], gave birth to a son, and she had hard labor and died. As her soul was departing she called his name Timna so that her name be remembered, while his father Eliphaz called him Korah. Scripture, however, does not ascribe this son Timna to Timna his mother in order not to prolong the account for the intent is only to enumerate Amalek by himself. However, the sons of Eliphaz were seven, [as they are enumerated here in Verses 15-16, and Korah is among them]. Now Scripture enumerates there the chieftains who were the sons of Eliphaz in the order of their importance. Therefore, it gave Kenaz and Korah precedence over Gatam [although the order of their birth as stated in Verse 11 was: Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz]. I have an additional opinion concerning this verse in connection with that which our Rabbis have said in the Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules by which Agadah (The part of Rabbinic teaching which explains the Bible homiletically, as opposed to the Halachic (or legal) interpretation, which is governed by the famous thirteen principles of interpretation mentioned by Rabbi Ishmael. This Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules” for Agadah was collated by Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.) is explained.” There they mentioned this rule: “There should have been one arrangement for [two verses, meaning that there are verses which should really be combined] but the prophets divided them for some reason! An example is the verse which says, For a multitude of the people, etc.” (For a multitude of the people… had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the passover otherwise that it is written. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying: The good Lord pardon, (II Chronicles 30:18). And then in Verse 19 it continues: His whole heart he hath set to seek G-d, the Eternal, the G-d of his fathers, though not according to the purification that pertaineth to holy things. Now Verse 18 does not explain whom G-d should pardon, while Verse 19 does not explain “who set his heart, etc.” Combining the two verses makes the sense clear. Hezekiah prayed that the good Lord pardon every one who, though he had not cleansed himself according, etc., had set his whole heart to seek G-d.) Those who pursue the plain meaning of Scripture apply this to other verses. And so too this verse says: (And) the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam and Kenaz, (This concludes Verse 11, while And Timna begins Verse 12. Ramban combines the two verses into one, with the result that Timna is also enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz.) and Timna. Then Scripture returns to say, there was a concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son, and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek, but Scripture does not mention the name of the concubine. But in truth she was Timna, as it is said, Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) and this is the reason that Scripture did not mention her name here since it did not want to say “and Timna” twice, once in reference to the male chieftain and once in reference to the female concubine. Thus Eliphaz had seven sons, [who are enumerated in Verses 11-12: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek], and they are the same chieftains ascribed to Eliphaz in Verses 15-16, but they changed the name of this youngest son of Eliphaz — namely Timna — to Korah because his name was like that of the concubine and so that he should not be thought of as her son. He was named Korah upon his ascending to the position of chieftain. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Korah the son of Esau’s wife Oholibamah is counted twice; [in Verse 5 he is mentioned as Oholibamah’s son while in Verse 16 he is listed as Adah’s son], because he was the youngest of Oholibamah’s sons, [as indicated in Verse 5 where he is mentioned last. Upon his mother’s death] Adah raised him, [which explains why he is mentioned among Adah’s children in Verse 16]. So also the verse, the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, (II Samuel 21:8.) as our Rabbis have said. (Sanhedrin 19 b: “But they were really Merab’s children! [See I Samuel 18:19.] It is because Merab gave birth to them. However Michal raised them; therefore, they are called by her name.”) According to this opinion [of Ibn Ezra, i.e., that because Adah raised Korah he is counted among her children], the explanation of Scripture in the book of Chronicles (I, 1:36), [where it mentions seven sons of Eliphaz, and among them, and Timna and Amalek, while here in Verses 11-12, it mentions only six sons of Eliphaz, is as follows: The expression in Chronicles, and Timna and Amalek, means] that Timna gave birth to Amalek, the sense of the verse thus being, “and to Timna, Amalek.” The letter lamed meaning “to” is missing just as in the verse: And there were two men that were captains of bands Saul’s son, (II Samuel 4:2.) which means “to Saul’s son.” [Thus it was Timna who was his mother, but because Adah raised him he is enumerated here in Verse 12 among the sons of Adah]. The correct interpretation however is, as I have suggested, [that Timna, Lotan’s sister, bore Amalek to Eliphaz], and the verse stating, And these are the sons of Adah — [namely, Verse 16, which mentions Amalek among them], refers to the majority of the names mentioned there, for Amalek was not her son. Similarly the verse, These are the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Padan-aram, (Above, 35:26.) does not apply to Benjamin, [who was born in the Land of Israel, although he is mentioned in the enumeration which follows].
ותמנע היתה פילגש, I have found in a Midrash on Psalms (שוחר טוב) that the prefix ו before the word תמנע suggests that this word may be read as part of what follows or as part of what preceded it. In fact, in Chronicles I 1,36 בני אליפז, תימן ואומר צפי וגעתם קנז ותמנע ועמלק it is understood as belonging to verse 11 in our chapter.
In the version in Chronicles, when listing the descendants of the בני שעיר, Timna is again listed in verse 39 as a sister of Lotan. This is parallel to Machalat, the daughter of Yishmael whom Esau married as a concession to his parents’ disgust with his other wives (Genesis 28,9) being described asאחות נביות “a sister to Nevayot, son of Yishmael.” The description of a woman as a sister of her brother rather than as a daughter of her father or mother also occurs in Exodus 15,20 where Miriam is described as Aaron’s sister. What happened here is that the first time Timna is mentioned, she is described in terms of he relationship to Avraham’s family, i.e. as the concubine of a great grandson of Avraham, Eliphaz, son of Esau, whereas the second time Timna is described as a sister of Lotan (verse 22) not genetically related to Avraham at all, but part of the genealogy of the בני שעיר. Such digressions in the sequence of a narrative are not unknown in the Bible. We find the following in Joshua 13,7-8 after G’d had instructed him at the beginning of the chapter to proceed with distributing the land of Israel to the various tribes, ועתה חלק את הארץ הזאת בנחלה לתשעת השבטים וחצי שבט המנשה. עמו הראובני והגדי לקחו נחלתם אשר נתן להם משה בעבר הירדן מזרחה נתן להם משה עבד ה' “Therefore, divide this territory into hereditary portions for the nine tribes and the half tribe of Menashe. Now, the Reubenites and the Gadites, along with the other half tribe of Menashe had already received their shares which Moses assigned to them on the east side of the Jordan- as assigned to them by Moses the servant of the Lord.” There can be no question that something is missing here as part of the second verse. You would have to say that this verse answered the question implied by the first verse, i.e. “what about the other half of the tribe of Menashe?” The reason for this peculiar division in describing the tribal allocation for the tribe of Menashe is that one half of the tribe, i.e. the half mentioned last, received their allocation by the authority of Moses himself, whereas the second half of the tribe received its allocation by the authority of Joshua. I, Samuel, (our author) have found a third verse [in addition to the two mentioned in the Midrash quoted. Ed.] about the genealogy in Chronicles I 8,35-36 where we deal with the family of Yonathan son of King Sha-ul the following: ובני מיכה פיתון ומלך ןתארע ואחז. ואחז הוליד את יהועדה, ויהועדה הוליד את עלמת וגו'.. “The sons of Micah: Pithon, Melech, Taarea, and Achaz. Achaz begot Yehoadah; and Yehoadah begot Alemeth, etc.” This same paragraph is repeated once more in chapter 9,41-43. In that sequence mention of Achaz is missing in the first of the two verses so that he appears out of nowhere in the second verse. Not only that but he is introduced with the connective letter ו, i.e. “and Achaz, etc. We must therefore conclude that the word ואחז הוליד, “and Achaz begot,” answers the verse which had in effect been interrupted in 8,35 with the word אחז. The author takes up the thread interrupted in chapter 8 and fills the reader in about the offspring of Achaz.
ותמנע היתה פילגש AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE — This is stated to tell you in what importance Abraham was held — how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said (v. 22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”, and Lotan was one of the chieftains inhabiting Seir — he was one of the Horites who had dwelt there from ancient times. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife would that I might become your concubine!” In Chronicles (1 Chronicles 1:36) Scripture enumerates her amongst the children of Eliphaz, thus intimating that he took Seir’s wife and from the two of them Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. This is why it is stated, “and Lotan’s sister was Timna”, and why Scripture does not enumerate her amongst Seir’s children, merely stating that she was sister to Lotan, Seir’s son, (see 5:20) because she was his sister from one mother and not from one father (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev 1).
ותמנע היתה פלגש, Eliphaz was one of the conquerors of that land and Timna a sister of the אלופים of the original inhabitants of the region fell to him as a conquest and became his concubine.
She said: “I may not merit being married to you, but, if only I could be your concubine.” Otherwise, why does it say, “Timna became a concubine...”? It should just say that Amalek, too, was among Eliphaz’s sons. Why was his mother’s name mentioned, over and above that of Eliphaz’s other sons? Also, what difference does it make if she was Eliphaz’s concubine or his wife? Therefore Rashi explains, “This is to inform us... if only I could be your concubine...” And therefore Rashi explains [on v. 24] that this is why the Torah had to write the families of the Chorites in vs. 29—30. (R. Meir Stern)
Indicating that he came upon Seir’s wife... Re’m asks: How does Rashi know that Timna was an illegitimate child? Perhaps Eliphaz took Seir’s wife after Seir’s demise, and begat Timna from her. Maharshal answers: If so, how could Eliphaz’s own daughter publicly become his concubine? But it is understandable if Eliphaz illicitly came upon Seir’s wife, as people would not know that Timna was Eliphaz’s daughter. But it seems to me [that the answer is:] that if Timna was Eliphaz’s [legitimate] daughter, why does it say, “Lotan’s sister was Timna”? It is understandable if she was Eliphaz’s illicit daughter, as people would assume she was Seir’s daughter and thus Lotan’s full sister. And Scripture would be informing us of the greatness of Avraham, [for the sister of Chief Lotan became a concubine to Eliphaz]. But if Eliphaz legitimately begat Timna, and then took her as a concubine because a ben Noach is [technically] permitted to his daughter, why does the verse tell us she was Lotan’s sister? To inform us of Avraham’s greatness? [This cannot be,] because she anyway was known to all as Avraham’s descendant. For Eliphaz legitimately took Seir’s [former] wife and begat Timna from her. Re’m answers: All these families were written here only to tell of their shame and illegitimacy. So wherever the opportunity arises, we attribute it to [their] illicitness.
And Timna, who was probably from a local ruling family, was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau and she bore Amalek to Elifaz. These are the sons of Ada, wife of Esau.
ותמנע היתה פילגש לאליפז בן עשו. “Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz, son of Esau.” Seeing that the Torah did not mention by name any of the mothers of Esau’s children except this one, Rashi was prompted to explain that Timna was outstanding, as expressed by her urge to marry into Avraham’s family, even to be married to Esau’s son as a concubine, if that was the best she could do. Nachmanides writes that it is possible that the sons of Eliphaz were already well known to him [i.e. he knew who their mothers were. Ed.] seeing their mothers were his real wives. On the other hand, Amalek, the son of a concubine, had to be identified clearly, else we could not have been certain who the father was. Amalek therefore was not included in Esau’s sons (grandsons) as he also did not dwell with his brothers. The Torah has commanded us not to detest the sons of Esau, and not to grab any part of their ancestral lands. This law refers to the known ancestral lands of Esau, the region of Mount Seir. The inhabitants of that region were known as Edomites. The son of the concubine did not reside in that land and was not called Edomite, and this is why there is no contradiction in the Torah having commanded us to wipe out the memory and name of Amalek. Rashi explains that in Chronicles I 1,39 Timna is included without hesitation as one of Eliphaz’s children, something which reveals to us that Eliphaz must have committed incest (adulterous) with the wife of Seir. When she grew up she became the concubine of Eliphaz, and that is the meaning of the words אחות לוטן תמנע, that from the father’s side she was a sister of Lotan. She is not enumerated with the descendants of Seir, as she was only a sister through the mother. Nachmanides does not agree that we can accept an explanation which would result in our accepting that Ezra in Chronicles counted Timna with the male offspring of Eliphaz when she clearly was a daughter and not a son. She should have been identified as Eliphaz’ daughter in Chronicles if Rashi is correct. Perhaps the Bible is not so explicit when the subject is something so well known, [that Timna was a woman. Ed.] We also find Miriam paired with Aaron and Moses in the same line in Chronicles I, 5,29 which would give the impression to the uninitiated that all three were males. The three personages are so familiar to the readers of Chronicles, that Ezra did not see the need to add that Miriam was a woman. At any rate, it is quite unlikely that Timna, not a world famous lady, would be enumerated together with the males. Perhaps we should say, in agreement with our sages, that the Timna mentioned in Chronicles was identical with the Aluf Timna who appears in verse 40 of our chapter, and is enumerated there as one of the sons of Eliphaz, just as the name Korach is also enumerated with the sons of Eliphaz This Korach who was the son of Oholivamah, wife of Esau, was also a mamzer, bastard, born from a forbidden incestuous relationship. He too was not listed with the category he belonged to. According to the plain meaning of the text we would have to say that Timna who was the wife of Eliphaz and bore him Amalek, became pregnant again and experienced a difficult birth as a result of which she died. The Torah did not mention the name of the baby whose birth caused her death. His father may have called that son Korach, a detail that the Torah omitted in order not to make the narrative unduly long. The major purpose of the Torah when narrating all these details was to isolate Amalek in such a way that the subsequent commandment that we are to wipe out the memory of Amalek should not be perceived as contradictory to the Torah’s injunction not to discriminate politically against the family of Esau. The Torah was not concerned with telling us who Amalek’s mother was. While it is true that when the Alufim are enumerated later on, the name Korach appears prior to the name Amalek although he was senior, these Alufim were mentioned in the order of their relative importance. This is also why Kenaz, though younger, was listed ahead of both Korach and Gaaton. I have to add that the verse needs to be understood as follows: “the sons of Eliphaz are Teiman, Omer, Tzfo, Gaaton, Knaz and Timna; i.e. Timna was also one of the sons of Eliphaz.” At that point, the Torah backtracks by saying that Eliphaz, the son of Esau, also had a concubine who bore Amalek for him. The name of the concubine is not mentioned. Actually, this concubine called Timna was a sister of Lotan. The reason why her name was not mentioned where you would have expected it, was that the Torah did not want to confuse the reader by listing two “Timnas” consecutively, one being male the other female. The seven sons of Eliphaz who were named here, appear later under the heading of “Alufey Esau,” ‘the “headmen” of Esau. As to the fact that this name of Timna has been exchanged when the Torah enumerates the “alufim,” this is precisely because his name was the same as that of Eliphaz’ concubine who was not considered a son of his in the regular manner. Hence he was renamed “Korach,” who had been elevated to the status of “Aluf.” Our sages believe that Eliphaz had slept with Oholivamah, the wife of his father, and that the result of this union was Korach. Ibn Ezra considers that Korach was the son of Oholivamah, wife of Esau, and that he is listed as one of her sons.
אלה בני עדה, “These are the sons of Adah.” .The meaning is that the majority of these listed were her sons, barring Amalek who was not hers.
“Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz” [36:12]. Rashi asks a question here. Why does it not say that Eliphaz took Timna as a concubine? The explanation is that the verse shows us that all the kings and nobles desired to unite with the children of Abraham. Therefore, the verse says, “Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz” [36:12]. That is to say, Timna was descended from nobles and kings, and joined the children of Esau who was of the children of Abraham. (Rashi, Genesis, 36:12.)
Tosafot support their assertion by citing examples of outstanding batei din, such as those of Yehoshua (According to the Midrash (see also Megillah 14b), Yehoshua accepted Rachav as a convert.) and Hillel (Shabbat 31a), who accepted sincere geirim. Although the individuals who came to him were hardly viable candidates for conversion at first – one of them denied the validity of the oral law - Hillel was confident that with patience and wisdom he would be able to shepherd them to full acceptance of Torah, an expectation that he fulfilled. Moreover, Tosafot cite the example of Timnah (Breishit 36:12) who, according to Chazal (Sanhedrin 99b), was unjustifiably denied conversion by our Avot (forefathers). Out of bitterness, she agreed to be a concubine to Eisav’s son Elifaz and bore Amaleik, who perpetually inflicts great pain upon Israel.
If repentance has to commence at the place where the sin was committed, only the fig tree could provide the leaves, seeing that it had been instrumental in man's fall (assuming that the fig tree was the tree of knowledge). Man hid, i.e. he considered himself beyond the sphere of Divine attention, just as the animal kingdom of which he now felt a part was outside the domain of G-d’s personal supervision. Only when addressed by G-d directly did man perceive that he had been wrong in his assumptions. This in turn led to complete repentance, recognition of his error. G-d’s rhetorical question "How could you feel naked unless you had eaten from the tree I told you not to eat from or you would become mortal," meant "You came out of earth's lap naked and you will return to earth naked." Adam replied, "True, I ate, but I was obliged to eat since the woman You gave me, gave me to eat." This stamps man as an ingrate, and woman who argued that her having succumbed was due to the serpent's enticement, claimed that her sin was natural, almost preordained. It is man's task to "hit the snake on the head," to neutralize its ability to mislead us and to distort the powers of our imagination. The snake's way is underhanded, it attacks the unprotected rear. It is our task to smash it head-on. Having abused our intelligence, we are condemned to attain our perfection via the route of gaining our sustenance through toil and sweat. The animal kingdom, having remained true to its instincts, does not need to fend for a living and finds its needs readily provided for (see Rabbi Eliezer at the end of tractate Kidushin). "On your belly you will move," i.e. even things suitable for you, you will find only with difficulty. This is the penalty for the serpent which had not been true to its instincts. The enmity between woman and the serpent is the disdain felt by people of sincere convictions (Torah) for those who adhere to all kinds of physical self-indulgence. The ability to crush the power of imaginary enjoyments will be greater than the power of those enjoyments to seduce, though that power will be great. The painfully slow process of pregnancy and giving birth, has its parallel in the equally gradual growth of perception of true values. Constant vigilance against falsehoods portrayed as true values in life renders such growth painful. Woman's mentor will henceforth be her husband, and he will be predominant in her thinking. "To Adam He had said," He called him Adam on account of the qualities he had originally been equipped with. When true to his purpose, the earth will be blessed by his conduct, and will yield its fruit willingly. When untrue, such as during this episode, man's ascendancy over earth as a superior is naught, hence the earth does not feel it needs to respond to man's efforts. The right to use nature for his own ends is based on man's doing so in the service of his Creator. Only then does earth also serve its Creator by serving man. "For you are dust," the intellectual faculties per se must not be viewed as ruach hakodesh, holy spirit. Through their being used constantly to fulfil tasks set for us by G-d, they gradually evolve, gain spiritual content, and ultimately—as in Jacob's dream with the ladder—may be transformed and become truly spiritual intellect. Adam was a pious man, who separated from Eve for 130 years once he had realized that he had brought mortality into the lives of the human species. During this period, he fasted and placed fig leaves on his flesh as a form of atonement. There are three kinds of repentance, corresponding to three types of sin. 1) Fasting is an antidote for errors committed through contamination of one's intellect through certain kinds of food or drink, which induce heretical views. 2) Sexual continence, in this case from his wife, who had seduced him into sinning. 3) The fig branches that tormented his body. When Adam called his wife chavah, he expressed the recognition that she had misled him, an act of repentance on his part. When G-d fashioned the leather coats for man, this was a sign that their repentance had been accepted. In the same way as leather garments are good for protecting the body, the light of Torah protects man's eyes. Both together are the way G-d in His kindness enables us to overcome the mortality which had resulted from eating of the tree of knowledge. Compare Onkelos on Leviticus 18,5 "When you observe the Torah, you will live forever." G-d’s Torah restores life to the condemned. (10) Rabbi Meir's version of the spelling of the word or with an aleph expresses the same thought that Onkelos stated on the verse in Leviticus.
We now must awaken you to many places in Torah where the name Ya”h-י״ה is found. For example, the verse states, (Exodus 17:16) “For a hand is [raised in oath] on the throne of Ya”h-י״ה; HaShem-יהו״ה maintains a war against Amalek from generation to generation.” What does it mean, “From generation to generation-MiDor Dor-מדור דור”? The following explains this verse: The wicked Amalek (The numerical value of Amalek-עמלק-240 is the same as “doubt-Safek-ספק-240,” in that the external husk (Kelipah) of Amalek sows doubt, as will soon be intimated.) comes from the power of the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee). He adheres to him and derives his strength from him. From the time that the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee) instilled his contamination into Chavah, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a) Adam severed the plantings above (After the sin of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam separated from his wife Chavah for one-hundred and thirty years, during which time he had nocturnal emissions of his seed with she-demons (Liliot) in his dreams. He thus caused a separation between the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut and the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet. This caused the plantings to be severed, and the conduits to pour out wasted influence. This caused the separation of the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel from the Holy One, blessed is He, in which the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י was separated from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus blemishing the letters Vav-Hey-ו"ה of the Name HaShem-יהו"ה. He then repented and returned to his wife Chavah and gave birth to his son Sheth who was born “in his likeness and image.” See Genesis 5:3 and Rashi there; Midrash Bereishit Rabba 20:11, 24:6; Bamidbar Rabba 14:12; Zohar III 31a, and elsewhere.) and “estranged the Master-Alooph-אלוף.” (See Proverbs 17:9 – That is, he brought about a separation of the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus concealing the Master of the World-Aloopho Shel Olam-אלופו של עולם.) This is the secret of the withdrawal of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, the Shechinah, the essential root of which was in the lower worlds, (Midrash Shir HaShirim Rabba 5:1 to Song of Songs 5:1 – “At first, the essential root of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Ikkar Shechinah, was in the lower worlds.”) so that, “the dove could not find a resting place for the sole of its foot.” (Genesis 8:9 – The dove-Yonah-יונה refers to the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel, the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Shechinah. This verse thus hints at the exile of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, from (Isaiah 66:1) “the earth (Aretz-ארץ) is My footstool,” as well as the exile of the Jewish people. See Talmud Bavli, Brachot 53b; Tikkunei Zohar 22b.) Now, even though when the children of Israel stood at Mount Sinai, their contamination ceased, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a ibid. – “When the Jewish people stood at Mount Sinai their contamination (which was instilled in Chava by the primordial snake ceased.” That is, at the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai there was a direct revelation of the true unity and singularity of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, in a manner that there is no room for doubt-Safek-ספק-240 (which is Amalek-עמלק-240) as it states (Exodus 19:20), “And HaShem-יהו״ה came down upon Mount Sinai,” and (Exodus 20:2), “I am HaShem-יהו״ה your God,” that we heard directly from the Almighty One, as discussed before in Gate Six.) nevertheless, the blemish of the moon (Kingdom-Malchut) (Levanah-לבנה) was never removed, (See at greater length in Talmud Bavli, Chulin 60b; This is explained at length in Pardes Rimonim, Shaar 18 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon), Etz Chayim, Shaar 36 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon) and elsewhere.) except at specific intervals in time [on Rosh Chodesh-the new moon] when certain known sacrifices are offered, namely the known he-goats (Se’irim-שעירים) that Se’ir adheres to, in that Se’ir is the first (Reishit-ראשית) of Amalek’s strength. (That is, the verse (Genesis 36:20) states, “These are the sons of Se’ir-שעיר the Horite… Lotan,” and (Genesis 36:22), “Lotan’s sister was Timna,” and (Genesis 36:12), “Timna was the concubine of Esav’s son Eliphaz; She gave birth to Amalek-עמלק-240 from Eliphaz.” (Also note Rashi there, that her birth came about through promiscuity and adultery, in which there was doubt-Safek-ספק-240 as to who her father was, which is why the verse only specifies that “Lotan’s sister was Timna.”)) The sign for this is the verse, (Numbers 24:20 – Amalak was the first nation to attack the Jewish people after they left Egypt, and did so without any reason or provocation.) “The first of the nations (Reishit Goyim-ראשית גוים) is Amalek.” When Amalek came, (That is, when Amalek (who is rooted in the blemish of the moon-Levanah) came and waged war on the Ingathering of Israel, their intention was to cause the separation of the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut, by blemishing the Sign of the Holy Covenant-Ot Brit Kodesh-אות ברית קודש (the circumcision), so that it will not receive beneficence from the upper Sefirot.) he added further iniquity to the blemish of the moon by “disjointing Yaakov’s thigh,” (Genesis 32:26, 33; Also see Zohar I 146a, 170b; Zohar II 111b; Tikkunei Zohar 36a and elsewhere. Also see Shaar HaYichud of Rabbi Dovber of Lubavitch, translated as The Gate of Unity (with commentary), Ch. 35, and the explanatory notes and citations there.) thereby shattering the Kingdom of the House of David. (That is, the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut is called “The Kingship of the House of David”-Malchut Beit David-מלכות בית דוד, as discussed in the First Gate.) Now, when the plantings were severed at the time of Adam, and when Amalek “disjointed Yaakov’s thigh,” the Torah portion of Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you (Parshat Zachor) was established. (That is, the Torah portion of (Deuteronomy 25:17), “Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you,” (which is to be recalled daily, see Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 5:5). As explained in Gate Two, the aspect of Remember-Zachor-זכור corresponds to the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod, which is where Amalek attempts to cause blemish in order to separate the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut. Therefore, to repair this, the Torah portion of Zachor-זכור is recited daily to repair this. Also see Zohar II 66a.) Thus, the final two letters of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, were blemished by the hand (Yedei-ידי) of Amalek, so to speak. This was possible because the hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה afflicted them, as in the verse, (Samuel I 12:12-15 – “But when you saw that Nachash-נחש, king of the children of Ammon, came upon you, you said to me, ‘No, but a king shall reign over us!’ But HaShem-יהו״ה your God, is your King! And now, here is the king who you have chosen, who you requested; for behold, HaShem-יהו״ה has set a king over you. If you will fear HaShem-יהו״ה and worship Him and listen to His voice and do not rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, then you and the king who reigns over you shall follow after HaShem-יהו״ה your God. But if you do not listen to HaShem’s-יהו״ה voice and rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, the hand of HaShem-יהו״ה shall be against you and against your fathers.”) “The hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה shall be against you,” and it states, (Proverbs 30:19 – Also note the explanation (in Gate Six) about the verse (Deuteronomy 32:18), “You have weakened the Rock-Tzur-צור who gave birth to you, and have forgotten the God who brought you forth.” See Midrash Eichah Rabba 1:33; Also see Shaarei Tzedek of Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, Shaar 2; Zohar II 64a; Etz Chayim, Shaar 49, Ch. 7.) “the way of a snake-Nachash-נחש is upon a rock-Tzur-צור.” The sign for this is the verse, (Exodus 17:8) “Amalek came and fought against Israel in Rephidim-רפידים,” meaning, (Mechilta d’Rabbi Yishmael 17:8 – “Rephidim-רפידים means ‘The slackening of the hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים,’ in that the Jewish people were slack in their Torah study [and observance], and it is on account of this that the enemy came upon them.” That is to say, through a weakening in the Sefirot of the “hands” and below, which are the Sefirot indicated by the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה of The Name HaShem-יהו״ה, Amalak and the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmoni) are able to set their hand against those Sefirot. It is for this reason that (Exodus 17:11), “Whenever Moshe raised his hands, Israel was stronger, and when he lowered his hands, Amalek was stronger,” [and particularly, when he would raise the middle finger of his hands, which is the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet and is the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, then the children of Israel prevailed. See Zohar III 186a-b (Yenukah).]) “Because of the slackness of their hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים.”
“Oholivama bore Yeush, and Yalam, and Koraḥ; these are the sons of Esau, who were born to him in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 36:5). “Oholivama bore…” – that is what is written: “How has Esau been searched?” (Obadiah 1:6). Rabbi Simon said: Like the peeling of an onion. (Just as one peels away the layers of an onion and exposes what is underneath, the Torah lists the genealogical records of Esau to reveal their secrets (Yefeh To’ar). ) Why to that extent? “I have exposed his hidden places” (Jeremiah 49:10) – in order to expose the mamzerim among them. How many mamzerim did he produce? Rav said three. (They were Ana (see below, 82:15), Oholivama (see Rashi, Genesis 36:2), and Timna (see Rashi, Genesis 36:12). Alternatively, the reference is to the three sons of Oholivama mentioned in this verse (Yefeh To’ar). ) Rabbi Levi said four. (He includes the Koraḥ mentioned in this verse, or according to the second approach mentioned above, he includes Timna. ) Rabbi Binyamin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Koraḥ mentioned here was a mamzer. (Koraḥ is mentioned as a son of Esau’s wife Oholivama in this verse, and as a son of Esau’s son Elifaz (Genesis 36:16), indicating that he was the illegitimate child of Oholivama and Elifaz (Rashi, Genesis 36:5). )
“Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau, and she bore Amalek to Elifaz. These are the sons of Ada wife of Esau” (Genesis 36:12). “Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau” – Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: Why do I [need for the verse] to expound and say: “Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau”? It is to inform us of the praiseworthiness of the household of Abraham our patriarch, to what extent the kingdoms and realms wished to cleave to him. Who was Lotan? He was one of the rulers, as it is stated: “The chieftain of Lotan” (Genesis 36:29), and it is written: “Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Genesis 36:22). “Timna was a concubine…” She said: ‘Since I am not worthy to marry him as a wife, I will be his maidservant.’ The matters can be inferred a fortiori: If the wicked Esau, who had to his credit only one mitzva, because he honored his father, kingdoms and realms wish to cleave to him, all the more so that they would wish to cleave to the righteous Jacob, our patriarch, who fulfilled the Torah in its entirety.
He concerned Himself also with the genealogy of Esau’s sons in the chapter These are the generations of Esau to disclose their degeneracy. You find that they too were the offspring of incestuous relations. Scripture states in one place: And the children of Elephaz were: Teman, and Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz. And Timna (ibid. 36:11), and elsewhere it states: And Timna was concubine to Elephaz (ibid., v. 12). This clearly informs us that Elephaz had sexual relations with his own daughter. How did that occur? He had sexual relations with Seir’s wife first and made her pregnant and begot Timna. Later he married Timna, as though she were Seir’s daughter, when in fact she was his own. That is why it says: And the children of Seir: Lotan … and Timna was Lotan’s sister (I Chron. 1:38–39). She was Lotan’s sister by her mother, but not by his father; Elephaz was her father, and Timna became the concubine of Elephaz the son of Esau.
I am nonetheless inclined to go more deeply into the meaning of that statement in the Sifri and to take it literally. We will find that it is quite possible to understand it. In this connection we need to consider a statement that we find in Baba Batra 14b, that "Moses wrote his book and that of Bileam and Job." How are we to understand this? Is there a single letter in the Torah that is not "Torah," not of Divine origin? If so, what could the Talmud have had in mind with that statement? Rashi comments on this: "His prophecies and parables, even though Moses did not need to, and the Torah would have been complete without them." I have not understood this comment of Rashi. All the stories in the Torah e.g. the slaying of Abel by Cain, are all at first glance not "necessary" parts of the Torah, and yet they are all part of the fabric of תורת השם תמימה, "that the Torah of G–d is complete, perfect", i.e. there is nothing in it that is redundant. Our sages usually point to Genesis 36,12: "and Timnah was the concubine of Esau's son Eliphaz" as an example that there is no word in the Torah that is not of enduring and meaningful significance. Sanhedrin 99, even concludes that we are to learn from this that it is better to be a lowly maidservant to a nation that has blood ties with Israel than to be a Lady in a family that has no ties with the Jewish people. Timnah the daughter of a nobleman, had chosen to demote herself in order to be associated with Abraham's descendants in some way. This verse in the Torah is equal in importance to the "Hear O Israel the Lord our G–d the Lord is One."
כי נר מצוה ותורה אור, ודרך חיים תוכחת מוסר, We have already mentioned that the weekly perusal of the relevant Torah portion has to include three distinct approaches. First and foremost, one must study the relevant commandments contained in the פרשה, be they positive or negative. This part of the weekly study comes under the heading of כי נר מצוה, “for the commandment is a lamp." Secondly, one must try to understand both the obvious and the more mystical significance of these commandments and their influence on our relationship with the "higher" world, each person according to his ability. In that connection it is important to be aware that no one part of the Torah is less important than any other part. If the Torah tells us for instance, that "the concubine of Eliphaz was called Timnah" (Genesis 36,12), this is no less important a sentence than שמע ישראל ה' אלוקינו ה' אחד, "Hear O Israel the Lord our G–d the Lord is One" (Deut 6,4). Every single part of the Torah reveals matters relevant to our world as well as matters relevant to the "higher" world. Our sages have given us an example of the importance of the verse quoted from Genesis by showing that the name of that concubine תמנע is composed of the first letters of certain words in the verse תורת השם תמימה משיבת נפש, עדות השם נאמנה מחכימת פתי (Psalms 19,8). The implication is that "the Torah is so perfect in totality" i.e. תורת ה' תמימה, that any part of it is מחכימת פתי, "makes the simple wise." All of Torah from beginning to end is משיבת נפש "renews life." The "life" referred to is the life in the "higher" regions. Anyone endowed by G–d with wisdom, חכמה, will be granted the kind of intelligence that enables him to touch base with חכמה-תבונה-ודעת. This is all included in the concept of תורה אור, that Torah is light. Any recipient of this "light," will discover in Torah the three dimensions of knowledge we have mentioned.
After all this, the deep intent of the words [contained in the blessing over the Torah], “A Torah of truth,” is now clear. [When we recite this blessing] we are not attempting to verify the truth of the utterances of the Holy One, blessed be He, or the [truth of the] Torah or [of the] commandments given by His mouth, may He be blessed, which He gave us to practice. [Instead, we are testifying] that though we see in the Torah many human conversations and narratives that seem to lack substance – that is, although historically accurate, they nevertheless [contain great wisdom even though they do not appear] to contain any enduring or eternal matter that would merit the title of truth; (all of this is in the Holy Zohar in the parashah of Be-ha’alosecha 149b). (There the Zohar uses the phrase Torah of Truth, since everything is contained in it, even the stories, enshrines lofty concepts and secrets that are applicable to the entire Torah.) Because of this we declare in this blessing that the entire Torah is truth. The [combination of God’s names] in the verse, “Timna was a concubine,” (Gen. 36:12.) are equal to those found in the verse, “Hear, O Israel.” (Deut. 6:4.) Both verses [consist of the Divine names] that are included in the essence of creation; both verses are the seal of the Holy One, blessed be He, which is [absolute] truth. (See Sanhedrin 64a, where R. Hanina proves that God’s seal is truth.)
[That which Rabbi Bartenura mentioned, "worthless interpreations" is] like Menashe (Sanhedrin 99b), who would interpret [and] ask, "What was it to Moshe to write (Genesis 36:12), 'And Timna was the concubine?'" - Rashi.
Tosafot support their assertion by citing examples of outstanding batei din, such as those of Yehoshua (According to Chazal (Megillah 14b), Yehoshua accepted Rachav as a convert.) and Hillel (Shabbat 31a), who accepted sincere geirim. Although the individuals who came to him were hardly viable candidates for conversion at first — one of them denied the validity of the oral law — Hillel was confident that with patience and wisdom he would be able to shepherd them to full acceptance of Torah, an expectation that he fulfilled. Moreover, Tosafot cite the example of Timna (Bereishit 36:12), who, according to Chazal (Sanhedrin 99b), was unjustifiably denied conversion by our Avot (forefathers). Out of bitterness, she agreed to be a concubine to Eisav’s son Elifaz and bore Amaleik, who perpetually inflicts great pain upon Israel.
Anyone who desecrates the Torah - his body will be desecrated by the created beings: About these they said, one who reveals [improper] faces of the Torah and says, "Why was it necessary to write, 'And Timna was a concubine'?" (Genesis 36:12), and similar to it - behold this is one who desecrates the Torah.
Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek. From this verse it seems that Timna was a son of Eliphaz, but the Torah (Gen 36:12) says that Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz and that she bore him Amalek! Some explain (cf. Rashi ibid.) that Timna is the mother of Amalek as it says in the Torah, and that she was misbegotten. For Eliphaz had relations with Seir’s wife, the mother of Lotan, and she bore him Timna—either during his lifetime or after his death—and Ezra made a subtle observation in the Torah that there is a paseq after “Timna,” so that the intent is: “Gatam, Kenaz, and Timna” (Gen 36:11–12), meaning that she too was his daughter. Afterward, though, she became his concubine and bore him Amalek. It is for this reason, then, that the text says, “and Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Gen 36:22, I Chr 1:39)—not “Seir’s daughter,” but rather “Lotan’s sister.” But this interpretation is midrashic: had Timna been the daughter of Eliphaz, the text would not have included her in the list of sons; for Scripture does not do this without saying so explicitly, as in: “and his daughter Dinah” (Gen 46:15), and: “and their sister Serah” (Gen 46:17). In my view the text adopts an abridged style: because Ezra did not need to be explicit, inasmuch as the matter is explicit in the Torah, he presented the genealogical lines in abridged form. He was similarly brief concerning the sons of Shem, recording Shem’s grandsons in the list of sons for the purpose of brevity, so that when the text says “Aram [and Uz and Hul]” (1 Chr 1:17) it is as though it says, “Aram’s sons were Uz and Hul.” Here too, then, he was brief in writing “Timna.” Indeed, he could have been even briefer and written “Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, and Amalek”; but because Amalek was not equal to the other sons—for they were sons of wives whereas he was the son of a concubine—he separated them by mentioning his mother. And it was adequate for him just to write “Timna,” because the matter is laid out in the Torah.
[This group of Simeonites] destroyed the last surviving Amalekites. This means whoever remained, not having been wiped out by Saul and David; for concerning David it says, “until he had killed off every male in Edom” (1 Kgs 11:16), and Amalek was a descendant of Edom (Gen 36:9–12). Now when the text says “and [these Simeonites] lived [in Mount Seir] to this day,” it means: until the day that they were exiled. Alternatively, it means that to this day, even though the Simeonites have been exiled from there, Amalekites have not returned there; so to this day it is in the possession of the Simeonites.
The eighth principle That the Torah is from Heaven and that is that we believe that this Torah that is given to us through Moshe, our teacher - peace be upon him - is completely from the mouth of the Almighty; which is to say that it all came to him from God, may He be blessed, in a manner that is metaphorically called speech. And no one knows how it came to him except Moshe himself, peace be upon him - since it came to him. And [we believe] that he was like a scribe who is dictated to and writes down all of the events, the stories and the commandments. And therefore, [Moshe] is called the engraver. And there is no difference between "And the sons of Cham were Kush and Mitsrayim" (Genesis 10:6), "and his wife's name was" Meheitabel" (Genesis 36:39), "And Timnah was his concubine" (Genesis 36:12) [ on the one hand] and "I am the Lord, your God" (Exodus 20:2) and "Hear Israel" (Deuteronomy 6:4) [on the other]; since they are all from the mouth of the Almighty and it is all the Torah of God - complete, pure and holy truth. And anyone who says, "These type of verses or stories were written by Moshe on his own," is for our sages and prophets a heretic, and one who reveals [incorrect] faces [of the Torah] more than all of the heretics; since he thinks that there is a heart and a peel to the Torah and that these chronicles and stories don't have a point to them and that they are from Moshe our teacher - peace be upon him. And this matter of one who holds that the Torah is not from Heaven, the sages said about it (Sanhedrin 99a), that it is one who believes the whole Torah is from the mouth of the Almighty except for this one verse, which the Holy One, blessed be He, did not say, but rather it was from Moshe himself. And this is "Since he disgraced the word of the Lord" (Numbers 15:31) - God, may He be blessed, is above the statements of the heretics. Rather every single word of the Torah contains wisdom and wonders for the one who understands them. And their ultimate wisdom is not [fully] grasped, as 'its measure is longer than the earth and broader than the sea.' And a man should only walk in the footsteps of David, the anointed of the God of Yaakov, who prayed (Psalms 119:18), "Uncover my eyes and I shall look upon the wonders of Your Torah." And so too, the accepted understanding of the Torah is also from the Almighty; and [so] that which we today make a [certain] form for the sukkah, the lulav, the shofar, the tsitsit, the tefilllin and other [such matters], it is the exact form that God, may He be blessed, said to Moshe, and which [Moshe] told to us - and he is reliable in his charge. And the statement that indicates this principle is that which is stated (Numbers 16:28), "with this shall you know that it is the Lord that sent me to do all of these acts, and it is not from my heart."
ONE WHO REVEALS WAYS TO READ THE TORAH CONTRARY TO THE HALACHA. Rav: such as one who translates “and do not give of your seed to pass to Molech” as “do not give of your seed to impregnate an Aramean,” which is not the plain meaning of the verse. He explains it this way in Megillah 9:4 as well, and I write about this verse there at length. The Rav also adds one who offers scornful interpretations of Torah. To this Rashi adds “like Menashe, who used to say, ‘Why should Moses write “and Timna was a concubine” (Genesis 36:12)?’”
What may have bothered Rashi is the reference to שדה עמלקי, considering that also Amalek had not been born yet, seeing that he was a grandson of Esau. Ed.] I believe (author speaking) that the reason the Torah speaks of שדה העמלקי is that there was an important person called Amalek in that region at the time, and that is the reason why Eliphaz, son of Esau, named his son (from the concubine Timnah after this original Amalek. (Genesis 36,12). Esau certainly ruled that region at one time after having separated from Yaakov.
[54] The wicked, too, take to them as concubines, opinions and doctrines. Thus he says that Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, the son of Esau, bore Amalek to Eliphaz (Gen. 36:12). How distinguished is the misbirth of him whose descent is here given! What the misbirth is you will see, if you cast away all thought that these words refer to men and turn your attention to what we may call the anatomy of soul-nature.
Manasseh said: But did Moses need to write only insignificant matters that teach nothing, for example: “And Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Genesis 36:22), or: “And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz, son of Esau” (Genesis 36:12), or: “And Reuben went in the days of the wheat harvest and found duda’im in the field” (Genesis 30:14)? A Divine Voice emerged and said to him: “You sit and speak against your brother; you slander your own mother’s son. These things you have done, and should I have kept silence, you would imagine that I was like you, but I will reprove you, and set the matter before your eyes” (Psalms 50:20–21). The verses in the Torah are not empty matters, with regard to which you can decide their import.
Timna became a concubine to Eliphaz, Eisov’s son, and she bore to Eliphaz [a son], Amaleik. These are the sons of Adah, the wife of Eisov.
And Timna was the concubine of Eliphaz bar Esau, and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek. He is Eliphaz the companion of Job. These are the sons of Adah wife of Esau.
| וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ בְּנֵ֣י רְעוּאֵ֔ל נַ֥חַת וָזֶ֖רַח שַׁמָּ֣ה וּמִזָּ֑ה אֵ֣לֶּה הָי֔וּ בְּנֵ֥י בָשְׂמַ֖ת אֵ֥שֶׁת עֵשָֽׂו׃ | 13 P | And these were the sons of Reuel: Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah. Those were the descendants of Esau’s wife Basemath. |
And these are the sons of Re’uel: Nahat, and Zerah, Shama, and Mitza; these were the sons of Basmat, wife of Esau.
Another interpretation: “The Lord spoke to Moses and to Aaron” – that is what is written: “The voice of my beloved, behold, he is coming” (Song of Songs 2:8). When Moses went and said to Israel: ‘So said the Holy One blessed be He to me: “Today you are leaving, in the month of spring”’ (Exodus 13:4), they said to him: ‘Where is He?’ He said to them: ‘He is about to arrive: “The voice of my beloved, behold, he is coming, [leaping upon the heights, bounding upon the hills]”’ (Song of Songs 2:8). Rabbi Yehuda said: What is “leaping upon the heights?” The Holy One blessed be He said: If I scrutinize the actions of Israel they will never be redeemed. Rather, at whom will I look? At their saintly forefathers, as it is stated: “Moreover, I have heard the cry of the children of Israel…[and I have remembered my covenant]” (Exodus 6:5) (The covenant was made with the patriarchs.) – on the merit of their forefathers I am redeeming them. Therefore, it is written: “Leaping upon the heights,” and heights mean nothing other than the forefathers, as it is stated: “Hear, O heights, the Lord’s grievance [and the mighty ones, foundations of the earth]” (Micah 6:2). ( Eitanim, meaning mighty ones, is a term that the Sages used for the patriarchs.) Another interpretation: Rabbi Neḥemya said: What is “leaping upon the heights?” [It is not to be understood literally.] Rather, the Holy One blessed be He said: Israel does not have deeds that would warrant their being redeemed, except by the merit of the elders, as it is stated: “Go, and gather the elders of Israel” (Exodus 3:16), and heights are nothing other than the elders, as Yiftaḥ’s daughter says to her father: “I will go down in the heights” (Judges 11:37). Was she going to the heights? Rather, she was saying: To the elders, as she was going to show the elders that she was a pure virgin. (She therefore did not deserve the fate decreed for her by her father’s vow.) That is why it is written: “Leaping upon the heights.” Another interpretation: Rabbi Elazar said: What is “leaping upon the heights”? The Holy One blessed be He said: I arranged for Esau that he would establish kings, as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom” (Genesis 36:31). If I allow Esau to establish more kings, how will Israel survive? Rather, I will supplant them and render them chieftains, as it is stated: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau” (Genesis 36:15). (The midrash is reading the verses out of chronological order, as if the chieftains came after the kings.) Heights mean nothing other than idolaters, as it is stated: “Behold, four chariots (The chariots represent four idolatrous nations.) are emerging from between the two heights” (Zechariah 6:1).
These are the sons of Reueil, Nachas, Zerach, Shamoh, and Mizzoh. These were the sons of Bosmas, the wife of Eisov.
And these are the sons of Reuel, Nachath and Zerach, Shammah and Mizzah. These are the sons of Basemath wife of Esau.
| וְאֵ֣לֶּה הָי֗וּ בְּנֵ֨י אׇהֳלִיבָמָ֧ה בַת־עֲנָ֛ה בַּת־צִבְע֖וֹן אֵ֣שֶׁת עֵשָׂ֑ו וַתֵּ֣לֶד לְעֵשָׂ֔ו אֶת־[יְע֥וּשׁ] (יעיש) וְאֶת־יַעְלָ֖ם וְאֶת־קֹֽרַח׃ | 14 P | And these were the sons of Esau’s wife Oholibamah, daughter of Anah daughter of Zibeon: she bore to Esau Jeush, Jalam, and Korah. |
ותלד לעשו את יעוש “she bore Ye-ush for Esau.” The word is spelled as יעיש, but read as if it had been spelled יעוש.
And these were the sons of Oholivama, daughter of Ana, daughter of Tzivon, Esau’s wife. It is clarified below that Oholivama was a native of Se’ir (verses 20–25), from the nation that lived there before Esau’s arrival. It may be suggested that Esau went there due to this marriage, and on account of this wife he claimed ownership of land on Mount Se’ir. She bore to Esau Yeush, Ya’elam, and Korah.
(Genesis 45:8) "So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh." I am like a creditor to him, as it is stated (Exodus 22:24), "Do not impose interest upon him." Just as the way of a creditor is to lend to a borrower (Proverbs 22:7), in the book of Rabbi Meir, it is written, "And he has made me a father," as it says, "which the Lord, your God, gives you" (Deuteronomy 15:2). This is a legal judgment derived from the full texts written in the Torah, which emerged from Jerusalem during the Sabbatical year and ascended to Rome, and the scrolls were stored in the synagogue of Asvyros. "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good" (Genesis 1:31). "For a man and his wife, leather tunics" (Genesis 3:21). "I will descend now and see their outcry" (Genesis 18:21). "The Lord who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth" (Genesis 24:7). "And he sold his birthright" (Genesis 25:33). "Behold, now, I am old; I do not know the day of my death" (Genesis 27:2). "The fragrance of a field that the Lord has blessed" (Genesis 27:27). "And Oholibamah bore Jeush" (Genesis 36:5). "Eliphaz, the son of Esau" (Genesis 36:10). "These were the sons of Oholibamah, the wife of Esau" (Genesis 36:14). "They arose and went down to Egypt" (Genesis 43:15). "And I buried her there on the way" (Genesis 48:7).And he has made me a father to Pharaoh." And here are the names that came down to Egypt (Genesis 46:8). "So shall you say to the children of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel" (Exodus 19:3). "The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses" (Exodus 12:37). "For it is a sign between Me" (Exodus 31:13). "Five for the planks on one side" (Exodus 26:27). "We have no barricade against it." "And the priest shall take from its blood" (Leviticus 4:34), for if it is a lamb. "And when the zav becomes purified with living water" (Leviticus 15:13). "One lamb of the first year without blemish" (Leviticus 14:10). "All who come to join the ranks must be counted in their census" (Numbers 4:3). "From the first of your dough, you shall give" (Numbers 15:20). "Avenge the vengeance of the children of Israel" (Numbers 31:2). "And they came to Moses and to the congregation of the children of Israel" (Numbers 12:1). "The heads of the families of the house of Joseph approached" (Numbers 36:1). "But I have not the power to go up" (Deuteronomy 1:26). "And they shall inherit it, they and all the people of the land" (Numbers 32:22). "To give us into the hands of the Amorites" (Deuteronomy 1:27). "Nor take a mother upon her young" (Deuteronomy 22:6). "Brimstone and salt burning" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "Like the upheaval of Sodom and Gomorrah" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "I said, I would scatter them" (Deuteronomy 32:26). So they are written in the Torah that emerged from Jerusalem.
You find likewise (that the expression sat also alludes to) the degeneracy of the descendants of Seir, since it is written: These are the sons of Seir the Horite, who sat on the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah (Gen. 36:20). However, Anah is elsewhere called the son of Zibeon: And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah (ibid., v. 24). We learn from this that Zibeon had sexual relations with his own mother, and conceived and begot Anah by her. Consequently, (Anah) was both (Zibeon’s) brother and his son. Later he had intercourse with his daughter-in-law, the wife of Anah, and Oholibamah was their child, as it is said: And these were the sons of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife (ibid., v. 14), and Esau took her as a wife. Inasmuch as they were all products of incestuous relations, Scripture mentions them only to disclose their degeneracy.
I shall now explain the meaning of the words: עד כי גדול מאד "until he was very great," in 26,13. Bereshit Rabbah 64,7 on that verse states that when people wanted to describe excessive wealth they used to describe it in terms of the silver and gold possessed by Avimelech. After Isaac had become rich, they described excessive wealth in terms of the dung of Isaac's mules. This seems a curious comparison. How can we assume that Avimelech's wealth did not even amount to the value of the dung of Isaac's mules? Another difficulty is the Midrash's comment on the words מצא את הימים, in Genesis 36,14. These yeymim are described by Bereshit Rabbah 82,15 as half-donkey and half-horse. Anah who crossbred horse and donkey to produce mules is severely criticized for interfering with G–d's plan of maintaining the purity of the species. How can we assume that Isaac a) kept or raised such animals, b) was the first one to crossbreed, seeing that the Torah reports this as something new much later and in Jacob's lifetime?
These are the sons of Oholivomoh, the daughter of Anoh, the daughter of Tzivon, the wife of Eisov; she bore to Eisov: Ye’ush, Yalom and Korach.
And these are the sons of Ahalibama the daughter of Anah the daughter of Sebeon wife of Esau; and she bare to Esau, Jehus, and Jaalam, and Korach.
| אֵ֖לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֣י בְנֵֽי־עֵשָׂ֑ו בְּנֵ֤י אֱלִיפַז֙ בְּכ֣וֹר עֵשָׂ֔ו אַלּ֤וּף תֵּימָן֙ אַלּ֣וּף אוֹמָ֔ר אַלּ֥וּף צְפ֖וֹ אַלּ֥וּף קְנַֽז׃ | 15 P | These are the clans of the sons of Esau. The descendants of Esau’s first-born Eliphaz: the clans Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz, |
All the Alufim mentioned in this chapter are heads of cities of clans. I believe that the אלוף קרח mentioned in this verse as one of the sons of Eliphaz is identical with the תמנע mentioned in Chronicles as a son of Eliphaz, (compare verse 12) whereas the קרח, mentioned in verse 18 here as the son of Oholovimah, is a different person by the same name.
אלה אלופי בני עשו THESE WERE CHIEFTAINS OF THE SONS OF ESAU — Heads of families.
Heads of families. Rashi is saying they were leaders and heads, each over a different family, but not that the families were formed by them.
These are the chieftains, the petty rulers of the various tribes that descended from the sons of Esau, who did not lose their status even after the kingdom of Edom was established: The chieftains of the sons of Elifaz, firstborn of Esau, were the chieftain of Teman, the chieftain of Omar, the chieftain of Tzefo, the chieftain of Kenaz, his aforementioned sons (verse 11). As the families grew, each of them was headed by a chief. The name of the patriarch of the family, who was their first chieftain, subsequently became the name of the entire family, e.g., the governor of Teman’s descendants was referred to as the chieftain of Teman.
“On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:72). “On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” – what was the reason for the prince of Asher to present his offering after the prince of Dan? It is because Dan is named for judgment [din], and Asher is named for its confirmation [ishuro]; that is why the Holy One blessed be He commanded Asher to present his offering after Dan, because the judge must confirm his judgment, just as it says: “Seek justice, confirm it for the oppressed” (Isaiah 1:17). “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:73). “His offering was [one] silver dish…” – Rabbi Tanḥuma said: The names of all the tribes were called for the redemption of Israel and for their praise. Asher’s name was called for the redemption of Israel, just as it says: “All the nations will praise [ve’ishru] you, as you will be a desired land, said the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 3:12), and for their praise, just as it says: “Happy [ashrei] is the nation for whom this is so; happy is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalms 144:15). Israel’s happiness [ishuran] is only because they chose the Holy One blessed be He to be God for them and the Holy One blessed be He chose them to be a treasured nation for Him. That is why when the prince of Asher came to present his offering, he presented his offering for the sake of the choice, that the Holy One blessed be He chose Israel from all the nations, just as it says: “The Lord has chosen you to be His treasured people of distinction [from all the peoples that are on the face of the earth]” (Deuteronomy 14:2), as it is stated: “Happy is the one whom You choose and draw near…” (Psalms 65:5). Therefore, he presented his offering of a silver dish, corresponding to the nations of the world, who were initially attributed to Abraham. (See Genesis 17:5.) “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – these are the seventy descendants of Noah and the sixty queens, as Solomon said: “They are sixty queens” (Song of Songs 6:8). Who were they? They were the sixteen sons of Ketura, Yishmael and his twelve sons, and Esau and his seventeen sons and grandsons. How so? The sons of Elifaz are eight and they are: “The sons of Elifaz: Teman, Omar, Tzefi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek” (I Chronicles 1:36); they, with Elifaz, are eight. There it is written: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau: The sons of Elifaz firstborn of Esau: The chieftain of Teiman,… the chieftain of Koraḥ, the chieftain of Gatam, the chieftain of Amalek…” (Genesis 36:15–16). They are nine, (They are nine with the addition of Koraḥ, who is listed in the verse in Genesis but does not appear in the verse in Chronicles.) Re’uel with his sons are five, as it is stated: “The sons of Re’uel: Naḥat, Zeraḥ, Shama, and Miza” (I Chronicles 1:37), that is fourteen. The sons of Esau are three: (Besides Elifaz and Re'uel.) “[The sons of Esau…] Yeush, Yalam, and Koraḥ…” (I Chronicles 1:35), that is seventeen. And the eleven chieftains who are tallied at the end, as it is stated: “These are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names: The chieftain of Timna…” (Genesis 36:40), that is fifty-seven. If you say: Are they not fifty-eight, Timna was the daughter of Elifaz. It is completed with three kings of Edom who were descendants of Edom. (See Genesis 36:32–34.) They are: Bela son of Beor (Genesis 36:32), who was named after Esau, who was a glutton [bela] and sold his birthright because of his gluttony. “Son of Beor” (“Beir” can mean animal; see Exodus 22:4.) – the son of one who rendered himself like an animal, as it is stated: “Feed me [haliteni] now from that red stuff, as I am exhausted” (Genesis 25:30), just as it says: One may not forcibly feed an animal, but one may place food in its mouth [malitin]. (Shabbat 155b.) The second, “Yovav son of Zeraḥ from Botzra” (Genesis 36:33). Botzra was of Edom, as it is stated: “Who is this, coming from Edom, with crimsoned garments from Botzra, resplendent in His attire, striding in His abundant strength? I speak with justice, potent to save” (Isaiah 63:1). The third, “Ḥusham of the land of the Temanite” (Genesis 36:34), and Teman was the land of Edom, as it is stated: “Your mighty, Teman, will be broken, so that each man from the mountain of Esau will be eliminated by slaughter” (Obadiah 1:9). But the other kings were from other places and other nations, that is sixty. Why did he call all these dishes [ke’arot]? It is because the Holy One blessed be He disqualified all of them. Ke’ara is nothing other than an expression of leprosy, just as it says: “Recessed [shekaarurot], deep green” (Leviticus 14:37). “Silver [kesef]” – due to shame, as they will all go “to reviling and eternal disgrace” (Daniel 12:2). From where is it derived that kesef is an expression of shame. It is as in the Jerusalem Targum, they call disgrace kisufa. “One silver basin” – this is Israel, whom the Holy One blessed be He separated out from them, just as it says: “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself…” (Psalms 135:4). And it says: “I took your father, Abraham, from beyond the river, and I led him throughout the land of Canaan, and I multiplied his descendants, and I gave him Isaac” (Joshua 24:3). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel…” – just as it says: “With seventy people, your ancestors descended to Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:22). “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering [leminḥa]” – as the Holy One blessed be He dispatched to the nations of the world and to Israel prophets of them and among them. That is leminḥa, just as it says: “The spirit of the Lord will rest [venaḥa] upon him” (Isaiah 11:2), and it says: “The spirit rested [vatanaḥ] upon them” (Numbers 11:26). The Holy One blessed be He wished to give His Torah to all of them, as it is stated: “He said: The Lord came from Sinai, [and shone from Seir for them, He appeared from Mount Paran]” (Deuteronomy 33:2). “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:74). “One [gold] ladle” – from all of them, the Holy One blessed be He chose only Israel, as it is stated: “Unique is my faultless dove, unique to her mother, pure to the one who bore her” (Song of Songs 6:9). That is why they are the happiest of the nations, just as it says: “Girls see her and laud her, and queens and concubines praise her” (Song of Songs 6:9) – these are the nations. Why did the Holy One blessed be He choose them? It is because all the nations rejected the Torah and did not want to receive it, but these wanted and chose the Holy One blessed be He and His Torah, which is five books corresponding to the five fingers on the hand, and received the Ten Commandments at Sinai. That is, “one gold ladle of ten shekels.” What is “filled with incense”? It is because they all said: “All that God spoke we will perform and we will heed” (Exodus 24:7); they accepted upon themselves Torah study and action. (These are sometimes compared to a pleasant smell. See Vayikra Rabba 30:12.) “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:75). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:76). “One young bull…” – these three species of burnt offering, why? They correspond to the three crowns that the Holy One blessed be He gave to Israel for this: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of kingship. The crown of Torah, this is the Ark, as it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown upon it all around” (Exodus 25:11). The crown of priesthood, this is the golden altar, in whose regard it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown for it all around” (Exodus 30:3). The crown of kingship, this is the table, as it is written: “He crafted a crown of gold for it all around” (Exodus 37:11). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to a good name, which is action, just as we learned: Study is not the principal matter but action, as action atones for the person, like what we learned: Repentance and good deeds are a shield before punishment. That crown corresponds to the candelabrum, to realize what is stated: “For mitzva is a candle, and Torah is light” (Proverbs 6:23). Why is Torah called light? It is because it illuminates for the person what he should do. And because the Torah teaches the person how he shall perform the will of the Omnipresent, therefore, the reward of study is great. And one who causes another to perform an action is greater than one who performs it, as it is stated: “The act of righteousness will be peace and the work of righteousness will be quiet and security forever” (Isaiah 32:17). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:77). “And for the peace offering, two bulls…” – as the Holy One blessed be He gave two Torahs to Israel: the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. He gave them the Written Torah, in which there are six hundred and thirteen mitzvot, in order to fill them with mitzvot and accord them merit, as it is stated: “The Lord desires for the sake of His righteousness; He will make the Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21). He gave them the Oral Torah, so they would excel through it among the other nations. That is the reason that He did not give it in writing, so that the Ishmaelites would not falsify it the way that they did to the Written Torah and say that they are Israel. In that regard, the verse said: “I write for him much of My Torah, but it is regarded like a strange matter” (Hosea 8:12). The Holy One blessed be He said: If I write for Israel much of My Torah – this is the Mishna, which is greater than the Bible – “it will be regarded like a strange matter.” “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these three species of peace offerings correspond to the priests, Levites, and Israelites. Alternatively, corresponding to the three types of greatness that the Holy One blessed be He conferred upon them in reward for the fact that they received the Torah. They are: being a treasure, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, as it is stated: “You shall be treasured for Me from among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine. You shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:5–6). They were three species of five each for a total of fifteen, corresponding to the Torah, that is five books, and the Ten Commandments, which they received, which were written on two tablets, five on this tablet and five on that tablet. Another matter: It corresponds to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the twelve tribes, as they are the primary chosen ones, just as it says: “Because He loved your forefathers, He chose their descendants after them, and He took you out before Him, with His great power, from Egypt” (Deuteronomy 4:37). “This was the offering of Pagiel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran.”
“They sent Rebecca their sister, and her nursemaid, and Abraham’s servant, and his men” (Genesis 24:59). “They blessed Rebecca, and said to her: Our sister, may you become thousands and myriads, and let your descendants inherit the gate of their enemies” (Genesis 24:60). “They sent Rebecca…they blessed Rebecca” – they were downcast and despondent [that she was going], and they blessing her only with their mouths. (Not with their hearts.) “Our sister, may you become thousands and myriads” – Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Levi in the name of Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: Why was Rebecca granted [conception] only after Isaac prayed for her? (See Genesis 25:21.) It was so that the idolaters [Laban and his mother] should not say: ‘Our prayer bore fruit.’ Instead, “Isaac entreated the Lord on behalf of his wife” (Genesis 25:21). Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Levi: “The blessing of the lost would come to me” (Job 29:13). “The blessing of the lost [oved]” – this refers to Laban the Aramean, as it is stated: “An Aramaean sought to destroy [oved] my father” (Deuteronomy 26:5). “Would come upon me” – this refers to Rebecca. “Our sister, may you become thousands [alfei] and myriads [revava]” – chieftains [alufim] emerged from her through Esau, and myriads through Jacob. Chieftains from Esau – “the chieftain of Teiman, the chieftain of Kenaz” (Genesis 36:15); myriads [revava] from Jacob, as it is written: “I rendered you numerous [revava] like the plants of the field” (Ezekiel 16:7). Some say that both of these emerged through Israel, as it is written: “When it rested, he said: Repose Lord, among the myriad [rivevot] thousands of [alfei] Israel” (Numbers 10:36).
(Gen. 37:1-2:) NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >…. THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH. What is written on the matter above (in Gen. 36:15)? THESE ARE THE LORDS OF THE CHILDREN OF ESAU. When Jacob saw them, he became alarmed and said: Who can stand against these? (Gen. R. 84:5; Tanh., Gen. 9:1.) To what is the matter comparable? To a goldsmith who would sit and ply his trade. His apprentice raised his eyes and saw a lot of camels who were loaded with straw. He began to say: Who can stand against these? His master said to him: If a spark went out of this furnace, it would burn all of them. So in the case of our father Jacob, when he saw all of Esau's lords, he began to be afraid and said: Who can stand against these? The Holy One said to him: Look at what is written below (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH. By your life, someone shall spring from Joseph, < a person > who shall burn all of them, as stated (in Obad. 18): THE HOUSE OF JACOB SHALL BE A FIRE, AND THE HOUSE OF JOSEPH A FLAME, AND THE HOUSE OF ESAU SHALL BE STRAW; < THEY SHALL BURN IT >…. R.Hanina said: It is written (in Is. 47:14): SEE, THEY HAVE BECOME LIKE STRAW; FIRE CONSUMES THEM. It is therefore written (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH.
I believe this can be understood in light of an astonishing, beautiful and satisfying insight I heard from the holy mouth of the saintly Rabbi Heshel Zoref, z”l, in the name of a certain Kabbalist. He said as follows: First you must know that Tzefo son of Elifaz son of Eisav, mentioned in the verse, “the chieftain of Tzefo” (Bereishis 36:15), was the first of the husks of impurity of the seventy nations. Corresponding to this on the side of holiness was the “land of Tzuf” (I Shmuel 9:5), for both names are comprised of the same letters. Tzefo was the first king and his realm was the land of Poland [Polin in Yiddish]. This name alludes to the name Ploni [a nickname for the Samech Mem, the guardian angel of Eisav], for these two names also consist of the same letters. Note that the numerical value of Polin is the same as that of Tzefo. For this reason, too, the kingdom of Edom [Eisav’s descendants] is also known as the Metropolis [Metropolin in the language of the Sages] of the seventy nations (Megillah 6a). For this nation is under the guardianship of the angel of Edom, who was the first of the husks of impurity. Know also that the impure husk of Tzefo was a product of the sin of Adam and Chava. The “tree” from which Adam ate was actually the wheat stalk (Berachos 40a), because wheat — chitah [(חטה)] — has a numerical value of 22 (Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 16, 31a), indicating that by eating of it Adam blemished the twenty-two letters with which the Torah is written. It is well known that Adam’s sin affected the attribute of Splendor [Hod], which is the eighth attribute. Eight times twenty-two is 176, the numerical value of Tzefo. This is because the sin came about through Chavah, who was created from the attribute of Splendor, the eighth attribute, and through her came the blemish to the twenty-two letters, as above.
These are the chiefs of the sons of Eisov: the sons of Eliphaz, Eisov’s first born: Chief Teiman, Chief Omar, Chief Tzepho, Chief Kenaz.
These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau; the sons of Eliphaz, the first--born of Esau, Rabba Teman, Rabba Omar, Rabba Zephu, Rabba Kenaz,
| אַלּֽוּף־קֹ֛רַח אַלּ֥וּף גַּעְתָּ֖ם אַלּ֣וּף עֲמָלֵ֑ק אֵ֣לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֤י אֱלִיפַז֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ אֱד֔וֹם אֵ֖לֶּה בְּנֵ֥י עָדָֽה׃ | 16 P | Korah, Gatam, and Amalek; these are the clans of Eliphaz in the land of Edom. Those are the descendants of Adah. |
אלוף קרח, “a chieftain over a thousand, named Korach. This person has already been listed amongst the sons of Eliphaz that has been mentioned in Chronicles I 1,36, seeing that the Korach who was a son of Oholivamah is a different Korach. In the tractate Sotah 13, Rashi explains that there was a Korach who was the son of Eliphaz as well as a Korach who was the son of Oholivamah. Some commentators argue that both times the Torah refers to the same Korach; the reason why the Torah mentions the “second” Korach is only because he lived together with the alufey Eliphaz. His mother Oholivamah died while Korach was still very young and she adopted him and raised him with her own children. We find something parallel concerning Amalek, who is linked together with the sons of Adah because he was the son of Adah’s servant maid.
אלוף קרח. Korach had not been mentioned earlier as a son of Eliphaz, but merely as a son of Oholovimah. Perhaps this Korach was another son of Eliphaz who had become an Aluf, and has now been mentioned with the other Aluphim who were sons of Eliphaz.
בארץ אדום, who had been born in the land of Edom and who had risen to the positions of Aluphim there.
אלה בני עדה, the sons of the son of Adah. Amalek was not a son of Adah, seeing he was the son of a concubine. The only reason why he is mentioned in this verse is because he too had risen to the position of an Aluph. The Torah, concentrating on the majority, simply lumps them all together as “sons of Adah.”
The chieftain of Korah, the chieftain of Gatam, the chieftain of Amalek. These are the chieftains of Elifaz in the land of Edom. These are the sons of Ada.
“Oholivama bore Yeush, and Yalam, and Koraḥ; these are the sons of Esau, who were born to him in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 36:5). “Oholivama bore…” – that is what is written: “How has Esau been searched?” (Obadiah 1:6). Rabbi Simon said: Like the peeling of an onion. (Just as one peels away the layers of an onion and exposes what is underneath, the Torah lists the genealogical records of Esau to reveal their secrets (Yefeh To’ar). ) Why to that extent? “I have exposed his hidden places” (Jeremiah 49:10) – in order to expose the mamzerim among them. How many mamzerim did he produce? Rav said three. (They were Ana (see below, 82:15), Oholivama (see Rashi, Genesis 36:2), and Timna (see Rashi, Genesis 36:12). Alternatively, the reference is to the three sons of Oholivama mentioned in this verse (Yefeh To’ar). ) Rabbi Levi said four. (He includes the Koraḥ mentioned in this verse, or according to the second approach mentioned above, he includes Timna. ) Rabbi Binyamin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Koraḥ mentioned here was a mamzer. (Koraḥ is mentioned as a son of Esau’s wife Oholivama in this verse, and as a son of Esau’s son Elifaz (Genesis 36:16), indicating that he was the illegitimate child of Oholivama and Elifaz (Rashi, Genesis 36:5). )
Chief Korach, Chief Gatam, Chief Amaleik. These are the chiefs of Eliphaz in the land of Edom. These are the sons of Adah.
Rabba Korach, Rabba Gaatam, Rabba Amalek: these are the chieftains of Eliphaz, whose habitation was in the land of Edom; they are the sons of Adah.
| וְאֵ֗לֶּה בְּנֵ֤י רְעוּאֵל֙ בֶּן־עֵשָׂ֔ו אַלּ֥וּף נַ֙חַת֙ אַלּ֣וּף זֶ֔רַח אַלּ֥וּף שַׁמָּ֖ה אַלּ֣וּף מִזָּ֑ה אֵ֣לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֤י רְעוּאֵל֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ אֱד֔וֹם אֵ֕לֶּה בְּנֵ֥י בָשְׂמַ֖ת אֵ֥שֶׁת עֵשָֽׂו׃ | 17 P | And these are the descendants of Esau’s son Reuel: the clans Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah; these are the clans of Reuel in the land of Edom. Those are the descendants of Esau’s wife Basemath. |
And these are the sons of Re’uel son of Esau: The chieftain of Nahat, the chieftain of Zerah, the chieftain of Shama, the chieftain of Mitza; these are the chieftains of Re’uel in the land of Edom, these are the sons of Basmat, wife of Esau.
These are the sons of Reu’eil, Eisov’s son: Chief Nachas, Chief Zerach. Chief Shamoh, Chief Mizzoh. These are the Chiefs of Reu’eil in the land of Edom. These are sons of Bosmas, wife of Eisov.
And these are the sons of Reuel bar Esau; Rabba Nachath, Rabba Zerach,, Rabba Shammah, Rabba Mizzah; these are the chieftains of Reuel, whose habitation was in the land of Edom. These are the sons of Basemath wife of Esau.
| וְאֵ֗לֶּה בְּנֵ֤י אׇהֳלִֽיבָמָה֙ אֵ֣שֶׁת עֵשָׂ֔ו אַלּ֥וּף יְע֛וּשׁ אַלּ֥וּף יַעְלָ֖ם אַלּ֣וּף קֹ֑רַח אֵ֣לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֞י אׇהֳלִֽיבָמָ֛ה בַּת־עֲנָ֖ה אֵ֥שֶׁת עֵשָֽׂו׃ | 18 P | And these are the descendants of Esau’s wife Oholibamah: the clans Jeush, Jalam, and Korah; these are the clans of Esau’s wife Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah. |
And these are the sons of Oholivama, wife of Esau: The chieftain of Yeush, the chieftain of Ya’elam, the chieftain of Korah; these are the chieftains of Oholivama, daughter of Ana, wife of Esau.
These are the sons of Oholivomoh, wife of Eisov: Chief Ye’ush, Chief Yalom, Chief Korach. These are the Chiefs of Oholivomoh, daughter of Anoh, wife of Eisov.
And these are the sons of Ahalibama wife of Esau; Rabba Jeush, Rabba Jaalam, Rabba Korach; these are the chieftains of Ahalibama, daughter of Adah wife of Esau.
| אֵ֧לֶּה בְנֵי־עֵשָׂ֛ו וְאֵ֥לֶּה אַלּוּפֵיהֶ֖ם ה֥וּא אֱדֽוֹם׃ | 19 P | Those were the sons of Esau—that is, Edom—and those are their clans. |
אלה בני עשו ואלה אלופיהם, the sons of Esau are the “patriarchs” all of whom have been mentioned as being Aluphim, heads of families, clans. Our sages in Sanhedrin 99 have said that every person named here as אלוף was in fact a king, except that he had not formally been “crowned.” The reason why the Torah bothered to list all these descendants of Esau was as a sign of respect for Yitzchok, just as the descendants of Yishmael had been listed at the end of Parshat Toldot as a sign of respect for Avraham. An additional reason for mentioning all these names is to teach us that it is important for any human being to know his antecedents, and after whom he himself has been named. In the case of Israelites this will help ensure that their legitimacy will not be challenged, that no one can call them mamzer, bastard, and get away with it. The Torah considers this so important that when referring to the Israelites entering lands which once belonged to the sons of Esau, it writes: “you are now crossing into territory of your brothers the sons of Esau.” (Deut. 2,4.)
These are the sons of Esau, and these are their chieftains; he is Edom.
And these are the generations of Jacob born unto him in Padan-Aram. And the sons of Jacob were twelve. The sons of Leah were: The first born Reuben, and Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Zebulum, and Dinah their sister: And the sons of Rachel were: Joseph and Benjamin. And the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s maid-servant, were: Gad and Asher. And the sons of Bilhah were: Dan and Naphtali; these are the sons of Jacob which were born unto him in Padan Aram. And Jacob with his sons and all belonging to him journeyed further and came to Mamre, the same is Kirjath-Arba which is in Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac dwelt, and Jacob with his sons with all belonging to him dwelt with his father in Hebron. And his brother Esau and his sons, and all belonging ... to him went to the land of Seir and dwelt there, and had possessions in the land of Seir, and the children of Esau were fruitful and multiplied exceedingly in the land of Seir. And these are the generations of Esau that were born to him in the land of Canaan; and the sons of Esau were five. And Adah bare to Esau his first born Eliphaz, and she also bare to him Reuel. And Ahli bamah bare to him Jeush, and Yaalam and Korah. These are the children of Esau who were born to him in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Eliphaz the son of Esau were: Teman, and Omar, and Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz, and Amalex. And the sons of Reuel were: Nachath, and Zerach, and Shamah, and Mizzah. And the sons of Jeush were: Timnah, and Alva, and Jetheth. And the sons of Yaalam were: Alah, and Phinor, and Kenaz. And the sons of Korah were: Teman, and Mibzar, and Magdiel, and Eram; these are the families of the sons of Esau according to their dukes in the land of Seir. And these are the names of the sons of Seir the Horite, inhabitants of the land of Seir: Lotan, and Shobal, and Zibean, and Anah, and Dishon, and Ezer, and Dishan, seven sons. And the children of Lotan were: Hori, and Heman, and their sister Timna, that is Timna who came to Jacob and his sons, and they would not listen to her, and she went and became a concubine to Eliphaz the son of Esau, and she bare to him Amalek. And the sons of Shobal were: Alvan, and Manahath, and Ebal, and Shepho, and Onam. And the sons of Zibeon were: Ajah, and Anah, this is Anah who found the Yemim in the wilderness when he fed the asses of Zibeon his father. And it came to pass while he was feeding the asses of his father, driving them to the wilderness into pasture as heretofore, and approaching one of the deserts on the sea shore opposite the wilderness of the people, and be hold a very great storm came from the other side of the sea, and it rested over the asses in the pasture and they were stunned and stood still all of them. And after wards one hundred and twenty great and horrible animals emerged from the wilderness on the other side of the sea, and they came all to the place of the asses and stood there. And those animals were on their lower half after the shape of the sons of men, but the upper half of some were in the shape of bears and some in the shape of apes, and they had tails behind, hanging down from between the shoulders and sweeping the ground like the tails of the dochiphath.
AND THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE CHIEFS THAT CAME TO ESAU. At first (Verses 15-19 here.) Scripture enumerated Esau’s grandsons who were chieftains in that generation, and afterwards some of his descendants succeeded in attaining sovereignty. After that their kingdom ceased, and the Edomites once again appointed these chieftains as their head. And so it is said in the book of Chronicles: (I, 1:51.) And Hadad died. And the chiefs of Edom were: the chief of Timna. So did Rashi explain it here in his commentary on this verse. And that which Scripture says here, according to their families, after their places, by their names, [and in Verse 43], after their habitations in the land of their possessions means that among the previous chiefs, [mentioned above in Verses 15-19], all the brothers who were the chiefs dwelled in one city, ruling one people, or their position was analogous to the princes of the tribes and the heads of families [in Israel]. But these latter ones were chiefs according to their families, meaning that each one was chief of all the families of Esau’s descendants, and in all of their dwelling places, for in that generation he alone was called “chief,” no other person being so called in all the land they possessed. Thus they were as kings in their countries, but they were not enthroned, and the glory of royalty was not bestowed upon them. In the opinion of many commentators (See Rashi on Verse 31. In his opinion, before there reigned any king (Verse 31) refers to Saul, king of Israel. Moses who wrote the Torah could therefore know it only by prophecy.) this section was written as a prophecy. But this is not correct. Why should prophecy mention these kings, and until what point in time was Scripture to enumerate them and stop? Rather the correct interpretation is that all these ruled before the Torah was given in the days of Moses. Now we may say that they all ruled in one time, and then the explanation of after their places would be that each one ruled in his place, or else their rule lasted but a short time, as Scripture says, But the years of the wicked shall be shortened. (Proverbs 10:27.)
These are the sons of Eisov, and these are their chiefs, he is Edom.
These are the sons of Esau, and these their chieftains. He is the father of the Edomites.
| אֵ֤לֶּה בְנֵֽי־שֵׂעִיר֙ הַחֹרִ֔י יֹשְׁבֵ֖י הָאָ֑רֶץ לוֹטָ֥ן וְשׁוֹבָ֖ל וְצִבְע֥וֹן וַעֲנָֽה׃ | 20 P | These were the sons of Seir the Horite, who were settled in the land: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, |
אלה בני שעיר וגו, “these were the sons of Seir, etc.” We do not know Seir’s ancestry. The Torah mentions his offspring merely in order to distinguish them from Esau’s offspring, seeing that the Torah (Deuteronomy 2,12) discusses them in connection with the nations whom the Israelites under Moses and Joshua are not to attack or harass.
יושבי הארץ, “the inhabitants of the land;” originally that land had belonged to them as we know from Deuteronomy 2,12: ובני עשו יירשום וישבו תחתם, “an the descendants of Esau disinherited them and settled there in their place.
וצבעון וענה, “and Tzivon and Anah;” this was the same Tzivon who had slept with his mother as a result of which Anah had been born. Subsequently, he slept with his daughterinlaw, the wife of Anah, as a result of which he produced Oholivamah, Esau’s wife.
SEIR. We do not know his pedigree. Scripture lists the children of Seir to inform us that they were of a different lineage from the children of Esau. The Bible notes this because Israel was prohibited from contending with the children of Esau. (Cf. Deut. 2:4-5. This prohibition did not apply to the Seirites. Both nations inhabited the same country. However, the children of Esau displaced them (Deut. 2:22).)
THE HORITE. Chori (Horite) means nobles. It is similar to chore (nobles) in the nobles (chore) of Judah (Jer. 27:20). (According to I.E. These are the sons of Seir the Horite (ha-chori) should be translated: These are the sons of Seir the noble (the chief).) It is possible that chori (Horites) comes from the same root as chorai in And they that weave cotton (chorai) (Is. 19:9), in which chorai means white stuff. Onkelos similarly renders white by chivvar. (So Cherez. Weiser renders I.E. as follows: the Targum (Jonathan) similarly translates chore to mean nobles.) Nobles are called chorim (the white ones) because they are metaphorically speaking, like the color white, (It is the most beautiful color.) a color which resembles light. (A symbol of good and purity.) In contrast to chorim, mean men are called chashukkim (dark ones), as we read in He shall not stand before mean men (chashukkim) (Prov. 22:29). (In Prov. 22:29 chashukkim is the antithesis of kings. Chashukkim comes from the word choshekh (black or dark). We thus see that white is a symbol of nobility, and black of poverty (Cherez) or of non-nobility, of meanness (Weiser).)
אלה בני שעיר החודי, These are the sons of Se-ir the Chorite, etc. The reason the Torah writes this whole detailed chapter is only to tell us how generously G'd endowed the wicked Esau on account of the merit of his father and grandfather. Our sages in Shabbat 85 also explain this in the following words of Rabbi Acha bar Yaakov: "The word Chori means that 'freed' the Chorim [the former inhabitants of Se-ir] of their possessions. In other words, the Torah speaks of G'd handing over their lands to the sons of Esau. We have an interesting statement in Sanhedrin 99 saying that Timna who was prince Lotan's sister, the most highly placed woman in that land, became the concubine of Eliphaz, son of Esau because all her efforts to intermarry with either Abraham, Isaac or Jacob were to no avail. Rather than remain a princess in her own right she chose to become a slave in the house of Esau. When her attempt to belong to the Jewish people became frustrated she became the maternal grandmother of Amalek instead.
אלה בני שעיר החרי ישבי הארץ, who used to dwell in that land before the sons of Esau and their offspring came to live there. This story has as its objective that the whole earth and all that is in it belongs to the one and only G’d Who has created it, and Who therefore may allocate it to whoever He wishes. He may deprive one nation of its homeland and give it to another. In this situation G’d expelled the nation which had lived in the region known as Mont Seir and allowed Esau and his clan to displace them. According to Bereshit Rabbah, or to Shabbat 85 and quoted by Rashi, the word חרי is derived from ריח, smell, fragrance. The people described as having lived in that land were such expert farmers that they could determine merely by their sense of small which piece of land was best suited to grow different crops.
THESE ARE THE SONS OF SE’IR ‘HACHORI’ (THE HORITE). Hachori was the name of a man who was the father of an ancient nation which was called by his name, just as the Amorite and the Perizzite, as it is said, When He destroyed the Horites from before them. (Deuteronomy 2:22.) And he was called Se’ir because of the name of the land which was Se’ir — a name derived from Esau who was a hairy man (Above, 27:11.) — from the day Esau came there. The name Edom likewise stemmed from Esau. However, Scripture seems to distinguish between “Se’ir” and “Edom” for it says, These are the sons of Se’ir the Horite who were the inhabitants of the land from the first, not the sons of Se’ir the Edomite who came there. With the help of G-d, I will yet explain the genealogy of the Horite in the book of Mishneh Torah. (Deuteronomy 2:10.) Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “Scripture mentions this in order to delineate the genealogy of Se’ir and Esau since Israel was to be commanded, concerning the sons of Esau, [not to abhor them or take their land].” (Ibid., 23:8; 2:5.) And Rashi wrote: “It would have been unnecessary to write the genealogy of the Horites had it not been that Scripture wishes to mention Timna, thereby showing the esteem in which Abraham was held.”
יושבי הארץ, originally, before Esau’s time. The clan of Esau inherited their land as mentioned in Deuteronomy 2,12 וישבו תחתם, “they settled in their place. (replaced them)”
ישבי הארץ THE INHABITANTS OF THE LAND — i.e. who had been its inhabitants before Esau came there. Our Rabbis explained (Shabbat 85b) that they are called יושבי הארץ because they were experts in making the land habitable (by skillful cultivation) saying: this entire rood of ground is suitable for planting olives, that entire rood for vines — because they tasted the soil and so discovered what was suitable for planting in it.
אלה בני שעיר החורי, the reason the Torah lists the outstanding people of that region is to show that Esau overpowered them in spite of their prowess. Obviously, this must have been G’d’s will, as the Torah testifies in Deuteronomy 2,22 כאשר עשה לבני עשו היושבים בשעיר, “as He did on behalf of the sons of Esau who are now living in Seir.”
These are the sons of Se’ir the Horite, the original inhabitants of the land. Alongside the Edomite rulers, the native rulers retained a measure of authority: Lotan, Shoval, Tzivon, Ana,
אלה בני שעיר החרי, “These are the sons of Seir, the Chori.” Rashi writes that the genealogy of all the people following was recorded here only in order to demonstrate the outstanding reputation of Avraham, which had caused Timna to make every conceivable effort to become related to him by marriage to him or one of his family members. Ibn Ezra writes that the reason for this chapter having been written is to separate the genealogy of Esau from that of the local inhabitants, the Chori. The Israelites received instructions from G’d concerning the descendants of Esau, but these were not applicable to the descendants of the Chori. Nachmanides explains that the Chori was the name of a founder of a nation which had been named after their founder-father. The nation was also called Seir, on account of the region inhabited by that nation. This latter name became associated with Esau and his descendants. The land of the Chori, which had first been inhabited by members of that tribe, was taken over by Esau and his sons. Our verse shows that the name Seir for the region concerned predated the arrival of Esau in that region. It is related to the arrival there for the first time by Esau, whom we have known from birth as איש שעיר, “a hairy man.” The name “Edom” also is traced back to Esau. The Torah makes a distinction between the inhabitants of the land Seir traced to Chori, and those traced to Esau. The difficulty with Nachmanides’ explanation is that we do find already in Genesis 14,6 a reference to “Chori in their mountains of Seir.” The chapter in question describes a situation prevailing at least 100 years before Esau was born. Ibn Ezra understands the word חרי as in חרי יהודה, “outstanding men of Yehudah.” (compare Jeremiah 27,20; Nechemyah 6,17)
We now must awaken you to many places in Torah where the name Ya”h-י״ה is found. For example, the verse states, (Exodus 17:16) “For a hand is [raised in oath] on the throne of Ya”h-י״ה; HaShem-יהו״ה maintains a war against Amalek from generation to generation.” What does it mean, “From generation to generation-MiDor Dor-מדור דור”? The following explains this verse: The wicked Amalek (The numerical value of Amalek-עמלק-240 is the same as “doubt-Safek-ספק-240,” in that the external husk (Kelipah) of Amalek sows doubt, as will soon be intimated.) comes from the power of the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee). He adheres to him and derives his strength from him. From the time that the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee) instilled his contamination into Chavah, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a) Adam severed the plantings above (After the sin of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam separated from his wife Chavah for one-hundred and thirty years, during which time he had nocturnal emissions of his seed with she-demons (Liliot) in his dreams. He thus caused a separation between the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut and the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet. This caused the plantings to be severed, and the conduits to pour out wasted influence. This caused the separation of the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel from the Holy One, blessed is He, in which the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י was separated from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus blemishing the letters Vav-Hey-ו"ה of the Name HaShem-יהו"ה. He then repented and returned to his wife Chavah and gave birth to his son Sheth who was born “in his likeness and image.” See Genesis 5:3 and Rashi there; Midrash Bereishit Rabba 20:11, 24:6; Bamidbar Rabba 14:12; Zohar III 31a, and elsewhere.) and “estranged the Master-Alooph-אלוף.” (See Proverbs 17:9 – That is, he brought about a separation of the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus concealing the Master of the World-Aloopho Shel Olam-אלופו של עולם.) This is the secret of the withdrawal of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, the Shechinah, the essential root of which was in the lower worlds, (Midrash Shir HaShirim Rabba 5:1 to Song of Songs 5:1 – “At first, the essential root of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Ikkar Shechinah, was in the lower worlds.”) so that, “the dove could not find a resting place for the sole of its foot.” (Genesis 8:9 – The dove-Yonah-יונה refers to the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel, the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Shechinah. This verse thus hints at the exile of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, from (Isaiah 66:1) “the earth (Aretz-ארץ) is My footstool,” as well as the exile of the Jewish people. See Talmud Bavli, Brachot 53b; Tikkunei Zohar 22b.) Now, even though when the children of Israel stood at Mount Sinai, their contamination ceased, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a ibid. – “When the Jewish people stood at Mount Sinai their contamination (which was instilled in Chava by the primordial snake ceased.” That is, at the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai there was a direct revelation of the true unity and singularity of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, in a manner that there is no room for doubt-Safek-ספק-240 (which is Amalek-עמלק-240) as it states (Exodus 19:20), “And HaShem-יהו״ה came down upon Mount Sinai,” and (Exodus 20:2), “I am HaShem-יהו״ה your God,” that we heard directly from the Almighty One, as discussed before in Gate Six.) nevertheless, the blemish of the moon (Kingdom-Malchut) (Levanah-לבנה) was never removed, (See at greater length in Talmud Bavli, Chulin 60b; This is explained at length in Pardes Rimonim, Shaar 18 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon), Etz Chayim, Shaar 36 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon) and elsewhere.) except at specific intervals in time [on Rosh Chodesh-the new moon] when certain known sacrifices are offered, namely the known he-goats (Se’irim-שעירים) that Se’ir adheres to, in that Se’ir is the first (Reishit-ראשית) of Amalek’s strength. (That is, the verse (Genesis 36:20) states, “These are the sons of Se’ir-שעיר the Horite… Lotan,” and (Genesis 36:22), “Lotan’s sister was Timna,” and (Genesis 36:12), “Timna was the concubine of Esav’s son Eliphaz; She gave birth to Amalek-עמלק-240 from Eliphaz.” (Also note Rashi there, that her birth came about through promiscuity and adultery, in which there was doubt-Safek-ספק-240 as to who her father was, which is why the verse only specifies that “Lotan’s sister was Timna.”)) The sign for this is the verse, (Numbers 24:20 – Amalak was the first nation to attack the Jewish people after they left Egypt, and did so without any reason or provocation.) “The first of the nations (Reishit Goyim-ראשית גוים) is Amalek.” When Amalek came, (That is, when Amalek (who is rooted in the blemish of the moon-Levanah) came and waged war on the Ingathering of Israel, their intention was to cause the separation of the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut, by blemishing the Sign of the Holy Covenant-Ot Brit Kodesh-אות ברית קודש (the circumcision), so that it will not receive beneficence from the upper Sefirot.) he added further iniquity to the blemish of the moon by “disjointing Yaakov’s thigh,” (Genesis 32:26, 33; Also see Zohar I 146a, 170b; Zohar II 111b; Tikkunei Zohar 36a and elsewhere. Also see Shaar HaYichud of Rabbi Dovber of Lubavitch, translated as The Gate of Unity (with commentary), Ch. 35, and the explanatory notes and citations there.) thereby shattering the Kingdom of the House of David. (That is, the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut is called “The Kingship of the House of David”-Malchut Beit David-מלכות בית דוד, as discussed in the First Gate.) Now, when the plantings were severed at the time of Adam, and when Amalek “disjointed Yaakov’s thigh,” the Torah portion of Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you (Parshat Zachor) was established. (That is, the Torah portion of (Deuteronomy 25:17), “Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you,” (which is to be recalled daily, see Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 5:5). As explained in Gate Two, the aspect of Remember-Zachor-זכור corresponds to the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod, which is where Amalek attempts to cause blemish in order to separate the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut. Therefore, to repair this, the Torah portion of Zachor-זכור is recited daily to repair this. Also see Zohar II 66a.) Thus, the final two letters of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, were blemished by the hand (Yedei-ידי) of Amalek, so to speak. This was possible because the hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה afflicted them, as in the verse, (Samuel I 12:12-15 – “But when you saw that Nachash-נחש, king of the children of Ammon, came upon you, you said to me, ‘No, but a king shall reign over us!’ But HaShem-יהו״ה your God, is your King! And now, here is the king who you have chosen, who you requested; for behold, HaShem-יהו״ה has set a king over you. If you will fear HaShem-יהו״ה and worship Him and listen to His voice and do not rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, then you and the king who reigns over you shall follow after HaShem-יהו״ה your God. But if you do not listen to HaShem’s-יהו״ה voice and rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, the hand of HaShem-יהו״ה shall be against you and against your fathers.”) “The hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה shall be against you,” and it states, (Proverbs 30:19 – Also note the explanation (in Gate Six) about the verse (Deuteronomy 32:18), “You have weakened the Rock-Tzur-צור who gave birth to you, and have forgotten the God who brought you forth.” See Midrash Eichah Rabba 1:33; Also see Shaarei Tzedek of Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, Shaar 2; Zohar II 64a; Etz Chayim, Shaar 49, Ch. 7.) “the way of a snake-Nachash-נחש is upon a rock-Tzur-צור.” The sign for this is the verse, (Exodus 17:8) “Amalek came and fought against Israel in Rephidim-רפידים,” meaning, (Mechilta d’Rabbi Yishmael 17:8 – “Rephidim-רפידים means ‘The slackening of the hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים,’ in that the Jewish people were slack in their Torah study [and observance], and it is on account of this that the enemy came upon them.” That is to say, through a weakening in the Sefirot of the “hands” and below, which are the Sefirot indicated by the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה of The Name HaShem-יהו״ה, Amalak and the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmoni) are able to set their hand against those Sefirot. It is for this reason that (Exodus 17:11), “Whenever Moshe raised his hands, Israel was stronger, and when he lowered his hands, Amalek was stronger,” [and particularly, when he would raise the middle finger of his hands, which is the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet and is the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, then the children of Israel prevailed. See Zohar III 186a-b (Yenukah).]) “Because of the slackness of their hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים.”
According to this principle, HaShem-יהו"ה told Israel that He gave Mount Seir to Esav as an inheritance. The reason is because Mount Seir is impure, in that the goat demons-Seirim-שעירים that they stray after, live there, as it says, (Isaiah 34:14) “and the goat demon-Seir-שעיר calls out to his fellow.” The Seir-שעיר is as the verse states, (Genesis 27:11) “My brother Esav is a hairy-Seir-שעיר man.” Opposite them is the goat that is sent into the desert (on Yom Kippur). Also opposite them is the verse, (Leviticus 17:7) “They shall no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to the goat-demons that they stray after etc.” Know that Esav took his portion from the lowly goats-Seirim-שעירים that are close to earth, as it states, (Genesis 36:20) “These are the children of Seir-שעיר, the Horite who dwell in the earth.” It therefore states about Esav, (Ibid 36:6) “Esav went to a (different) land than his brother Yaakov.” This is the matter about which it states about Esav, (Obadiah 1:2) “Behold, I have made you small amongst the nations, you are very despised.” The reason is because the other nations have high ministering angels, as scripture states, (Daniel 10:20) “Now I will return to battle with the ministering angel of Persia, and when I depart, behold, the ministering angel of Greece comes.” The same applies to all seventy nations. Similarly, Yishmael has twelve ministers to their nations. However, the portion and inheritance of Esav are the goat-demons, which are the lowest of creatures. Esav is therefore called Seir-שעיר, and it says, (Joshua 24:4) “I gave Esav the Mountain of goats-Se’irim-שעירים as an inheritance.”
Chapter 29: Prophets [1] "For the LORD had closed Hannah's womb." (1 Samuel 2:21) This refers to the statement "I will not cause pain nor create children" (Isaiah 66:9), which is talking about Hannah, as it is said "And unto Hannah he gave a worthy portion; for he loved Hannah, but the LORD had shut up her womb." (1 Samuel 1:5) "[If I am the one who gives birth and stops it]" (Isaiah, same verse). If I am the one who gives birth to Sarah and stops it for Abimelech's household, [as it says] "for he had closed up every womb" (Genesis 20:18). Another interpretation is that if I am the one who gives birth to Israel, as it says "who are born from me" (Isaiah 46:3), and I stop it for the enemy, as it says "all the nations are as nothing before Him" (Isaiah 40:17), for it is written "I will cut off from Babylon name and remnant, descendants and posterity, declares the Lord" (Isaiah 14:22). "This name is her currency. She'ar (remnant) will not be a survivor, etc." (Obadiah 1:18), "And the son (nephew) represents the kingdom, and the grandson represents the general. Alternatively, if I give birth to Zion, as it says, "For Zion has gone into labor and has given birth to her children" (Isaiah 66:8)." "And Atzeret (עצרתי) refers to Sodom. Its inhabitants will also die like that (ימותון - will die) (Isaiah 1:9). This is Sodom, as it says, "These are the sons of Seir the Horite [the inhabitants of the land]" (Genesis 36:20). But for Israel, "my salvation will be forever" (Isaiah 51:6)."
“These are the children of Tzivon: Aya and Ana; he is Ana, who found the yemim in the wilderness, as he was herding the donkeys of Tzivon his father” (Genesis 36:24). “These are the children of Tzivon: Aya..” “These are the children of Tzivon: Aya and Ana” – what did the verse see that led it to write Ana, Ana, twice? (Why is Ana listed among the brothers of Tzivon (Genesis 36:20) and also among his sons? (Etz Yosef). ) Were they two? Actually, there was one; however, Tzivon consorted with his mother and she bore Ana, and he became the son of Ana, son of Tzivon, and son of Se’ir. (Ana was listed among the sons of Se’ir because he was the son of Se’ir’s wife, but in actuality he was the son of Tzivon. The words “the son of Ana” appear to be out of place here. ) In any case, he was one. It is taught: Fire and mixed breeds (Animals that were crossbred.) were not created during the six days of Creation, but it entered His mind for them to be created. When were the mixed breeds created? It was in the days of Ana. That is what is written: “He is Ana, who found the yemim in the wilderness.” Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: Mules [hamyonas]. The Rabbis say: Half-breeds [himisu] – half donkey and half horse. These are the signs: If its ears are small, its mother is a horse and its father is a donkey; if they are large, its mother is a donkey and its father is a horse. Rabbi Mana would command those of the household of the Nasi that they should purchase those with the small ears, because their mothers are horses and their fathers are donkeys. What did Ana do? He brought a female donkey, crossed it with a horse, and a mule emerged. The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘I did not create anything that causes damage, but you created something that causes damage. As you live, I will create for you something that causes damage.’ What did He do? He brought a serpent, crossed it with a starred agama lizard, and a poisonous lizard resulted. A person never said that he was bitten by a rabid dog and he lived, by a poisonous lizard and he lived, or by a white mule and he lived. Fire: Rabbi Levi in the name of Rabbi Nezira: That light (The light that was created on the first day of Creation.) served for thirty-six hours, twelve on Shabbat eve, (Friday.) twelve on Shabbat night, and twelve on Shabbat. When the sun set on Shabbat night, the Holy One blessed be He sought to sequester the light, but He accorded honor to the Shabbat. That is what is written: “The Lord blessed the seventh day” (Genesis 2:3). With what did He bless it? With light. When the sun set on Shabbat night and the light began serving, (The light created on the first day began to light up the world even without the sun. ) everything began lauding the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “Under all the heavens they sing to Him” (This verse is often translated “Under the heavens He sends it forth [yishrehu],” but the midrash interprets the word yishrehu to mean “they sing to Him [yashiru lo].” ) (Job 37:3) – why? Because “His light is to the ends of the earth” (Job 37:3). When the sun set at the conclusion of Shabbat, darkness began to set in. Adam the first man became fearful, as it is written: “And I say: Darkness will conceal me” (Psalms 139:11). What did the Holy One blessed be He do for him? He prepared for him two flint stones, and [Adam] struck one against the other. Fire emerged and he recited a blessing over it. That is what is written: “Night is light for me” (Psalms 139:11). This is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, [who said]: Why do we recite a blessing on a candle at the conclusion of Shabbat? Because then was the beginning of its creation. Rav Huna in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: One recites a blessing over it even at the conclusion of Yom Kippur because the fire rested that entire day. (Since one is not permitted to use the fire on Yom Kippur, and once Yom Kippur is over one is permitted to use it, one appreciates fire and recites the blessing. )
(Fol. 85a) R. Chiya b. Abba said: "What is meant by the passage (Deut. 19, 14.) Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor's landmark, which the people of old have set, i.e, Thou shalt not go beyond what is limited by those of old." What have those of old limited? R. Samuel b. Nachmeini, in the name of R. Jochanan, said: "It is WTitten (Gen. 36, 20.) These are the sons of Seir the Chorite, who inhabited the land. Did the rest of mankind inhabit heaven? But [it means that] they were experts in agriculture. 'This measure [of ground],' they would say, ' is adequate for [the planting of] olive trees; this measure of ground for wines, and this measure for dates.'" What does V'chori mean? This means they used to smell the earth. And what means Ve'chiri? R. Papa said; "They tasted the earth [to know for what it would be adequate] as a serpent does." R. Acha b. Jacob said: "Chori means they became freed of their wealth [because they lost it]."
You find likewise (that the expression sat also alludes to) the degeneracy of the descendants of Seir, since it is written: These are the sons of Seir the Horite, who sat on the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah (Gen. 36:20). However, Anah is elsewhere called the son of Zibeon: And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah (ibid., v. 24). We learn from this that Zibeon had sexual relations with his own mother, and conceived and begot Anah by her. Consequently, (Anah) was both (Zibeon’s) brother and his son. Later he had intercourse with his daughter-in-law, the wife of Anah, and Oholibamah was their child, as it is said: And these were the sons of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife (ibid., v. 14), and Esau took her as a wife. Inasmuch as they were all products of incestuous relations, Scripture mentions them only to disclose their degeneracy.
THE HORITES. They are the sons of Seir the Horite (Gen. 36:20).
ואת החרי בהררם שעיר, they also defeated the Chori on the mountain on which these people lived. We know that the area was mountainous from Genesis 36,20. בהררם, the name of the place without the pronoun-suffix is הרר, with a vowel pattern similar to ארץ and גפן. If the word הררם were a derivative from a root in the piel mode, itself a noun in its own right, as some commentators claim, (including Ibn Ezra), the letter ה would have had to have the vowel kametz and not patach, as it does. Onkelos, in rendering it as דבטוריא דשעיר “in the mountains of Se-ir” also understands it as did Ibn Ezra. איל פארן means, as the Targum renders it, “the plain of Paran.” The words על המדבר mean the same as if the Torah had written סמוך למדבר, adjoining the desert. A similar construction is found in Numbers 2,20 ועליו מטה מנשה, “next to him the tribe of Menashe.”
AND CANAAN BEGOT ZIDON HIS FIRST-BORN. These were the ten (“Ten.” There are eleven children of Canaan mentioned here. Ramban will explain later in the text that one did not develop into a separate nation.) nations, sons of Canaan, whose lands were given to our father Abraham since all seed of Canaan were sold into servitude forever. These were the ones that were given to Abraham. Their names, however, changed for the most part in the days of Abraham; here they were inscribed according to the names their father called them on the days of their birth, but after they parted according to their lands and their nations, they were called by other names. (Compare Verses 15-18 here with Verses 19-21 in Chapter 15.) Perhaps they were called by the names of the land in which they settled, as we have explained. (Above, at the end of Verse 13 concerning the origin of the name Philistines.) Likewise, Se’ir the Horite (Genesis 36:20.) was so called because the name of the city was Se’ira. And there are many similar names. It may be that the Arkite and the Sinite (Verse 17 here.) did beget families but were cut off from them, and their children were, for example, the Kenite, and the Kenizzite. (Further, 15:19.) These became the heads of families, the entire nation being called by their name as was customary among the tribes of Israel. Now in His gift [of the land of Abraham, G-d] called the ten nations by the names by which they were known in the time of Abraham. (Ibid., Verses 19-21.) Proof of this, [namely, that some of the names of the sons of Canaan changed in the time of Abraham], is that the Hivite mentioned here (Verse 17 here.) is not mentioned in the gift to Abraham, (Ibid., Verses 19-21.) and yet he was among them, as it is said, And He shall cast out many nations before thee, the Hittite, and the Girgashite, and the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite, seven nations. (Deuteronomy 7:1.) So also in every place [Scripture counts the Hivite among the nations that inhabited the land of Canaan]. Now the Canaanite is counted in the gift to Abraham among his [Canaan’s] children, (As the verse states: And the Amorite and the Canaanite… . Further, 15:21.) but only ten are counted [there (Ibid., Verses 19-21.) — while eleven children of Canaan are mentioned here] — (Verses 15-18 here.) because one of his sons did not prevail like his other brothers, and so he was called together with his brother [the Hivite] by the name of his father, [thus bringing to a total of ten the number of nations whose lands were given to Abraham]. It is possible also that it was Zidon, Canaan’s first-born who was called the Canaanite together with his brother, [the eleventh son of Canaan], who did not become a nation, [thus making ten the total number of lands given to Abraham]. Do not find it difficult that the land of the Philistines was also given to Abraham — as it is written, Sojourn in this land … for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands (Genesis 26:3.) — and yet the Philistines were of the sons of Mitzraim [and not of Canaan]! Scripture said, Counted to the Canaanites were the five lords of the Philistines, (Joshua 13:3. Hence their lands were also given to Abraham even though the Philistines themselves were not of the seed of Canaan.) because the Philistines conquered part of the land of the Canaanites and settled thereon. And here in Scripture you will see [that the Philistines captured part of the Canaanite land], for the boundary of the Canaanite was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar, unto Gaza (Verse 19 here.) yet we find that these were Philistine cities, since Abimelech, king of the Philistines, was king of Gerar, (Genesis 20:2.) and Gaza belonged to the Gazites. Similarly, For Gaza one. (I Samuel 6:17. This is counted among the guilt-offerings the five Philistine cities sent along with the Ark of G-d which they were returning.) Sidon also belonged to the Philistines, for it is written, All the Zidonians will I drive out from before the children of Israel; only allot thou it unto Israel for an inheritance; (Joshua 13:6.) and again, And also what are ye to Me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the regions of Philistia? (Joel 4:4.) Perhaps the rest of the land of the Philistines, excluding that of these five of their lords, (Joshua 13:3.) was not given to Israel. Know that the land of Canaan with its boundaries, since it became a nation, (Exodus 9:24.) was qualified for Israel, and this was the lot of their inheritance, as it is said, When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the children of men, He set the borders of the peoples according to the number of the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8.) But at the time of the dispersion of the nations, the Holy One, blessed be He, gave it to Canaan, on account of his being a servant, to keep it for Israel. This is just as a man who deposits for safe-keeping the belongings of the master’s son with his servant until such time as the son will grow up and acquire the belongings as well as the servant. I will explain this yet (Ibid., 2:23.) with the help of G-d, exalted be He.
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ANAH: DISHON AND OHOLIBAMAH THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH. Such is the way of Scripture when referring to daughters, as in the expression, and his daughter Dinah. (Further, 46:15.) Now this Anah was the fourth son of Se’ir the Horite, enumerated above, (Verse 20 here.) after Zibeon his brother, for the section enumerates seven sons (Verses 20-21 here.) of Se’ir the Horite in the order of their birth. This Anah had another son also called by the name Dishon as was his uncle, (Verse 21 here.) and he had a daughter called Oholibamah, which was also the name of her relative, the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon. (Verse 2 here.) This is why Scripture says concerning Esau’s wife, Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, (Verse 2 here.) in order to relate that she was the daughter of Anah who had found the mules, and granddaughter of Zibeon, not Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the son of Se’ir the Horite, Zibeon’s brother. However, in the opinion of some of our Rabbis (Pesachim 54a.) there is in this entire section only one man called Anah, and he was Zibeon’s son. (Verse 24 here.) Since Zibeon committed incest with his mother, the wife of Se’ir the Horite, Scripture thus enumerates Anah among Se’ir the Horite’s sons (Verse 20 here.) because people considered him as Se’ir’s son and called him “Anah the son of Se’ir,” and he grew up among his sons because Se’ir thought he was his son. Scripture, however, enumerates him a second time as Zibeon’s son (Verse 24 here.) in keeping with the true facts. This is the interpretation of the symbolizing interpreters as is mentioned in Tractate Pesachim, (Pesachim 54a.) but it is not the consensus of opinion in the Gemara and is not at all the plain meaning of Scripture.
אחות נביות, seeing that Nevayot was the oldest of Ishmael’s children the Torah calls Machalat “the sister of Nevayot,” (instead of merely “the daughter of Ishmael”). We find something parallel to this in Exodus 15,20 ותקח מרים הנביאה אחות אהרן, “Miriam the prophetess, sister of Aaron, took, etc.” The reason she is referred to in that fashion is that she was older than Moses but younger than Aaron. On the other hand, in a verse where both Moses and Aaron are mentioned together with Miriam, (Exodus Numbers 26,59) she is referred to as “their sister.” The Torah employs the same formulation in Genesis 36,22 where Timna is described as the sister of Lotan, seeing that Lotan was the oldest of his brothers as we know from verse 20 in that chapter, i.e. לוטן, ושובל, וצבעון, וענה.
כי לא דבר רק הוא מכם FOR IT IS NOT A VAIN THING FOR YOU — it is not for nothing that you are to occupy yourselves laboriously with it. because much reward depends on it, כי הוא חייכם FOR IT IS YOUR LIFE (life is the reward). Another explanation: There is not one empty (ריק i.e., apparently superfluous) word in the Torah that, if you properly expound it, has not a grant of reward attached to it for doing so. You can know this, for so did our Rabbis say: It states (Genesis 36:22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”; (Genesis 36:32) “and Timna was concubine [to Eliphaz, Esau’s son]”. Why is this stated? Because she (Timna) said, “If I am unworthy to become his (Elphaz's) wife, would that I would become his concubine!”. And why all this (why does Scripture enter into all these details of her birth and marriage; of what interest is it to us)? To tell you in what distinction Abraham was held — that rulers and kings (Lotan was one of the chieftains of Seir, cf. Genesis 36:20—21) were eager to connect themselves by marriage to his descendants (Sifrei Devarim 336:1; cf. Rashi on Genesis 36:12).
הוא ענה THIS WAS THAT ANAH mentioned above (Genesis 36:20) as the brother of Zibeon. Here is called his son, thus telling us that Zibeon and his own mother were the parents of Anah (Pesachim 54a).
Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai recited this verse about him: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah” (Genesis 36:20), and it is written: “And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah” (Genesis 36:24). The first verse portrays Zibeon and Anah as brothers, while the second states that they are father and son. Rather, this teaches that Zibeon engaged in sexual intercourse with his mother and begot Anah, so that he was both Anah’s father and his brother. From the fact that the first verse equates Zibeon and Anah by referring to both of them as Seir’s sons despite Anah being a grandson of Seir, it is clear that grandchildren are equal to children, contrary to the Sadducees’ assertion.
The interpreters of Torah symbolism [ḥamurot] would say: Anah was the product of an incestuous relationship, and as a result he was spiritually unfit to produce offspring. Therefore, he brought an example of unfitness, i.e., an animal physically unfit to produce offspring, into the world, as it is stated: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan, and Shoval, and Zibeon, and Anah” (Genesis 36:20). And it is also stated: “And these are the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah” (Genesis 36:24). One verse describes both Anah and Zibeon as sons of Seir, meaning that they are brothers, while the other verse describes Anah as Zibeon’s son. Rather, this teaches that Zibeon cohabited with his mother, the wife of Seir, and fathered Anah from her. He is called Seir’s son although in fact he was the offspring of Seir’s son and Seir’s wife.
The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that when the Sages have an accepted tradition it is a substantial matter, meaning that the tradition is reliable? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “You shall not cross your neighbor’s border, which they of the old times have set in your inheritance that you shall inherit” (Deuteronomy 19:14)? It means that you shall not cross the border that the early generations set, establishing the parameters necessary for each plant. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: The early generations set? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: What is the meaning of that which was written: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite who inhabit the land, Lotan and Shoval and Zibeon and Ana” (Genesis 36:20)? And is everyone else inhabitants of the heavens, that it was necessary for the verse to emphasize that these inhabit the land? Rather, it means that they were experts in the settlement of the land, as they would say: This tract of land that is the full length of a rod is fit for olive trees; this full length of a rod is fit for grapes, this full length of a rod is fit for figs. And the members of this tribe were called Horites [ḥori] since they smelled [heriḥu] the earth to determine what is fit to be grown there. The allusion is based on a transposition of the letters ḥet and reish. And in explanation of why the early inhabitants of Seir were called Hivites [ḥivi] (see Genesis 36:2), Rav Pappa said: Because they would taste the earth like a snake [ḥivya] and determine what should be grown there according to the taste. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said that they were called Horites [ḥori] because they became free [benei ḥorin] of their possessions when the children of Esau drove them from their lands. Their primary name was actually Hivites.
The sons of Reuel: Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah.
The sons of Seir: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan.
These are the sons of Se’ir, the Chorite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan, Shoval, Tzivon, and Anoh.
These are the sons of Gebal, the generations who before that had dwelt in that land: Lotan, and Shobal, and Sebeon, and Anah,
| וְדִשׁ֥וֹן וְאֵ֖צֶר וְדִישָׁ֑ן אֵ֣לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֧י הַחֹרִ֛י בְּנֵ֥י שֵׂעִ֖יר בְּאֶ֥רֶץ אֱדֽוֹם׃ | 21 P | Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. Those are the clans of the Horites, the descendants of Seir, in the land of Edom. |
ודישון ואצר ודשן, as well as Dishon, Atzar, and Dishan.” According to the vocalisation by the authors of the tradition that we rely on, the sequence for reading these names is as follows: דישון, דישן, דישון, דישן, דישן דישון, דישן to help us memorize this sequence (these names appear a total of seven times) it pays to commence with the seventh day, i.e. Shabbat. On the seventh day the second day and the fifth day of the week (the three days of the week the Torah is read in public) this recalls the spelling with the letter ו. On the days of the week when we do not read from the Torah in public, i.e. first, third, fourth and sixth day, this recalls the times it is read as if spelled defectively. Do not be astounded concerning the phrasing of: ואלה בני דישן חמדן וגו', “and these were the sons of Dishon, Chemdon,” in verse 27. This refers to the first time we read about דישון. Verse 27 refers back to דישן in verse 26 which should have been vocalised as דישון. We must understand that whenever in the Holy Scriptures books written later, refer to names of persons or places which appear spelled differently from the first time they had appeared, they refer to the ones mentioned the first time in the Bible, unless otherwise stated. Examples of the names of the same people, or the same verbs, being spelled differently in different Books of the Bible, are: Samuel II 22 as opposed to Psalms chapter 18, where the word מגדל, in verse 51 of the former means the same as the word מגדיל in the verse 51 of Psalms.[You will note the similarity of the subject matter in both chapters, plus the fact that both of these words appear in verse 51 of the chapter mentioned. Compare also Genesis 32,32 and 31 respectively, where the name of the place פנואל is once spelled with the letter ו and the other time with the letter י in the middle. Compare the spelling of the ears of corn in Pharaoh’s dream in Genesis 41,7 as דקות, and when Joseph interprets it in about it in Genesis 41,27, as רקות. Our author cites a few more examples which I have decided to skip as he has made his point. Ed.]
Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan; these are the chieftains of the Horites, sons of Se’ir in the land of Edom. This is referring either to actual Horite chieftains who retained their chiefdom to some degree after Esau’s family came into power, or to Edomite chieftains who adopted this title from the Horites.
You find likewise (that the expression sat also alludes to) the degeneracy of the descendants of Seir, since it is written: These are the sons of Seir the Horite, who sat on the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah (Gen. 36:20). However, Anah is elsewhere called the son of Zibeon: And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah (ibid., v. 24). We learn from this that Zibeon had sexual relations with his own mother, and conceived and begot Anah by her. Consequently, (Anah) was both (Zibeon’s) brother and his son. Later he had intercourse with his daughter-in-law, the wife of Anah, and Oholibamah was their child, as it is said: And these were the sons of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife (ibid., v. 14), and Esau took her as a wife. Inasmuch as they were all products of incestuous relations, Scripture mentions them only to disclose their degeneracy.
בארץ המישור לראובני, “in the land of the plain of the tribe of Reuven.” The reason this is mentioned first is that Reuven had tried to save the life of Joseph at the time when he prevailed on his brothers not to kill him (Genesis 36,21-22). This is why the first city of refuge was situated in Reuven’s part of the east bank. This is the meaning of Proverbs 28,17: “a man oppressed by blood guilt will flee to a pit, let none give him support.” The “pit” mentioned in that verse is a reference to the territory of Reuven of whom the Torah writes in Genesis 37,29: “Reuven returned to the pit.”
The sons of Dishon. But it the Torah (Gen 36:26) it says, “These are the sons of Dishan,” with a qameṣ. In truth, they were the sons of Dishon; for Dishon—with a ḥolem—was the fifth of Seir’s sons, whereas Dishan—with a qameṣ—was the seventh of Seir’s sons. This is in fact how the text records them in the Torah: “Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan” (Gen 36:21). But when it records their progeny it calls both of them “Dishan”—with a qameṣ: “The sons of Dishan were Hemdan and Eshban” (Gen 36:26)—then the sons of Ezer—and then: “the sons of Dishan were Uz and Aran” (Gen 36:28). Ezra, however, wrote “Dishon” for both of them. Apparently, concerning their names, they were not particular about the distinction between “Dishan” and “Dishon.”
Dishon, Eitzer and Dishan, these are the chiefs of the Chorites, the sons of Se’ir, in the land of Edom.
and Dishon, and Etser, and Dishon. These are the chieftains of the generations of the sons of Gebal, whose habitation was of old in the land of the Edomites.
| וַיִּהְי֥וּ בְנֵי־לוֹטָ֖ן חֹרִ֣י וְהֵימָ֑ם וַאֲח֥וֹת לוֹטָ֖ן תִּמְנָֽע׃ | 22 P | The sons of Lotan were Hori and Hemam; and Lotan’s sister was Timna. |
ואחות לוטן תמנע, “Lotan’s sister was called Timna.” Seeing that Lotan was the senior of the brothers, Timna’s name appears next to his. [Normally, we would have expected the sequence: ותמנע אחות לוטן, “Timna was the sister of Lotan.” Ed.] We find a similar example of this construction in Genesis 28,9, as well as in Exodus 15,20 and in Exodus 6,23.
AND LOTAN’s SISTER WAS TIMNA. This is analogous to the verses: And the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah; (Above, 4:22. ) And their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail; (I Chronicles 2:16.) And Tamar was their sister; (Ibid., 3:9.) and Serah their sister. (Genesis, 46:17.) It is the custom of Scripture to trace the genealogy of a daughter through the brothers. Now it would have been proper that Timna be enumerated above with the sons of Se’ir by saying, “And Dishon, and Ezer, and Dishan (Verse 21 here.) and their sister Timna.” But since she was Lotan’s sister both paternally and maternally, and not the maternal sister of the other brothers, Scripture therefore wanted to trace her genealogy through Lotan. It may be that she was Lotan’s maternal but not paternal sister and she was not the daughter of Se’ir the Horite, [and therefore could not be listed among his children].
ואחות לוטן תמנע. Seeing that Lotan was the outstanding one among his brothers, Timna’s genealogy is linked to her prominent brother rather than to her father. We have encountered the same principle when Machalat whom Esau married to assuage the hurt feelings of his parents, is described as the sister of Nevayot, a son of Yishmael. Also Miriam the prophetess, is described as Aaron’s sister instead of as Amram’s daughter. (Exodus 15,20)
The children of Lotan were Hori and Hemam; and Lotan’s sister was Timna, the concubine of Elifaz, son of Esau (verse 12). Timna, Amalek’s mother, is one of the few women mentioned in this section.
ואחות לוטן תמנע. “Lotan’s sister was Timna.” It is customary for the Bible to trace the ancestry of the daughters by mentioning their brothers. Examples are: “the sister of Tuval Kayin was Naamah,” (Genesis 4,22) Actually, she should have been listed already together with the sons of Seir and Dishan, etc. (36,30). It is possible, however, that she was a full sister to Lotan, both having the same father and mother, whereas she was not a sister to the sons of Seir mentioned in verses 26-30, as she was not a daughter of the tribe of Seir.
THERE are in the Law portions which include deep wisdom, but have been misunderstood by many persons.; they require, therefore, an explanation. I mean the narratives contained in the Law which many consider as being of no use whatever; e.g., the list of the various families descended from Noah, with their names and their territories (Gen. x.); the sons of Seir the Horite (ibid. 36:20-30); the kings that reigned in Edom (ibid. 31, seq.); and the like. There is a saying of our Sages (B Ṭ. Sanh. 99b) that the wicked king Manasse frequently held disgraceful meetings for the sole purpose of criticising such passages of the Law. “He held meetings and made blasphemous observations on Scripture, saying, Had Moses nothing else to write than, And the sister of Lotan was Timna” (Gen. 36:22)? With reference to such passages, I will first give a general principle, and then discuss them seriatim, as I have done in the exposition of the reasons of the precepts.
The preceding verse states, Wisdom [cries out] in the streets (Prov. 1:20). This verse refers to the recondite secrets of our holy Torah. [Wisdom] states, How long will you simple ones love simplicity? (Prov. 1:22). In other words, you who follow after the simple meaning (Peshat. This refers to the simple, literal meaning of a given text.) deceive yourselves with your love of simplicity—the part of the Torah you do believe in—which contains nothing beyond the simple meaning. And scoffers [be eager] to scoff. This has reference to [King] Manasseh [son of Hezekiah], who would expound [difficult haggadot and say, “Did Moses have only to write The sister of Lotan was Timna (Gen. 36:22)]?” (Sanhedrin 99b.)
We now must awaken you to many places in Torah where the name Ya”h-י״ה is found. For example, the verse states, (Exodus 17:16) “For a hand is [raised in oath] on the throne of Ya”h-י״ה; HaShem-יהו״ה maintains a war against Amalek from generation to generation.” What does it mean, “From generation to generation-MiDor Dor-מדור דור”? The following explains this verse: The wicked Amalek (The numerical value of Amalek-עמלק-240 is the same as “doubt-Safek-ספק-240,” in that the external husk (Kelipah) of Amalek sows doubt, as will soon be intimated.) comes from the power of the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee). He adheres to him and derives his strength from him. From the time that the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmonee) instilled his contamination into Chavah, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a) Adam severed the plantings above (After the sin of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam separated from his wife Chavah for one-hundred and thirty years, during which time he had nocturnal emissions of his seed with she-demons (Liliot) in his dreams. He thus caused a separation between the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut and the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet. This caused the plantings to be severed, and the conduits to pour out wasted influence. This caused the separation of the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel from the Holy One, blessed is He, in which the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י was separated from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus blemishing the letters Vav-Hey-ו"ה of the Name HaShem-יהו"ה. He then repented and returned to his wife Chavah and gave birth to his son Sheth who was born “in his likeness and image.” See Genesis 5:3 and Rashi there; Midrash Bereishit Rabba 20:11, 24:6; Bamidbar Rabba 14:12; Zohar III 31a, and elsewhere.) and “estranged the Master-Alooph-אלוף.” (See Proverbs 17:9 – That is, he brought about a separation of the title Lord-Adona”y-אדנ״י from the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, thus concealing the Master of the World-Aloopho Shel Olam-אלופו של עולם.) This is the secret of the withdrawal of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, the Shechinah, the essential root of which was in the lower worlds, (Midrash Shir HaShirim Rabba 5:1 to Song of Songs 5:1 – “At first, the essential root of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Ikkar Shechinah, was in the lower worlds.”) so that, “the dove could not find a resting place for the sole of its foot.” (Genesis 8:9 – The dove-Yonah-יונה refers to the Ingathering of Israel-Knesset Yisroel, the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, the Shechinah. This verse thus hints at the exile of the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, from (Isaiah 66:1) “the earth (Aretz-ארץ) is My footstool,” as well as the exile of the Jewish people. See Talmud Bavli, Brachot 53b; Tikkunei Zohar 22b.) Now, even though when the children of Israel stood at Mount Sinai, their contamination ceased, (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 146a ibid. – “When the Jewish people stood at Mount Sinai their contamination (which was instilled in Chava by the primordial snake ceased.” That is, at the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai there was a direct revelation of the true unity and singularity of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, blessed is He, in a manner that there is no room for doubt-Safek-ספק-240 (which is Amalek-עמלק-240) as it states (Exodus 19:20), “And HaShem-יהו״ה came down upon Mount Sinai,” and (Exodus 20:2), “I am HaShem-יהו״ה your God,” that we heard directly from the Almighty One, as discussed before in Gate Six.) nevertheless, the blemish of the moon (Kingdom-Malchut) (Levanah-לבנה) was never removed, (See at greater length in Talmud Bavli, Chulin 60b; This is explained at length in Pardes Rimonim, Shaar 18 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon), Etz Chayim, Shaar 36 (Shaar Mi’ut HaYare’ach-The Gate on the Diminishment of the Moon) and elsewhere.) except at specific intervals in time [on Rosh Chodesh-the new moon] when certain known sacrifices are offered, namely the known he-goats (Se’irim-שעירים) that Se’ir adheres to, in that Se’ir is the first (Reishit-ראשית) of Amalek’s strength. (That is, the verse (Genesis 36:20) states, “These are the sons of Se’ir-שעיר the Horite… Lotan,” and (Genesis 36:22), “Lotan’s sister was Timna,” and (Genesis 36:12), “Timna was the concubine of Esav’s son Eliphaz; She gave birth to Amalek-עמלק-240 from Eliphaz.” (Also note Rashi there, that her birth came about through promiscuity and adultery, in which there was doubt-Safek-ספק-240 as to who her father was, which is why the verse only specifies that “Lotan’s sister was Timna.”)) The sign for this is the verse, (Numbers 24:20 – Amalak was the first nation to attack the Jewish people after they left Egypt, and did so without any reason or provocation.) “The first of the nations (Reishit Goyim-ראשית גוים) is Amalek.” When Amalek came, (That is, when Amalek (who is rooted in the blemish of the moon-Levanah) came and waged war on the Ingathering of Israel, their intention was to cause the separation of the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut, by blemishing the Sign of the Holy Covenant-Ot Brit Kodesh-אות ברית קודש (the circumcision), so that it will not receive beneficence from the upper Sefirot.) he added further iniquity to the blemish of the moon by “disjointing Yaakov’s thigh,” (Genesis 32:26, 33; Also see Zohar I 146a, 170b; Zohar II 111b; Tikkunei Zohar 36a and elsewhere. Also see Shaar HaYichud of Rabbi Dovber of Lubavitch, translated as The Gate of Unity (with commentary), Ch. 35, and the explanatory notes and citations there.) thereby shattering the Kingdom of the House of David. (That is, the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut is called “The Kingship of the House of David”-Malchut Beit David-מלכות בית דוד, as discussed in the First Gate.) Now, when the plantings were severed at the time of Adam, and when Amalek “disjointed Yaakov’s thigh,” the Torah portion of Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you (Parshat Zachor) was established. (That is, the Torah portion of (Deuteronomy 25:17), “Remember-Zachor-זכור what Amalek did to you,” (which is to be recalled daily, see Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 5:5). As explained in Gate Two, the aspect of Remember-Zachor-זכור corresponds to the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod, which is where Amalek attempts to cause blemish in order to separate the Sefirah of Foundation-Yesod from the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut. Therefore, to repair this, the Torah portion of Zachor-זכור is recited daily to repair this. Also see Zohar II 66a.) Thus, the final two letters of the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, were blemished by the hand (Yedei-ידי) of Amalek, so to speak. This was possible because the hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה afflicted them, as in the verse, (Samuel I 12:12-15 – “But when you saw that Nachash-נחש, king of the children of Ammon, came upon you, you said to me, ‘No, but a king shall reign over us!’ But HaShem-יהו״ה your God, is your King! And now, here is the king who you have chosen, who you requested; for behold, HaShem-יהו״ה has set a king over you. If you will fear HaShem-יהו״ה and worship Him and listen to His voice and do not rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, then you and the king who reigns over you shall follow after HaShem-יהו״ה your God. But if you do not listen to HaShem’s-יהו״ה voice and rebel against the word of HaShem-יהו״ה, the hand of HaShem-יהו״ה shall be against you and against your fathers.”) “The hand of HaShem-Yad HaShem-יד יהו״ה shall be against you,” and it states, (Proverbs 30:19 – Also note the explanation (in Gate Six) about the verse (Deuteronomy 32:18), “You have weakened the Rock-Tzur-צור who gave birth to you, and have forgotten the God who brought you forth.” See Midrash Eichah Rabba 1:33; Also see Shaarei Tzedek of Rabbi Yosef Gikatilla, Shaar 2; Zohar II 64a; Etz Chayim, Shaar 49, Ch. 7.) “the way of a snake-Nachash-נחש is upon a rock-Tzur-צור.” The sign for this is the verse, (Exodus 17:8) “Amalek came and fought against Israel in Rephidim-רפידים,” meaning, (Mechilta d’Rabbi Yishmael 17:8 – “Rephidim-רפידים means ‘The slackening of the hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים,’ in that the Jewish people were slack in their Torah study [and observance], and it is on account of this that the enemy came upon them.” That is to say, through a weakening in the Sefirot of the “hands” and below, which are the Sefirot indicated by the letters Vav-Hey-ו״ה of The Name HaShem-יהו״ה, Amalak and the primordial snake (Nachash HaKadmoni) are able to set their hand against those Sefirot. It is for this reason that (Exodus 17:11), “Whenever Moshe raised his hands, Israel was stronger, and when he lowered his hands, Amalek was stronger,” [and particularly, when he would raise the middle finger of his hands, which is the Sefirah of Splendor-Tiferet and is the Name HaShem-יהו״ה, then the children of Israel prevailed. See Zohar III 186a-b (Yenukah).]) “Because of the slackness of their hands-Riphyon Yadayim-רפיון ידים.”
“Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau, and she bore Amalek to Elifaz. These are the sons of Ada wife of Esau” (Genesis 36:12). “Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau” – Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: Why do I [need for the verse] to expound and say: “Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau”? It is to inform us of the praiseworthiness of the household of Abraham our patriarch, to what extent the kingdoms and realms wished to cleave to him. Who was Lotan? He was one of the rulers, as it is stated: “The chieftain of Lotan” (Genesis 36:29), and it is written: “Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Genesis 36:22). “Timna was a concubine…” She said: ‘Since I am not worthy to marry him as a wife, I will be his maidservant.’ The matters can be inferred a fortiori: If the wicked Esau, who had to his credit only one mitzva, because he honored his father, kingdoms and realms wish to cleave to him, all the more so that they would wish to cleave to the righteous Jacob, our patriarch, who fulfilled the Torah in its entirety.
Our Rabbis were taught: (Num. 15, 30) "But the person that doth aught with a high hand; this refers to Menasseh b. Hezekiah who sat and lectured on topics with the object of fault-finding," saying, "Could not Moses have found something better than (Gen. 36, 22) "And Lotan's sister was Thimna, or, (Ib.) she was a concubine of Eliphaz b. Esau," or that of (Ib. 13, 14) "And Reuben went in the days of the wheat harvest and found mandrakes in the field." A heavenly voice was then heard saying (Ps. 50, 20) "Thou sittest and speakest against thy brother, against thy own mother's sons thou utterest slander, etc." And to him also applies the words of tradition: (Is. 5, 18) Wee unto those that draw iniquity with the cords of falsehood, and as with a wagon-rope, sinfulnesses." What does a wagon-rope mean? A. Assi said: "In the beginning, the evil inclination appears as thin as the thread of a spider's web; and finally he becomes as thick as a wagon rope." Since we have already arrived at it, let us see what does And Lotan's sister was Thimna really mean. Thimna was a princess, as it is written (Gen. 36, 40) Duke Thimna, and dukedom means a kingdom without a crown. She desired to become a proselyte, but Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not accept her. And she went and became the concubine of Eliphaz b. Esau, saying it is better to be a servant in this nation than to be a princess of another. And her offspring was Amalek, who troubled Israel as a punishment to their parents, who ought not to have driven her away.
R. Simlai stated: In reference to Reuben, it is written: And delivered him out of their hand (ibid. 37:2). Hence you learn that he was not responsible for the selling of Joseph. Similarly Judah said to them: What profit is it if we slay our brother? (ibid., v. 36). Now, inasmuch as these were the four eldest sons, it is apparent that Simeon and Levi must have been responsible for his sale. When they came to Egypt, Joseph looked angrily at Simeon, as it is said: And took Simeon from among them and bound him (ibid. 42:24). Hence he addressed them together: Simeon and Levi are brothers.
(Devarim 32:47) "For it is not an empty thing for you; for it is your life, and by this thing you shall prolong days": There is nothing empty in the Torah, for which, if you fulfill it, you will not be rewarded in this world, with the principal remaining for the world to come. Know this to be so, for they said: Why is it written (Bereshith 36:22) "And the sister of Lotan was Timna," and (Ibid. 36:12) "And Timna was a concubine to Elifaz (the son of Esav)"? Because she said: "I am not worthy of being his wife; (at least) let me be his concubine." Why all this? To apprise us of the greatness of our father Abraham, kings and sultans [(Timna was a daughter of royalty)] desiring to marry into his family. Now does this not follow a fortiori? If Esav, who kept only one mitzvah, that of honoring his father — kings and sultans desired to marry into his family, how much more so would they run to do so with Jacob the tzaddik, who fulfilled all of the mitzvoth, viz. (Ibid. 25:27) "And Jacob was a whole man!"
"And the sister of Tuval-Cain was Naamah." She was known in the days of Moshe our teacher and the Israelites, and thus it says (Genesis 36:22) "And the sister of Lotan was Timna," because she was famous. Know that all of these were wiped out and turned into demons, and were well-known, and it is not my desire to discuss this at length, therefore I am writing here.
Using a seemingly unimportant verse from the Edomite genealogy in Genesis, Chapter 36, Rabbi Horowitz suggests that a deep mystical message can be found, Because Jacob did not complete the process of redeeming the divine sparks from his brother’s line, the divine sparks were responsible for the most terrible evil – Amalek. This incomplete process of redemption leads Pharaoh to deal shrewd treatment of the Israelites. Rabbi Horowitz quotes an explanation offered by the Ari, but it is full of strange allusions that are extremely hard to piece together. Let us deal shrewdly with them: Why did Pharaoh say “Let us deal shrewdly” with Israel instead of simply saying “Let us kill Israel.” To understand the answer to this question we must first understand where the power to destroy Israel comes from. We find the following discussion in the Talmud (See Sanhedrin 99b; see Numbers 15:30 and Genesis 36:22; this verse is taken from the genealogy of Esau – it seems to contain nothing but useless information.) : ““But the soul that acts presumptuously.” This verse refers to Manasseh son of Hezekiah, who examined biblical verses (The word Aggadah is used here – it is the opposite of Halachah; that is it refers to the non-legal, narrative sections of the bible as well as comments on Scripture.) to prove them worthless. Thus, he jeered, “Did Moses have nothing better to write than, “And Lotan's sister was Timnah?”” Why was it necessary to speak of Esau’s family tree? Esau’s genealogy is actually a mystical record of how the divine sparks became mixed in the husks in the world. The root of Jacob’s soul came from the Higher Wisdom (The reference to high wisdom is a reference to the Sephirah of Chokhma which is above Hesed in the sephirotic chart.) and that is why he set out to redeem the divine sparks. The letters which precede each of the letters in the name, Lotan, spell Chokhma – by going back one letter we have the letters of Chokhma. Similarly, the word achot, sister, is also a reference to the Sephirah of Chokhma. Rabbi Isaac Luria explained that Esau or Edom gained its power from the divine sparks that fell into the world. In the end, when the divine sparks return to their source, Edom will lose its power as is alluded to in the prophecy, “I will make wisdom vanish from Edom, understanding from Esau’s mountain,” (Obidiah 1:8) and in the verse “Who turns wisdom back, makes nonsense of their knowledge.” (Isaiah 44:25) Similarly, the name, Timnah hints to the divine sparks and the demonic which are mixed together in the world. The first letters of Timnah, tauf-mem, can be transmuted into el by moving back one letter in the alphabet. And the last two letters of this name, nun-eyin, can be transmuted into Sam (Sam means poison. This is a form of decoding in which the practitioner moves back or forward one letter in the aleph bet to create a hidden word. Note that in moving ‘back’ one letter, the tauf which is the final letter in the alphabet becomes an aleph, the first letter in the alphabet.) , which is part of the name, Samael. (Samael is the name of the power of evil. This transmutation of letters works by moving back from the letter taf to the letter aleph.) This is an allusion to a deep mystery in the cosmic unfolding of the world. Timnah sought out Jacob in the hope of being repaired, but Jacob was only able to repair the first two letters of her name – they became el. Timnah then went to Eliphaz. She brought the sparks of the divine wisdom and, as a result, Amalek was born from this relationship, (69 See the continuation of discussion in Sanhedrin99b - What is the purpose of [writing], And Lotan's sister was Timna? — Timna was a royal princess, as it is written, “Alluf *duke+ Lotan, alluf *duke+ Timna;” and by 'alluf' an uncrowned ruler is meant. Desiring to become a proselyte, she went to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but they did not accept her. So she went and became a concubine to Eliphaz the son of Esau, saying, 'I would rather be a servant to this people than a mistress of another nation.' From her, Amalek was descended, who afflicted Israel. Why so? — Because they should not have repulsed her.) and as a result, the second part of her name was transformed into sam, poison. The divine sparks, then, have the power to give birth to either holiness or impurity. Thus, the verse in Genesis alludes, “Wisdom (Lotan) is the sister of Samael (Timnah).” Timnah is referred to a concubine, in Genesis 36, because she used subterfuge to be transformed through the wisdom. Because Jacob was unable to transform and repair the nun-ayin of the name Timnah, Eliphaz was able to pursue and damage Jacob. (According to a Midrash, Eliphaz was sent by Esau to kill Jacob. He thought better of this plan when he caught up to his uncle and acted on his uncle’s suggestion – by stealing all of his possessions, he could say he left him like a dead man. Poverty, according to the rabbis is as bad as death! See Ginsburg, Legends of the Jews, Book 1, page 346) Nun-ayin, when reversed spell Ani, impoverish! The reason he did not kill Jacob was that he did not have the power to do so since Jacob had repaired the first letters of Timnah’s name: the tuaf mem, when reversed spell mayt, dead. Thus, Jacob could not be killed! That is why we are commanded both to remember Amalek and never forget what the Amalekites did to us. Memory is the means to redemption of the divine spark, and not forgetting is beyond the redemption. Evil is born through forgetfulness. The gid hanasheh, the sciatic, is actually the nerve of forgetfulness (The root nasheh as in the name Menasheh means to forget. Joseph names his son Manasseh because he has forgotten his father’s house.) (nasheh also means to forget). We can now understand the allusion in the statement, “Let us deal shrewdly with them.” Pharaoh knew that he had the power to impoverish Israel but not destroy them completely because of the sparks that had already been redeemed – that is how he decided to use this knowledge to deal shrewdly with them. He enslaved them, and killed the males but he did not seek to destroy the entire nation, as Amalek had suggested.
ותקח מרים הנביאה, “Miriam the prophetess took, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text the reason the Torah added the words “sister of Aaron,” — something we were well aware of — was to ensure that the three siblings Moses, Aaron, and Miriam should all have their names associated with this song. Another reason is connected with good form. It is customary that when the name of a person is introduced we relate it to his or her oldest brother as we find in Genesis 36,22: “the sister of Lotan was Timnah.” It is also possible that Aaron was mentioned in order for her to obtain permission to use the percussion instrument drum, seeing a drum is an instrument connected with the planet (zodiac sign) Jupiter. Each of the planets had a musical instrument which was specifically associated with that planet, the drum being that associated with Jupiter. We have a verse in Job 29,14 צדק לבשתי וילבשני, “I clothed myself in righteousness and it robed me.” This verse is understood to refer to Aaron’s priestly garments. The word צדק then appears both as meaning “Jupiter” and as meaning “Aaron.” Miriam had to obtain Aaron’s permission to use the drum. You are aware that Psalm 150 contains 10 “hallelujahs” of G’d but only nine musical instruments corresponding to nine celestial bodies — horn, harp, lyre, timbrel, dance (מחול), lute, pipe, cymbals, loud-clashing cymbals. [More on this subject on Exodus 32,19.] The words אהרון את התוף are a clear allusion that there was a conceptual linkage between Aaron and the instrument called תוף.
Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek. From this verse it seems that Timna was a son of Eliphaz, but the Torah (Gen 36:12) says that Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz and that she bore him Amalek! Some explain (cf. Rashi ibid.) that Timna is the mother of Amalek as it says in the Torah, and that she was misbegotten. For Eliphaz had relations with Seir’s wife, the mother of Lotan, and she bore him Timna—either during his lifetime or after his death—and Ezra made a subtle observation in the Torah that there is a paseq after “Timna,” so that the intent is: “Gatam, Kenaz, and Timna” (Gen 36:11–12), meaning that she too was his daughter. Afterward, though, she became his concubine and bore him Amalek. It is for this reason, then, that the text says, “and Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Gen 36:22, I Chr 1:39)—not “Seir’s daughter,” but rather “Lotan’s sister.” But this interpretation is midrashic: had Timna been the daughter of Eliphaz, the text would not have included her in the list of sons; for Scripture does not do this without saying so explicitly, as in: “and his daughter Dinah” (Gen 46:15), and: “and their sister Serah” (Gen 46:17). In my view the text adopts an abridged style: because Ezra did not need to be explicit, inasmuch as the matter is explicit in the Torah, he presented the genealogical lines in abridged form. He was similarly brief concerning the sons of Shem, recording Shem’s grandsons in the list of sons for the purpose of brevity, so that when the text says “Aram [and Uz and Hul]” (1 Chr 1:17) it is as though it says, “Aram’s sons were Uz and Hul.” Here too, then, he was brief in writing “Timna.” Indeed, he could have been even briefer and written “Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, and Amalek”; but because Amalek was not equal to the other sons—for they were sons of wives whereas he was the son of a concubine—he separated them by mentioning his mother. And it was adequate for him just to write “Timna,” because the matter is laid out in the Torah.
The sons of Lotan: Hori and Homam—with a vav; but in the Torah (Gen 36:22) this appears as “Hemam,” with a yod.
AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE TO ELIPHAZ ESAU’s SON. Because Scripture was not particular to tell us the names of the mothers of all the others, our Rabbis have interpreted that this was to tell us of the esteem in which Abraham our father was held, i.e., how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [and Lotan was one of the chieftains of Se’ir]. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife, would that I might become your concubine,” as Rashi has written. It is possible that the five sons of Eliphaz, mentioned in the preceding verse, were generally known as his children since he had begotten them from his wives. But Amalek, [born of Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz], was not known among his brothers, [who were the recognized children of Eliphaz], and he might have been included among Esau’s children because he was his descendant. Therefore, Scripture found it necessary to say that his mother so-and-so, to whom Amalek was known to have belonged, bore him to Eliphaz, but he is not listed among the descendants of Esau and did not dwell with them on mount Se’ir. Only the sons of the mistresses, and not the son of a concubine, are called Esau’s seed, since the son of the handmaid will not be heir with his sons, in keeping with the practice of his father’s father. (Above, 21:10.) Now concerning the descendants of Esau, we have been commanded not to abhor them (Deuteronomy 23:8.) or take their land. (Ibid., 2:5.) This refers to all his known sons who dwell in Se’ir, as they are called Edomites by his name, but the son of the concubine is not part of the descendants of Esau, and he did not inherit together with them in their land, and in fact with respect to him we have been commanded to the contrary, i.e., to abhor him and blot out his name. (Ibid., 25:19.) Now Rashi wrote further: “In the book of Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) Scripture enumerates Timna among the children of Eliphaz! This implies that he lived with Se’ir the Horite’s wife and from this union Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. And this is why Scripture says, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [since Lotan’s father was Se’ir the Horite]. And the reason why Scripture does not enumerate her among Se’ir’s children is that she was Lotan’s sister maternally but not paternally.” But I do not agree with this since in the book Chronicles, it should have said, “and Timna his daughter.” (See further, 46:15: “and Dinah his daughter.”) Why should Scripture enumerate the woman among the sons? Perhaps Scripture is not particular about this when a matter is known for so we find there in Chronicles: And the sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Miriam. And the sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu, etc. (I Chronicles 5:29.) [Scripture thus enumerates a woman among the sons.] If so, it is fitting that we say that this Timna was the daughter of Eliphaz, who had been born to him of the wife of Se’ir the Horite after the death of her husband, and she was thus Lotan’s sister from one mother. Eliphaz took her as a concubine, this being permissible to an idolater. (Sanhedrin 55b.) Or we shall say, in accordance with the opinion of our Rabbis [that Timna was illegitimate, as explained above in the words of Rashi], that the Timna mentioned in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) is identical with Timna the chieftain mentioned further on, (Verse 40 here.) for he is enumerated there in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) among the sons of Eliphaz, just as Korah is enumerated there (I Chronicles 1:35.) among the sons of Esau [while here in Verses 15-16 Korah is listed among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude that he was illegitimate, as was Timna]. Furthermore, Korah is listed here in Verse 5 as the son of Oholibamah [and Esau, and further in Verse 16 he is enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude] that both Korah and Timna were illegitimate, born of one father, and enumerated with the children of another, for it is far-fetched to say that the woman Timna was enumerated among the sons, as was suggested above. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is feasible to conjecture that Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, after having given birth to Amalek [as stated in our present verse], gave birth to a son, and she had hard labor and died. As her soul was departing she called his name Timna so that her name be remembered, while his father Eliphaz called him Korah. Scripture, however, does not ascribe this son Timna to Timna his mother in order not to prolong the account for the intent is only to enumerate Amalek by himself. However, the sons of Eliphaz were seven, [as they are enumerated here in Verses 15-16, and Korah is among them]. Now Scripture enumerates there the chieftains who were the sons of Eliphaz in the order of their importance. Therefore, it gave Kenaz and Korah precedence over Gatam [although the order of their birth as stated in Verse 11 was: Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz]. I have an additional opinion concerning this verse in connection with that which our Rabbis have said in the Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules by which Agadah (The part of Rabbinic teaching which explains the Bible homiletically, as opposed to the Halachic (or legal) interpretation, which is governed by the famous thirteen principles of interpretation mentioned by Rabbi Ishmael. This Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules” for Agadah was collated by Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.) is explained.” There they mentioned this rule: “There should have been one arrangement for [two verses, meaning that there are verses which should really be combined] but the prophets divided them for some reason! An example is the verse which says, For a multitude of the people, etc.” (For a multitude of the people… had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the passover otherwise that it is written. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying: The good Lord pardon, (II Chronicles 30:18). And then in Verse 19 it continues: His whole heart he hath set to seek G-d, the Eternal, the G-d of his fathers, though not according to the purification that pertaineth to holy things. Now Verse 18 does not explain whom G-d should pardon, while Verse 19 does not explain “who set his heart, etc.” Combining the two verses makes the sense clear. Hezekiah prayed that the good Lord pardon every one who, though he had not cleansed himself according, etc., had set his whole heart to seek G-d.) Those who pursue the plain meaning of Scripture apply this to other verses. And so too this verse says: (And) the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam and Kenaz, (This concludes Verse 11, while And Timna begins Verse 12. Ramban combines the two verses into one, with the result that Timna is also enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz.) and Timna. Then Scripture returns to say, there was a concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son, and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek, but Scripture does not mention the name of the concubine. But in truth she was Timna, as it is said, Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) and this is the reason that Scripture did not mention her name here since it did not want to say “and Timna” twice, once in reference to the male chieftain and once in reference to the female concubine. Thus Eliphaz had seven sons, [who are enumerated in Verses 11-12: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek], and they are the same chieftains ascribed to Eliphaz in Verses 15-16, but they changed the name of this youngest son of Eliphaz — namely Timna — to Korah because his name was like that of the concubine and so that he should not be thought of as her son. He was named Korah upon his ascending to the position of chieftain. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Korah the son of Esau’s wife Oholibamah is counted twice; [in Verse 5 he is mentioned as Oholibamah’s son while in Verse 16 he is listed as Adah’s son], because he was the youngest of Oholibamah’s sons, [as indicated in Verse 5 where he is mentioned last. Upon his mother’s death] Adah raised him, [which explains why he is mentioned among Adah’s children in Verse 16]. So also the verse, the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, (II Samuel 21:8.) as our Rabbis have said. (Sanhedrin 19 b: “But they were really Merab’s children! [See I Samuel 18:19.] It is because Merab gave birth to them. However Michal raised them; therefore, they are called by her name.”) According to this opinion [of Ibn Ezra, i.e., that because Adah raised Korah he is counted among her children], the explanation of Scripture in the book of Chronicles (I, 1:36), [where it mentions seven sons of Eliphaz, and among them, and Timna and Amalek, while here in Verses 11-12, it mentions only six sons of Eliphaz, is as follows: The expression in Chronicles, and Timna and Amalek, means] that Timna gave birth to Amalek, the sense of the verse thus being, “and to Timna, Amalek.” The letter lamed meaning “to” is missing just as in the verse: And there were two men that were captains of bands Saul’s son, (II Samuel 4:2.) which means “to Saul’s son.” [Thus it was Timna who was his mother, but because Adah raised him he is enumerated here in Verse 12 among the sons of Adah]. The correct interpretation however is, as I have suggested, [that Timna, Lotan’s sister, bore Amalek to Eliphaz], and the verse stating, And these are the sons of Adah — [namely, Verse 16, which mentions Amalek among them], refers to the majority of the names mentioned there, for Amalek was not her son. Similarly the verse, These are the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Padan-aram, (Above, 35:26.) does not apply to Benjamin, [who was born in the Land of Israel, although he is mentioned in the enumeration which follows].
AND THE SISTER OF TUBAL-CAIN WAS NAAMAH. This is as if Scripture would say: “and a sister was born to him and her name was Naamah.” A similar sense is found in the verses: And Lotan’s sister was Timnah; (Genesis 36:22.) And Miriam their sister; (Numbers 26:59.) His sister’s name was Maacah. (I Chronicles 7:15.) In Bereshith Rabbah (23:4.) there are some Rabbis who say that Naamah was Noah’s wife. “And why did they call her Naamah [which means lovely]? Because her deeds were lovely and pleasant.” By this the Rabbis meant to say that she was famous in those generations because she was a righteous woman and she gave birth to righteous children. This was why Scripture mentioned her. If so, a small remembrance of Cain was left in the world. However, if we say that she was not the woman from whom Noah begot his three sons, there is no reason for Scripture mentioning her. However, our Rabbis have another Midrash (Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, Chapter 22.) concerning her which states that she was the very beautiful woman in whom the bnei ha’elohim (See further 6:2, 4.) erred. This is hinted in the verse, And the ‘bnei ha’elohim’ saw the daughters of men, (Ibid., Verse 2.) as mentioned in Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer. (Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, Chapter 22.) But other sources (Mentioned in Midrash Hane’elam. (See my Hebrew commentary, p. 46, Note 3.)) have it that Naamah was the wife of Shamdon, the mother of Ashmedai, (Chief of demons.) and it is from her that the demons were born for her name is indeed found in the writings of “the use of the demons.” Scripture hints and deals briefly with such hidden matters.
אחות אהרן, seeing that he was her older brother the Torah describes her as Aaron’s sister rather than as Moses’ sister. I have explained this in connection with Genesis 28,9 about אחות נביות as well as in connection with אחות לוטן in Genesis 36,22.
אחות נביות, seeing that Nevayot was the oldest of Ishmael’s children the Torah calls Machalat “the sister of Nevayot,” (instead of merely “the daughter of Ishmael”). We find something parallel to this in Exodus 15,20 ותקח מרים הנביאה אחות אהרן, “Miriam the prophetess, sister of Aaron, took, etc.” The reason she is referred to in that fashion is that she was older than Moses but younger than Aaron. On the other hand, in a verse where both Moses and Aaron are mentioned together with Miriam, (Exodus Numbers 26,59) she is referred to as “their sister.” The Torah employs the same formulation in Genesis 36,22 where Timna is described as the sister of Lotan, seeing that Lotan was the oldest of his brothers as we know from verse 20 in that chapter, i.e. לוטן, ושובל, וצבעון, וענה.
כי לא דבר רק הוא מכם FOR IT IS NOT A VAIN THING FOR YOU — it is not for nothing that you are to occupy yourselves laboriously with it. because much reward depends on it, כי הוא חייכם FOR IT IS YOUR LIFE (life is the reward). Another explanation: There is not one empty (ריק i.e., apparently superfluous) word in the Torah that, if you properly expound it, has not a grant of reward attached to it for doing so. You can know this, for so did our Rabbis say: It states (Genesis 36:22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”; (Genesis 36:32) “and Timna was concubine [to Eliphaz, Esau’s son]”. Why is this stated? Because she (Timna) said, “If I am unworthy to become his (Elphaz's) wife, would that I would become his concubine!”. And why all this (why does Scripture enter into all these details of her birth and marriage; of what interest is it to us)? To tell you in what distinction Abraham was held — that rulers and kings (Lotan was one of the chieftains of Seir, cf. Genesis 36:20—21) were eager to connect themselves by marriage to his descendants (Sifrei Devarim 336:1; cf. Rashi on Genesis 36:12).
ותמנע היתה פילגש AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE — This is stated to tell you in what importance Abraham was held — how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said (v. 22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”, and Lotan was one of the chieftains inhabiting Seir — he was one of the Horites who had dwelt there from ancient times. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife would that I might become your concubine!” In Chronicles (1 Chronicles 1:36) Scripture enumerates her amongst the children of Eliphaz, thus intimating that he took Seir’s wife and from the two of them Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. This is why it is stated, “and Lotan’s sister was Timna”, and why Scripture does not enumerate her amongst Seir’s children, merely stating that she was sister to Lotan, Seir’s son, (see 5:20) because she was his sister from one mother and not from one father (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev 1).
Adam, Seth, Enosh Ezra wrote this book of genealogy through Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi during the eighteen years from the name that Zerubbabel and Joshua the Priest came to Jerusalem in the days of Cyrus I until Cyrus the son of Esther came. All of this [book] is for the [purpose of tracing the] lineage of King David and the Levites for gate sentries, guards, and singers, how David stationed them in their positions, and the priests in their watches. Therefore, he traced their lineage from Adam to Abraham, and since he had to trace Abraham’s lineage, he mentioned also the rest of the nations, his sons and his grandsons, and because of his sons, he had to trace the lineage of the rest of the nations, the sons of Canaan, to let [us] know how Abraham inherited their land. And since he had to mention and trace the lineage of the generations of Canaan, he mentioned together with them (the generations of) the rest of the nations, but he mentions them only briefly and casts them away until he reaches the main ones, as is explained in Genesis Rabbah (39:10) (See also Tanhuma Veyesheb 1). This can be compared to a king who was traveling from place to place and dropped a pearl. The king stood and sifted the sand with a sieve until he found the pearl. So said the Holy One, blessed be He, “Why should I trace the lineage of Shem and Arpachshad and Terach except to find Abraham?” [As it is written] (Neh. 9:8): “... and You found his heart faithful [before You].” And because of the honor of Isaac, he traced the lineage of the sons of Esau and Ishmael and the sons of Keturah, and he cast them away little by little and left them. He mentions the sons of Seir because the sons of Esau inherited them [i.e., their territory]; he also traces the lineage of Timna, who became a concubine to the seed of Abraham, to let us know the praise of Abraham, for she was the daughter of princes and chiefs and wished to be a concubine to the seed of Abraham, as it is written (Gen. 36:22): “... and Lotan’s sister was Timna,” and it is written (ibid. 12): “And Timna was a concubine to Eliphaz the son of Esau,” because she said, “If I am not worthy to marry him, I shall be his concubine.” (Gen. Rabbah 84: 14, Sanh. 99b) Moreover, for this reason, he traced the lineage of the sons of Seir because they were chiefs and princes, and Mount Seir belonged to Seir, but out of love for Isaac, the Holy One, blessed be He, gave it to Esau, as it is written (Deut. 2:12): “... and the children of Esau drove them out, etc., and settled in their place,” and to inform us of the fulfillment of the words of the Holy One, blessed be He, Who promised Isaac that He would multiply his seed and give him dominion over all, and because of the honor of Isaac he likewise wrote (verse. 31): “Now these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, etc.”
And brazenly defies. He expounds aggados fallaciously, for example [he says that] “Moshe should not have written ‘the sister of Lotan was Timna’ (Bereishis 36:22)” (Sanhedrin 99b).
אחות אהרן, “Aaron’s sister.” The reason Miriam is described thus is because both Moses and Miriam had already been mentioned in a “single breath,” as it were in connection with the song, the Torah looked for a way to also have Aaron mentioned in this context. It was a way of giving honour to Aaron, her older brother. After all, Aaron too possessed the rank of being a prophet. It is also possible that it is the norm of Torah verses to relate women to their brothers, as for instance in Genesis 36,22 ואחות לוטן תמנע, “Timna was Lotan’s sister.”
(Babli 99a, Sifry Num. 112.) It is written (Num. 15:31.) : For he showed contempt for the Eternal’s Word. Not only if he was contemptuous of the teachings of the Torah, from where if he denied one verse, one Aramaic expression, one argument de minore ad majus? The verse says, His command he violated. One verse, Lotan’s sister was Timna` (Gen. 36:22; cf. Gen. rabba 82(15).) . One Aramaic expression, Laban called it Yegar Sahadu̅ta̅ (Gen. 31:47. In Gen. rabba 72(12) the expression is characterized as Syriac.) . One argument de minore ad majus: For Cain would be avenged sevenfold, etc. (Gen. 4:24. While Lemekh’s song violates the formal rules of an argument de minore ad majus, the verse is Divine approval of poetry.) .
Manasseh said: But did Moses need to write only insignificant matters that teach nothing, for example: “And Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Genesis 36:22), or: “And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz, son of Esau” (Genesis 36:12), or: “And Reuben went in the days of the wheat harvest and found duda’im in the field” (Genesis 30:14)? A Divine Voice emerged and said to him: “You sit and speak against your brother; you slander your own mother’s son. These things you have done, and should I have kept silence, you would imagine that I was like you, but I will reprove you, and set the matter before your eyes” (Psalms 50:20–21). The verses in the Torah are not empty matters, with regard to which you can decide their import.
The sons of Lotan were Chori and Heimam. Lotan’s sister was Timna.
And the sons of Lotan were the Chori and Heman; and the sister of Lotan was Timna.
| וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ בְּנֵ֣י שׁוֹבָ֔ל עַלְוָ֥ן וּמָנַ֖חַת וְעֵיבָ֑ל שְׁפ֖וֹ וְאוֹנָֽם׃ | 23 P | The sons of Shobal were these: Alvan, Manahath, Ebal, Shepho, and Onam. |
And these are the children of Shoval: Alvan, and Manahat, and Eval, Shepho, and Onam.
The sons of Shobal: Alian. But in the Torah (Gen 36:23) this appears as “Alvan,” with a vav.
These are the sons of Shoval: Alvan, Manachas, Eival, Shefo and Onom.
And these are the sons of Shobal, Alvan, and Manachoth, and Ebal, Shepho, and Onam.
| וְאֵ֥לֶּה בְנֵֽי־צִבְע֖וֹן וְאַיָּ֣ה וַעֲנָ֑ה ה֣וּא עֲנָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר מָצָ֤א אֶת־הַיֵּמִם֙ בַּמִּדְבָּ֔ר בִּרְעֹת֥וֹ אֶת־הַחֲמֹרִ֖ים לְצִבְע֥וֹן אָבִֽיו׃ | 24 P | The sons of Zibeon were these: Aiah (Aiah Heb. “and Aiah.”) and Anah—that was the Anah who discovered the hot springs (hot springs Meaning of Heb. yemim uncertain.) in the wilderness while pasturing the asses of his father Zibeon. |
אשר מצא את הימים, “who discovered the yemim. According to Rashi, these were animals that resulted from crossbreeding, and the Torah names him in order to chastise him for having successfully violated the principle of not crossbreeding. If you were to question that Anah could not have been the first person having done this as Rashi himself commenting on Genesis 26,13 on the words: ויגדל מאד, writes that people at that time already used to say that “the dung of the mules of Yitzchok are worth more than the gold of their king,” which proves that mules, which are the result of crossbreeding horses and donkeys already existed and people were familiar with them, we have to understand this verse as follows: Anah was the first person who deliberately mated donkeys with horses. Prior to this, mules existed but they resulted from the mother animal having mated with a horse of its own account. The word: מצא means that he developed a system of breeding such animals successfully. He noted that in order to tell which animal was the result of a male donkey mating with a female horse, and which was the product of a sheass having mated with a male horse, if the animal has thin ears it is the product of a female horse and a male donkey; when the ears are thick, it is proof that the mother animal was a sheass and it had mated with a male horse. Seeing that G-d is very displeased with such procedures being undertaken by man, he is blamed for such practices having been introduced. Another interpretation: the Torah wishes the reader to know that the animals resulting from crossbreeding are not included in the blessing given by the Creator to all the creatures He had created. Proof of this is the fact that such creatures cannot sire or give birth to another generation of their breed.
AIAH AND ANAH. The vav prefixed to Aiah has the same meaning as the Arabic fa. (The Hebrew has a vav before Aiah. If this vav is a connective vav we should translate: And these are the children of Zibeon and Aiah and Anah. I.E. points out that the vav before Aiah is not to be translated. It is superfluous and is placed for emphasis (Weiser).) We have a similar clause without a vav prefixed to Aiah (I Chron. 1:40 reads, And the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah.) in Chronicles (I Chron. 1:40).
THE HOT SPRINGS. Onkelos renders yemim (hot springs) mighty men as in The Emim dwelt therein aforetime, a people great, and many, and tall (Deut. 2:10). (The Emim were mighty men. Onkelos identifies the Yemin with them.) It is possible to compare the two because we find the yod and alef interchanging (Hence yemim equals emim. Nachmanides explains that Onkelos held that Anah was attacked by Emem, who wanted to rob his father’s asses, and overcame them. Thus he found the Emim in the wilderness as he fed the asses of Zibeon, his father.) as with the word yityammeru (bear themselves loftily) (Ps. 94:4). (There is no such word in Scripture. However, we do find tityammaru (shall ye revel) (Is. 61:6). Either we have a scribal error (Krinsky) and what I.E. is saying is that tityammaru could have been written titammeru since Ps. 94:4 employs the term yitammeru (bear themselves loftily), or I.E. is saying that Ps. 94:4 could have read yityammeru since Is. 61:6 reads tityammaru (Weiser). Spelled with a yod or an alef it means to exalt.) However, Saadiah Gaon translates yemim as mules. He interprets who found to mean who crossbred. (He crossbred a horse and an ass and “found” mules. This is also the opinion of the Talmud. Cf. Jerusalem Talmud, Berakhot 8:5.) It is also possible that who found means who first discovered the technique of crossbreeding, since two different species cannot produce offspring. (Hence crossbreeding was a new discovery.) The latter interpretation is substantiated by Scripture’s stating, as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father. (Since he was occupied with taking care of the asses, he experimented and discovered this technique.) If the meaning of yemim is plants, as is maintained by many commentators, why should Scripture mention as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father? (If the Bible wants to tell us that Anah found a certain type of plant (yemim) in the desert, what need is there to tell us that he did this as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father?)
Heb. “and Aiah.”
Meaning of Heb. yemim uncertain.
ואלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה, “and these were the sons of Tzivon, Aiah and Anah.” The letters ו in front of these names are merely prefixes and have nothing to do with the names of these two people. We find something parallel in Samuel Ii 15,34 עבד אביך ואני מאז which means “I have been a servant of your father from way before.” In this verse we are told that Anah was a son of Tzivon, whereas from verse 20 it is clear that both Anah and Tzivon were brothers, sons of Seir HaChori. In order to ensure that we would not think that the Anah mentioned was the uncle of the other Anah, the Torah added that the Anah mentioned here was the one who discovered the mules in the desert. Our sages in Pessachim 54 explained that we are dealing with the same Anah who had been mentioned previously and that he had been sired through his father having slept with his mother. The reason the Torah lists him here as one of the sons of Seir HaChori is because all the people of his generation thought that he was the son of Seir HaChori. The Torah, however, was concerned with relating his true ancestry. The Torah mentions him as either himself crossbreeding a donkey with a mare or discovering the products of such crossbreeding, to illustrate how illegitimate sexual relations between human beings result eventually in bastardy or association with animals which were the product of such crossbreeding. At the time it was considered very astute of Anah to have discovered or crossbred two such species of animals. According to the opinion of Onkelos who translated the verse as Anah having found גבריה, “men in the desert,” the word ימים must be understood as a variant of אימים, antediluvian giants. According to Onkelos the plain meaning of our verse is that Anah was met or attacked by members of that people who wanted to rob him of the donkeys belonging to Tzivon which he was minding. The Torah reports that although alone, Anah managed to save the donkeys from the hands of these אימים. Nachmanides interprets the verse in this fashion.
ואלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה, the letter ו in the word ואיה, is not part of the name of the person described. It is the kind of ו used in Scripture sometimes to introduce a new sequence, such as in 22,4 ויהי ביום השלישי וישא אברהם את עיניו, “on the third day Avraham raised his eyes.” For the previous 2 days he had been proceeding in the direction of the land of Moriah; now, on the third day, he thought it was time to look for a definitive place in that region. A similar use of the letter ו occurs in Psalms 67,7 נרדם ורכב וסוס, where the letter ו at the beginning of ורכב, introduces a new subject (of sorts). Other examples of a similar nature are Samuel II 13,20, etc. My grandfather of blessed memory wrote that none of these letters ו are additional, i.e. meant for considerations involving syntax, but they are an alert to the reader that a word prior to the word starting with the letter ו is missing in the sentence and has to be found in the text preceding it. Accordingly, the meaning of the words ואיה וענה is that Tzivon had other sons beside those listed here, senior to the ones listed here, but that the Torah had not considered it necessary to mention their names. Perhaps the reason is that those sons had not produced progeny. The ענה mentioned here is not the same as has been mentioned in verse 20. The one mentioned in verse 20 was a descendent of the בני שעיר and was not a son of Tzivon who was a brother of Tzivon. Our sages in Pessachim 54 believe that the two men called ענה are one and the same. To the possible question whether we are dealing with two men of the same name, the Torah answers: “this is the Anah who was well known previously for having located the Yeymim, etc.” Our sages concluded further that Tzivon had slept with his mother having begotten Anah from that intercourse. Not only had Anah himself been a bastard, but he had produced more bastards himself. According to the plain meaning of the text, the words הוא ענה, simply mean: “he is the well known Anah.”
אשר מצא את הימים, our sages explain the word as meaning “mules,” i.e. just as he had been a bastard he now bread bastards, i.e. animals which resulted from crossbreeding horses and donkeys. This is the meaning of the words that follow ברעותו את החמורים “while he was engaged in tending the donkeys.” It occurred to him that it might be a good idea to see what would happen if he allowed or persuaded a horse to mount an ass. He found to his astonishment that the ass gave birth to a mule as well as a female mule. Our sages have said in Bereshit Rabbah 82,14 that any mule, i.e. an animal resembling it traces its ancestry by means of the size of its ears. If the ears are short it has been sired by a donkey and born by a horse, whereas if it has long ears it has been sired by a horse having been born by an ass. Tzivon had violated G’d’s law according to which the species are not to be crossbred, whether humans or animals or plants. As a reminder of this legislation the Torah subsequently forbade products of crossbreeding, a prohibition which extends to our having any beneficial use of the result of such crossbreeding. According to Bereshit Rabbah in the section just quoted, neither fire nor kilayim, i.e. the product of crossbreeding different species of animals, were created during the 6 days of creation. Mules, i.e. the result of crossbreeding was not created until the days of Anah (whose father had made the experiment). There is a discussion as to when fire was created. According to Levi the original light created on the first day served man for 36 hours, i.e. during the 12 hours before the onset of the first Sabbath, i.e. the first 12 hours after his creation, and the 24 hours of the Sabbath. When the world sank into darkness as a result of G’d withdrawing the original light, as part of Adam’s punishment for having violated His commandment not to eat from the tree of knowledge, Adam was disconsolate and exclaimed (Psalms 139,11) “is darkness to conceal me permanently?” G’d responded to his cry of anguish by replacing the original light with fire, sparks, by teaching him how to produce fire by striking two flints against each other. Having been successful in this, Adam blessed the fire. This corresponds to the view of Shemuel who taught us that the reason we pronounce a benediction over fire on the evening following the Sabbath is that this was the time that fire was created. Rabbi Avuhu added in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that we also bless fire on the evening after Yom Kippur because the fire had to observe “Sabbath” during that whole day, i.e. handling it was out of bounds to us. [Of course, fire is also prohibited for use (handling) on the Sabbath, but Yom Kippur is also called Sabbath even when it does not occur on the day we would normally observe the Sabbath. Ed.]
Concerning the words in our verse here ברעותו את החמורים, he was also tending horses, but most of the animals he was looking after were donkeys. This is why the Torah mentioned only the donkeys. We do not know what Onkelos meant when he translated the word הימים as גבריא. The reason why the Torah mentioned all these Alufim of Seir is because of G’d’s love for Yitzchok. Had G’d not loved Yitzchok He would not have gone out of his way for Esau and his sons and have allowed his sons to become such “bigshots” in the land of Seir.
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ZIBEON: AND AJAH, AND ANAH. The letter vav in the word v’ayah — (and Ajah) is redundant. Similarly: Thy father’s servant ‘va’ani’ (and I) have been in time past, so ‘va’ani’ (and I) will now be thy servant. (II Samuel 15:34.) In both cases the vav is redundant, and the meaning of the word is ani (I). And there were the heads of their fathers’ houses: ‘va’epher’ (and Epher), and Ishi (I Chronicles 5:24.) — here too the vav is redundant. And there are many others like them. Now this Zibeon was the third son of Se’ir the Horite, (Verse 20 here.) and he begot these two children, Ajah and Anah, and Scripture relates that this Anah, Zibeon’s son, was that same Anah who found the mules in the desert as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father, to differentiate between him and his uncle Anah, (Verse 20 here.) the brother of his father, Zibeon. This Anah, Zibeon’s son, was Esau’s father-in-law. (Verse 2: Oholibamah the daughter of Anah.)
WHO FOUND THE ‘YEIMIM’ IN THE DESERT. In the opinion of some of our Rabbis in the Talmud, (Pesachim 54a.) the yeimim are mules, and this man discovered that an ass and a mare, even though they were unlike species, could breed together as opposed to other unlike species. Scripture says that he found them in the wilderness as he fed the asses, for he had there in the desert many asses seeking she-asses and he mated them with mares, and they begot offspring. It would appear that in his generation it was accounted to him as an act of wisdom in that he knew the various species which are nearly alike in nature and thus can produce offspring by cross-breeding. He was thus known by this deed, and therefore Scripture described him by it. And Onkelos translated yeimim as valiant men. It would appear from his opinion that this Anah was attacked by people from a nation called Emim, as it is said, The Emim… a people great, and many and tall as the Anakim, (Deuteronomy 2:10.) and they wished to rob him of the asses of Zibeon his father. He was in the desert with no one to help him, but he overtook them and saved the asses from their hand. The word matza in matza eth hayeimim is thus to be associated with these expressions: Thine hand ‘timtza’ (shall overtake) all thine enemies; (Psalms 21:9.) And I have not delivered thee into the hand of Saul. (II Samuel 3:8. “Saul.” In the verse: “David.”) It may be that the word matza means that he found them and they were thus saved, and he came to be known for this prowess. This is correct.
ואיה וענה, I believe that the real names of these people were “Veayah” and “Veanah,” not “Ayah” and “Anah.” The same is true of Numbers 13,14 where the letter ו is part of the name itself, i.e. ופסי, just as it is in Esther where the letter ו is part of the name of Queen Vashti, i.e. ושתי. Even though these sons of Tzivon are also referred to by the names Ayah and Adah in Chronicles I 1,40, we need not attribute too much meaning to this, as there are numerous instances when such names are not accurately reported. (Examples of such inaccuracies are Genesis 10,23 where the letters ו in the words וחול וגתר (names) clearly are not part of the names themselves. The same is true of Chronicles I 1,17 where all four of these names are introduced with the letter ו. Clearly, the two versions cannot both be correct. Anyone who interprets the letter ו in the words (names) ואיה וענה to be connective letters ו, must surely answer the question of what prompted the Torah to write such connective letters ו here when it did not seem to be called for. Why would just these sons have been selected by the Torah to be linked to one another by the connective letter ו and not numerous other sons who appear in this chapter? [the author challenges his grandfather Rashi’s interpretation. Ed.] The proofs cited by such commentators for their interpretation are not convincing at all. The very letters ו whom these commentators quote as support for their thesis are themselves not connective letters For instance, in Samuel II 13,20 the line ותשב תמר ושוממה בית אבשלום אחיה, the word ושוממה means the same as שבי, as in שבי אלמנה בית אביך, (Genesis 38,11) where Yehudah tells his daughter-in-law (also) called Tamar to await Shelah’s growing up by remaining like a grieving widow in her father’s house. The word ותשב in Samuel II 13.20 has two meanings. It tells us that Tamar henceforth was isolated, lonely, an outcast. The word בודדה for “lonely,” is implied but not spelled out, and the whole line must be understood as if the prophet had written ותשב תמר בודדה ושוממה, “Tamar lived lonely and abandoned in the house of her brother Avshalom.” Psalms 76,7 מגערתך אלוקי יעקב נרדם ורכב וסוס, must be understood as מגערת אלוקי יעקב נרדם חיל שונאינו, at Your blast, O G’d of Yaakov, horse and chariot (with our enemies) lay stunned.” The reference is to the army mentioned in the preceding verses. The word אנשי חיל, “the soldiers,” which appears in verse 6 of that chapter is presumed as also applying to verse 7. If this were not so, the verse would make little sense. We find that a similar verse to that in Psalms 77,7 is found in Exodus 15,1, where the Torah includes the riders of the cavalry as having been tossed into the sea, as their survival would hardly have constituted an overwhelming victory by G’d.
הוא ענה, who has been mentioned in the time of Moses as a great hero. [I do not know where. Ed.]
אשר מצא את היימים, either powerful human beings, or ferocious animals, in either case “who found,” means he located and vanquished them. According to the plain meaning of the text there is no need to search for additional meanings.
ואיה וענה literally, AND AJAH AND ANAH — The ו in ואיה is redundant, so that the words are equivalent to איה וענה Ajah and Anah. There are many examples of this in Biblical Hebrew: (Daniel 8:13) “to give (וקדש וצבא) both the Sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot”; (Psalms 86:7) “they are cast into a deep sleep (ורכב וסוס) the riders also and the horses”.
הוא ענה THIS WAS THAT ANAH mentioned above (Genesis 36:20) as the brother of Zibeon. Here is called his son, thus telling us that Zibeon and his own mother were the parents of Anah (Pesachim 54a).
את הימים means THE MULES — He crossed an ass and a mare, the offspring being a mule. Being himself the offspring of an unnatural union he reared such in the animal world (Pesachim 54a). Why are they called ימים (which may signify “dreaded beings”)? Because the fear of them lies upon people; for R. Hanina said, “No-one has ever consulted me about an injury caused by a white mule and has recovered (וחיה literally, lived)”. “But do we not see that such a person has recovered (lived)? But you should not read וחיה “and he lived”, but וחיתה “and it (the wound) healed up” — for such a wound never heals up (Chullin 7b). From “But do we not see" is to be found in an old text of Rashi. It would have been unnecessary to write the genealogy of the Horites had it not been that it wishes to mention Timna, thereby showing in what importance Abraham was held, as I have explained above (Genesis 5:12).
Indicating that Tzivon came upon his mother and bore Anoh. You might ask: How does Rashi know that Tzivon came upon his mother, Seir’s wife? Perhaps Seir, Tzivon’s father, came upon Tzivon’s wife and begat Anoh from her. And people thought Anoh was Tzivon’s son, but Anoh was in fact Seir’s son and Tzivon’s brother. The answer is: It is logical to attribute an act of corruption to one who is corrupt. And before we find that Tzivon was corrupt (Rashi, v. 2), as he came upon his daughterin-law, Anoh’s wife. But there is no reason to say that both [Anoh and Seir] were corrupt. You might object: And before, how did Rashi know that Tzivon was corrupt and came upon his daughter-in-law? Perhaps Anoh was the corrupt one and came upon his mother, Tzivon’s wife. The answer is: If so, there still would be two corrupt people—Anoh and Seir. And since we could rather attribute it all to Tzivon, we do so. (Re’m) Maharshal objects: Why should we consider two women corrupt—Anoh’s wife who was Tzivon’s daughter-in-law, and Seir’s wife who was Tzivon’s mother? [It is possible that Tzivon’s wife was the corrupt one in both incidents.] The answer is: Women are not called corrupt, because they are passive. The man, who does the act, is called corrupt. An alternative answer: Women can say they were forced to have relations. But a man cannot thereby exempt himself, since he is capable of having relations only if he is willing.
“No person has ever consulted me about a wound caused by a white mule and lived.” I.e., R. Chanina was a doctor, and said: “No one ever consulted me about a wound caused by a white mule and I gave him a cure.”
And these are the children of Tzivon: Aya and Ana; he is Ana, who found the Yemim in the wilderness. The word yemim is either the name of a nation that descended from primeval giants, 26 or it means mules. 27 As he was herding the donkeys of Tzivon his father. The significance of this incident depends on the interpretation of the word yemim . If Yemim are giants, the likely explanation is that they tried to steal the donkeys, and Ana stood up to them bravely, for which he became renowned. If they are mules, the statement that Ana found the yemim means that he invented them by crossbreeding donkeys and horses, either intentionally or by accident. The verse notes that this happened while he was herding donkeys.
ואלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה, “and these are the sons of Tzivon, Veayah and Veanah, The prefixes ו in the names “Ayah,” and “Anah,” are nothing unusual. Tzivon was the third son of Seir the Chori, and he sired numerous children. The Torah narrates that Anah had discovered the mules while pasturing his father’s flocks in the desert, because it wanted to distinguish between him and another Anah, his uncle, the brother of his father Tzivon. This Anah was the father-in- law of Esau.
אשר מצא את הימים, “who had discovered the mules.” These animals are what we know as mules. Anah discovered this by using his intelligence, succeeding in producing offspring through pairing two different species, i.e. the horse and the donkey. This is the only known example of mating two different species resulting in offspring. His achievement was considered a feat of wisdom, as he matched two species which appeared to him to have much in common genetically, and the product was supposed to combine the advantages of a horse and a donkey. Onkelos translates our verse as Anah “finding courage.” He surmises that a nation known as “yemim” attacked him, wanting to steal his donkeys, while he was alone in the desert. He succeeded in saving the donkeys from the attack of these people. The word מצא would have to be understood as in תמצא ידך לכל אויביך, (Psalms 21,9) “your hand is equal to all your enemies.” Alternately, what happened was that he found, i.e. encountered these “Yemim,” and was saved (miraculously) from their attack. His fame as a warrior was established henceforth.
“Who discovered the hot springs in the wilderness” [36:24]. One was called Anah. He was a descendant of Esau and was in the wilderness, herding cattle. He took a female horse and caused a donkey to mate with her and they produced a mule. Since he was a bastard, he thought to bring more bastards into the world among the animals. Therefore, the mules are called hot springs, because the fear of them is great among people. (Rashi, Genesis, 36:24.) Hizkuni asks a question. There were mules in the time of Isaac, since Rashi writes that Isaac’s mule was better than the silver and gold of Abimelech. (Rashi, Genesis, 26:13.) The explanation is that there were mules, but these mules were produced when a female horse mated with a donkey by themselves. However, Anah, the son of Esau, went and with his hands, caused a female horse to mate with a donkey. Therefore, the verse says that he brought many mules into the world. That is why no mule can ever have offspring, since the Holy One does not want that creatures should increase that God did not create, when He created the world. The blessing that God gave to all of His creatures did not apply to a creature combining two species. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 36:24.)
“These are the children of Tzivon: Aya and Ana; he is Ana, who found the yemim in the wilderness, as he was herding the donkeys of Tzivon his father” (Genesis 36:24). “These are the children of Tzivon: Aya..” “These are the children of Tzivon: Aya and Ana” – what did the verse see that led it to write Ana, Ana, twice? (Why is Ana listed among the brothers of Tzivon (Genesis 36:20) and also among his sons? (Etz Yosef). ) Were they two? Actually, there was one; however, Tzivon consorted with his mother and she bore Ana, and he became the son of Ana, son of Tzivon, and son of Se’ir. (Ana was listed among the sons of Se’ir because he was the son of Se’ir’s wife, but in actuality he was the son of Tzivon. The words “the son of Ana” appear to be out of place here. ) In any case, he was one. It is taught: Fire and mixed breeds (Animals that were crossbred.) were not created during the six days of Creation, but it entered His mind for them to be created. When were the mixed breeds created? It was in the days of Ana. That is what is written: “He is Ana, who found the yemim in the wilderness.” Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: Mules [hamyonas]. The Rabbis say: Half-breeds [himisu] – half donkey and half horse. These are the signs: If its ears are small, its mother is a horse and its father is a donkey; if they are large, its mother is a donkey and its father is a horse. Rabbi Mana would command those of the household of the Nasi that they should purchase those with the small ears, because their mothers are horses and their fathers are donkeys. What did Ana do? He brought a female donkey, crossed it with a horse, and a mule emerged. The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘I did not create anything that causes damage, but you created something that causes damage. As you live, I will create for you something that causes damage.’ What did He do? He brought a serpent, crossed it with a starred agama lizard, and a poisonous lizard resulted. A person never said that he was bitten by a rabid dog and he lived, by a poisonous lizard and he lived, or by a white mule and he lived. Fire: Rabbi Levi in the name of Rabbi Nezira: That light (The light that was created on the first day of Creation.) served for thirty-six hours, twelve on Shabbat eve, (Friday.) twelve on Shabbat night, and twelve on Shabbat. When the sun set on Shabbat night, the Holy One blessed be He sought to sequester the light, but He accorded honor to the Shabbat. That is what is written: “The Lord blessed the seventh day” (Genesis 2:3). With what did He bless it? With light. When the sun set on Shabbat night and the light began serving, (The light created on the first day began to light up the world even without the sun. ) everything began lauding the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “Under all the heavens they sing to Him” (This verse is often translated “Under the heavens He sends it forth [yishrehu],” but the midrash interprets the word yishrehu to mean “they sing to Him [yashiru lo].” ) (Job 37:3) – why? Because “His light is to the ends of the earth” (Job 37:3). When the sun set at the conclusion of Shabbat, darkness began to set in. Adam the first man became fearful, as it is written: “And I say: Darkness will conceal me” (Psalms 139:11). What did the Holy One blessed be He do for him? He prepared for him two flint stones, and [Adam] struck one against the other. Fire emerged and he recited a blessing over it. That is what is written: “Night is light for me” (Psalms 139:11). This is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, [who said]: Why do we recite a blessing on a candle at the conclusion of Shabbat? Because then was the beginning of its creation. Rav Huna in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: One recites a blessing over it even at the conclusion of Yom Kippur because the fire rested that entire day. (Since one is not permitted to use the fire on Yom Kippur, and once Yom Kippur is over one is permitted to use it, one appreciates fire and recites the blessing. )
You find likewise (that the expression sat also alludes to) the degeneracy of the descendants of Seir, since it is written: These are the sons of Seir the Horite, who sat on the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah (Gen. 36:20). However, Anah is elsewhere called the son of Zibeon: And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah (ibid., v. 24). We learn from this that Zibeon had sexual relations with his own mother, and conceived and begot Anah by her. Consequently, (Anah) was both (Zibeon’s) brother and his son. Later he had intercourse with his daughter-in-law, the wife of Anah, and Oholibamah was their child, as it is said: And these were the sons of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife (ibid., v. 14), and Esau took her as a wife. Inasmuch as they were all products of incestuous relations, Scripture mentions them only to disclose their degeneracy.
He then cited, “These are the sons of Tziv’on, Ayah and Anah — the same Anah who found the mules (yeimim) in the desert.” “The word yeimim is written missing a yud (ימם).” The concept here is that there is a certain kind of destructive spirit, Heaven spare us, that focuses in particular upon those guilty of immoral acts from which mamzeirim are produced (i.e., adulterous or incestuous relations bearing the penalty of excision). These spirits are called yeimim. It is written without a yud to indicate that they were created on the eve of the first Shabbos just at dusk (relating yeimim to yom — day; it is plural but missing the plural yud to indicate that it is doubtful to which day this creature belongs). The proper place of these destructive spirits is upon the high mountains, where no seed or tree can be planted. That barren region is their proper place and these are the strange creatures that Rabbi Yitzchak saw. Anah, mentioned in the verse above, once visited that mountain where these creatures adhered to him. Therefore, as the Sages tell us in Pesachim (54a), he himself gave birth to mamzeirim and that he also was the first one to graft different species and produce the mule (a hybrid of a horse and a donkey). The Zohar mentions in the continuation of that passage that all desolate mountains are their dwelling place, however, concerning those who engage in study while they travel it is written, “Hashem your shelter is at your right hand” (Tehillim 121:5). Nevertheless, a person should avoid places where there is no human habitation.
I shall now explain the meaning of the words: עד כי גדול מאד "until he was very great," in 26,13. Bereshit Rabbah 64,7 on that verse states that when people wanted to describe excessive wealth they used to describe it in terms of the silver and gold possessed by Avimelech. After Isaac had become rich, they described excessive wealth in terms of the dung of Isaac's mules. This seems a curious comparison. How can we assume that Avimelech's wealth did not even amount to the value of the dung of Isaac's mules? Another difficulty is the Midrash's comment on the words מצא את הימים, in Genesis 36,14. These yeymim are described by Bereshit Rabbah 82,15 as half-donkey and half-horse. Anah who crossbred horse and donkey to produce mules is severely criticized for interfering with G–d's plan of maintaining the purity of the species. How can we assume that Isaac a) kept or raised such animals, b) was the first one to crossbreed, seeing that the Torah reports this as something new much later and in Jacob's lifetime?
Because their terror (eimatam), etc.: It is referring to the mules from earlier. And he holds like the one in Pesachim (54a) that says that mules came to be from the days of Anah. And there, there is one who disagrees and holds that mules came to be from the days of creation. So the explanation of yemim (in Genesis 36:24), according to him, is like the Targum of Onkelos, "mighty men."
Be fruitful and multiply: And mules were not included in [this] blessing, as we say (Genesis 36:24), "he is Anah, who found the mules in the wilderness;" and therefore, they do not reproduce and multiply in the world. And even according to Rabbi Yose - who concludes in Chapter Makom She'nahagu, that on the night after the first Shabbat, Adam brought two beasts and cross-breeded them, and from them came the mule - it is not difficult, [since] it had previously been said, "be fruitful and multiply" [and the mule had already been excluded].
פרו ורבו, “be fruitful and multiply!” this blessing did not include mules, as we know from the Torah’s cryptic report that a certain man by the name of Anah had made horses and donkeys mate as a result of which a new species called mules came into being. (Genesis 36,24) (after having cross bred horses and she donkeys) “this is Anah who found the mules in the desert which had been the result of horses and asses being crossbred.” This is the reason why mules do not reproduce their species. According to our sages, he did so, seeing that he himself was a bastard as related in the beginning of the same verse. He had slept with his mother. Even according to the opinion of Rabbi Yossi, in the Talmud tractate Pessachim folio 54, who claims that immediately after the first Sabbath Adam crossbred two mammals, as a resulted of which the species mules came into existence there is no inconsistency here as the blessing to be fruitful and to multiply had been given to man prior to the first Sabbath.
ביום השלישי וישא אברהם, the letter ו is something additional, a phenomenon we encounter frequently, such as in Genesis 36,24 ואלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה. The Torah could also have written ביום השלישי נשא אברהם את עיניו, “on the third day Avraham raised his eyes.” (using the ordinary past tense, instead of the future tense with the vav hahipuch. It is possible to justify the use of the form with the letter ו by understanding this verse as a continuation of the previous verse and reading that one as if it had been written: וילך אל המקום ביום השלישי, “he went (arrived) to the place on the third day.” At that time he raised his eyes in the direction of the site in question, i.e. Jerusalem. In other words, once Avraham had entered the general area known as ארץ המוריה, he raised his eyes to look for the specific site G’d must have had in mind. At any rate, he did not yet know which mountain G’d had chosen for him to erect the altar on which to sacrifice Yitzchok. According to Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 31 and other Midrashim, the words וירא את המקום מרחוק refer to Avraham actually seeing the mountain in question. He identified it as he saw a column of fire on that mountain. He asked his son if he saw anything specific on any of the mountains, to which Yitzchok replied that he saw a column of fire on one of the mountains. When Avraham repeated the same question to Ishmael and Eliezer previously described as נעריו, his lads, they both answered in the negative. Upon hearing that both of these men did not notice anything out of the ordinary, he told them to remain near the donkey which could also not see anything unusual. שבו לכם עם החמור, with those who are like donkeys.
Ve-‘Efer ve-Yish‘i (Epher and Ishi). The vav of ve-‘Efer is like the vav of ve-Ayyah va-‘Anah (=Aiah and Anah; Gen 36:24).
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ANAH: DISHON AND OHOLIBAMAH THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH. Such is the way of Scripture when referring to daughters, as in the expression, and his daughter Dinah. (Further, 46:15.) Now this Anah was the fourth son of Se’ir the Horite, enumerated above, (Verse 20 here.) after Zibeon his brother, for the section enumerates seven sons (Verses 20-21 here.) of Se’ir the Horite in the order of their birth. This Anah had another son also called by the name Dishon as was his uncle, (Verse 21 here.) and he had a daughter called Oholibamah, which was also the name of her relative, the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon. (Verse 2 here.) This is why Scripture says concerning Esau’s wife, Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, (Verse 2 here.) in order to relate that she was the daughter of Anah who had found the mules, and granddaughter of Zibeon, not Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the son of Se’ir the Horite, Zibeon’s brother. However, in the opinion of some of our Rabbis (Pesachim 54a.) there is in this entire section only one man called Anah, and he was Zibeon’s son. (Verse 24 here.) Since Zibeon committed incest with his mother, the wife of Se’ir the Horite, Scripture thus enumerates Anah among Se’ir the Horite’s sons (Verse 20 here.) because people considered him as Se’ir’s son and called him “Anah the son of Se’ir,” and he grew up among his sons because Se’ir thought he was his son. Scripture, however, enumerates him a second time as Zibeon’s son (Verse 24 here.) in keeping with the true facts. This is the interpretation of the symbolizing interpreters as is mentioned in Tractate Pesachim, (Pesachim 54a.) but it is not the consensus of opinion in the Gemara and is not at all the plain meaning of Scripture.
AND ON THE MORROW ‘V’HANOTHAR’ (AND THAT WHICH REMAINETH) OF IT SHALL BE EATEN. “The letter vav [in the word v’hanothar — ‘and’ that which remaineth] is redundant [thus the meaning of the verse is: “and on the morrow, that which remaineth of it shall be eaten”]. There are many examples of this in Scripture, such as: and these are the children of Zibeon: ‘v’ayah’ (and Ajah) and Anah. (Genesis 36:24. The vav in v’ayah (“and” Ajah) is redundant. See in Vol. I, p. 440.) So also: to give ‘v’kodesh’ (‘and’ the Sanctuary) and the host to be trampled upon.” (Daniel 8:13. The vav in v’kodesh (“and” the Sanctuary) is here redundant.) This is Rashi’s language, and so did Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra interpret the verse. In my opinion the meaning of the verse is as follows: Since He said, it shall be eaten on the day that he offereth his offering, and on the morrow, this might imply that it is a commandment that it [the peace-offering] be eaten in two days, [namely] that he should eat part of it on the first day, and should leave part of it to be eaten on the morrow. Therefore He explained again, ‘and’ that which remaineth is to be eaten on the first day and also on the morrow [if by chance it was not all eaten on the first day]. But he is not to leave some over intentionally, nor is he permitted to leave it all over to be eaten on the second day. Rather, it is a commandment that he should eat it on the first day, and that which is left over by chance, should be eaten on the morrow previously mentioned. This matter we have learned from the words of our Rabbis, who have said in the Torath Kohanim: (Torath Kohanim, Tzav 12:11-12.) “On the day that he offereth it, shall it be eaten. It is a commandment that it be eaten thereof during the first day. I might think that he is commanded to eat the whole of it; Scripture therefore says, and on the morrow. I might then think that it is a commandment to eat it in two days; Scripture therefore states, and that which remaineth — if it remains, it remains [i.e., it may still be eaten]. If [we are to go by the expression] and that which remaineth, I might think that if he left it all over for the second day it is invalid [since that does not come under the term “remaineth” which indicates only a part thereof]; Scripture therefore says [that which remaineth of it] shall be eaten, even all of it.” And even if you hold the vav in v’hanothar (and that which remaineth) to be redundant, [as Rashi explained], the verse can also be explained to mean: “and on the morrow that which remained of it [from the first day] may be eaten,” but not that he is to leave it over intentionally. But I do not know why Rashi held the vav of the verse, to give ‘v’kodesh’ (‘and’ the Sanctuary) and the host to be trampled upon (Daniel 8:13. The vav in v’kodesh (“and” the Sanctuary) is here redundant.) to be redundant, since the meaning of the verse is that [the angel] is asking: “How long shall the transgression give appalment, and how long shall the Sanctuary and the host be trampled underfoot?” (The vav in v’kodesh thus stands for the repetition of the phrase ad mathai (how long), and is therefore not redundant.)
VAYIKACH KORACH’ (AND KORACH TOOK). “This section is explained in a beautiful way in the Midrash of Rabbi Tanchuma. (The Rabbis of the Talmud composed two great exegetical commentaries on the Bible, whose aim was to spread moral, ethical and religious teachings, as they are derived from a study of the Scriptures. These are the Midrash Rabbah and Midrash Tanchuma, both works of Palestinian Rabbis. The Midrash Rabbah is on the Five Books of Moses and the five Scrolls. As its name Rabbah (Great), indicates, it is the largest homiletical work of the Rabbis of the Talmud. Next in importance is the Midrash Tanchuma on the Five Books of Moses, composed by Rabbi Tanchuma ben Abba, of the fourth century of the Common Era. This Midrash was very popular, and Rashi relies upon it for a great deal of Agadic material, which he often incorporates into his commentary. On the relationship of the Midrash Tanchuma to Midrash Yelamdeinu, see Volume II, Seder Bo, p. 131, Note 196.) Vayikach Korach — he betook himself (Since the object of the verb [vayikach — “and he took”] is not mentioned in the verse, Rashi explains that it is reflexive in meaning, referring to Korach himself: “Korach betook himself to one side etc.” Ramban suggests a number of other possible interpretations.) to one side in order to separate himself from the [rest of the] congregation so that he could contend for the priesthood [which Moses had conferred upon Aaron and his sons, and Korach claimed that it belonged to all Israel]. This is [also] Onkelos’ intention in translating [the word vayikach as] v’ithpleig — ‘he separated himself’ from the congregation to persist in his contention. Similarly, Why ‘yikachacha’ thy heart? (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) means: [Why does your heart] ‘carry you away’ to separate yourself from the rest of the people?” But the opinion of the Midrash [Tanchuma quoted further on] is not in accordance with the Rabbi’s [i.e., Rashi’s] interpretation, (Ramban understood Rashi’s comment as meaning that Korach betook himself physically and left his tent, setting up his quarters outside the camp in order to gather people together to rally to him in his dispute with Moses. In Ramban’s opinion, however, the Midrash clearly means that Korach’s heart stirred him up to revolt (Mizrachi), but not that he betook himself elsewhere physically. See also my Hebrew commentary, pp. 254-255.) for the Rabbis have said there: “The term vayikach always denotes ‘division,’ [and here it means] that his heart took control of him, in a similar manner to that which it says, Why ‘yikachacha’ thy heart?” (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) The verse thus does not mean to say that Korach betook himself [physically] to one side [of the camp]. Similarly, Why ‘yikachacha’ thy heart? (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) does not mean that it [your heart] takes you to one side to separate yourself [physically] from other people. Instead, the meaning of the [interpretation of the] Midrash on [the phrase] Vayikach Korach is that he took counsel in his heart to do that which [Scripture] relates [subsequently], for [the term] “taking” applies also to counsel and thought. Similarly, Why ‘yikachacha’ thy heart? (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) means: “What thought does your heart lead you to, that you should be thinking secretly: ‘There is no justice nor Judge,’ and you do not reveal it? Or, and why do thine eyes wink?, (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) for one can notice from your winkings that you deny G-d’s justice, but you do not utter [that belief] openly, but [instead] you complain [of injustice], as one who conceals his intent.” Eliphaz said this to Job before Job explained his thoughts in a clearly-expressed statement, [saying] that the Creator’s concern does not extend to the individuals of the lower beings [of each species]. Therefore Eliphaz said to Job: And thou sayest: ‘What doth G-d know? Can He judge through the dark cloud?’ (Job 22:13.) This is the true meaning of that reply [of Eliphaz to Job: Why ‘yikachacha’ thy heart? and why do thine eyes wink? (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) — as is apparent] to one who considers it carefully. Similarly we find the term “taking” used of “thinking”: ‘k’chu’ (take) my instruction; (Proverbs, 8:10. This clearly cannot refer to taking physically, but means: “think of my instruction and guide your conduct accordingly.”) nor ‘kachath’ (to take) instruction. (Jeremiah 17:23.) The Rabbis have further said in the Midrash: (Bamidmar Rabbah 18:13.) “Scripture does not state here: And Korach ‘quarelled,’ or ‘spoke,’ or ‘commanded,’ but it says vayikach (and he took). What did he take? He did not take anything; rather, it was his heart that took [control of] him, just as Scripture says, Why doth thy heart take thee?” (Job 15:12. These are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, when criticizing Job for lack of trust in G-d.) This [Midrash] coincides with what I have explained. And Onkelos who translated: [vayikach as] v’ithpleig (“and he separated himself”) explained the [expression according to its] general meaning, not according to its literal sense, as is his habit in many places. Thus also he translated [the expression] about ‘d’var’ (the matter of) Korach (Further, 17:14.) as “about ‘the strife’ of Korach,” while ‘bi’dvar’ (the matter of) Balaam (Ibid., 31:16.) he translated as “through ‘the counsel’ of Balaam,” because he mentions the [whole] subject-matter in his translation [rather than the literal meaning, as illustrated by the change in the translation of the word d’var in the above example]. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “And Korach took [means he took] ‘men,’ the phrase being elliptical, as in: chamor lechem (I Samuel 16:20.) [literally: ‘an ass of bread,’ which means: ‘an ass laden with bread’].” Others (This interpretation I have found in the commentary of Chizkuni. See Genesis, Vol. I p. 298, Note 109, where the same expression “Others” also refers to Chizkuni.) explain that [the word] v’dathan (and Dathan) [in the phrase: And Korach took … and Dathan] is like the verse, And these are the children of Zibeon: ‘and’ Ajah, and Anah (Genesis 36:24. See Vol. I, p. 440.) [where the letter vav in the word v’ayah is redundant, and here too the vav in v’dathan is redundant], and its correct meaning is thus: “and Korach took Dathan and Abiram” [and they rose up before Moses]. But in my opinion there is no need for [these interpretations], for it is quite correct for the [Sacred] Language to say: “and Korach took and Dathan, and they rose, (Verse 2.) and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron,” (Verse 3.) because the [word] “taking” always occurs at the beginning of an event, being an expression of taking action to [do] that deed. Similarly, And Absalom in his lifetime had ‘taken’ and reared up for himself the pillar (II Samuel 18:18.) [which means that “he bestirred himself” to set up the pillar]. And if you prefer to explain that the term “taking” refers to the object mentioned subsequently, [so that the verse quoted means]: “and Absalom took the pillar and reared it up for himself in his lifetime” — you may likewise explain [our phrase] “and Korach took” [as referring to] the men of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty, (Verse 2.) and they rose up before Moses, and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron. (Verse 3.) Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that this incident [of Korach’s rebellion] happened in the wilderness of Sinai when the firstborns were exchanged [for the Levites] (Above, 3:44-51.) and the Levites were separated [to do the Divine service in the Tent of Meeting], (Ibid., 8:5-22.) for [some] Israelites thought that Moses our master did this of his own accord so that he could bestow greatness upon his brother [Aaron] and on the children of Kohath who were his relatives, (Kohath was Moses’ grandfather. Since Kohath had three other sons beside Amram — namely, Itzhar, Hebron, and Uzziel (above, 3:19) — some people thought that Moses gave the Kohathites special distinction in the Tabernacle service of his own accord (see above, Chapter 4:1-20) because they were his relatives. In actual fact, of course, he did everything by Divine command (see above, 3:40, 4:1 and 8:5).) and on all the Levites, since they were of his family. The Levites [nevertheless] joined the conspiracy against him [Moses] because they were given to Aaron and to his sons, (Above, 8:19.) and Dathan and Abiram [who were of the tribe of Reuben] joined in the rebellion because Moses took away the right of the firstborn from their ancestor Reuben [and gave it to Joseph]. (See (Genesis), Vol. I, pp. 570-572. Here the reference is to the fact that Moses considered Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Menasheh, as two separate tribes, and Dathan and Abiram claimed that this distinction should have been conferred upon Reuben the firstborn.) Korach too was a firstborn. (Exodus 6:21 — And the sons of Itzhar: Korach, and Nepheg, and Zichri. — Now before the Tabernacle was set up, the service of the offerings was performed by any of the firstborn in Israel (Zebachim 112b), but afterwards it was performed only by priests. As a firstborn, Korach was thus personally amongst those deprived of his prerogative under the new order established by Moses.) [Thus far are Ibn Ezra’s comments.] Now all this is based on the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra [himself] who has said in many places, as it pleases him, that there is no strict chronological order in the [narrative of the] Torah, but I have already written (In (Exodus), Vol. II, pp. 252, 419, and in Leviticus 8:2. Here too, Ramban’s objection is that according to Ibn Ezra the rebellion of Korach took place when Israel was still encamped in the wilderness of Sinai although their departure from there has already been recorded long ago (above, 10:12)! Since then there had already been many other stages in their journey through the desert (see e.g. above, 11:35, 12:16)!) that in my opinion the whole Torah follows the chronological sequence, except for those places where Scripture [itself] expressly states the “earlier” and the “later,” (I.e., if the verses clearly state the dates. See, for example, the section commencing above in Chapter 9, where the date given is clearly before the date of the previous chapters (see Chapter 1, Verse 1).) and even then it is [only changed] for a particular purpose and for good reason. But this matter [i.e., the rebellion of Korach] happened in the wilderness of Paran, (Above, 12:16.) in Kadesh-barnea, (Deuteronomy 1:19. It is from Kadesh-barnea that they sent the spies, as related in the Book of Deuteronomy, ibid.) after the incident of the spies [and not, as Ibn Ezra wrote, before the sending of the spies]. A correct interpretation by way of homiletic exposition is that Korach became angry because of the status of prince [of the Kohathites] (Above, 3:30.) bestowed [by Moses] upon Elizaphan, as our Rabbis have said, (Said Korach: “My grandfather Kohath had four sons: Amram, Itzhar, Hebron and Uzziel (Exodus 6:18). The two sons of Amram, the eldest, namely Moses and Aaron, assumed the royalty and the priesthood. Who is entitled to the next rank — the prince of the Kohathites — if not I, the eldest of the second son of Kohath, Itzhar? And yet he [i.e., Moses] went and appointed Elizaphan, whose father was Uzziel, the youngest son of my grandfather!” (Tanchuma Korach 1, mentioned by Rashi).) and he was also jealous of Aaron, as it is said, and seek ye the priesthood also! (Further, Verse 10.) Dathan and Abiram [who were of the tribe of Reuben] were attracted to Korach, but not because of the [loss of their] birthright, for it was their father Jacob who had deprived Reuben of it and given it to Joseph; (Genesis 48:5.) however, they too, voiced their complaint [by saying that Moses had taken the people out of Egypt] to kill us in the wilderness, (Further, Verse 13.) and moreover thou hast not brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey. (Ibid., Verse 14.) Now as long as Israel was in the wilderness of Sinai no evil happening befell them, for even after the incident of the [golden] calf, which was a serious and well-known sin, those who died [as a punishment] were few, and the people were saved by Moses’ prayer when he fell down before the Eternal the forty days and forty nights. (Deuteronomy 9:25.) Thus they loved Moses as [they loved] themselves, and they obeyed him, so that had anybody rebelled against Moses at that time, the people would have stoned him. Therefore Korach endured the greatness of Aaron [when he was appointed High Priest], and the firstborns accepted [without protest] the high status of the Levites, and all [the other] acts of Moses. But when they came to the wilderness of Paran (Above, 12:16.) and [some people] were burnt in Taberah, (Above, 11:3.) and many died in Kibroth-hattaavah, (Ibid., Verse 34.) and when after sinning [in the matter of] the spies Moses did not pray on their behalf, (See Ramban above, 14:17 (towards the end) who explains the reason for this.) so that the decree against them was thus not annulled, and the princes of all the tribes died by the plague before the Eternal (Ibid., Verse 37.) and it was decreed that the whole people would be consumed in the wilderness and there they shall die, (Ibid., Verse 35.) then the mood of the whole people became embittered, and they said in their hearts that mishaps occur to them through Moses’ words. Therefore Korach found it an opportune occasion to contest Moses’ deeds, thinking that the people would [readily] listen to him. This was the intention of [the statement of Dathan and Abiram that Moses had taken the people out of Egypt] to kill us in the wilderness, (Further, Verse 13.) meaning: “Behold, you have brought us to this place and you have not fulfilled that which you promised to give us, [namely to take us to] a land flowing with milk and honey, (Ibid., Verse 14.) for you have not given us any inheritance at all; instead we will die in the wilderness and be wiped out there, for our children will also never come out of the wilderness, and that which you promised our children will also not be fulfilled, just as it did not come to realization with respect to their parents.” This then was the reason why they murmured particularly at this juncture immediately after the [Divine] decree because of the spies. It is likely that all those who assembled [against Moses] were firstborns, and therefore they were annoyed about the priesthood [which was taken away from them], (See Note 22 above.) and that is why Moses told them to take censers [and put incense upon them (Further, Verses 6-7.) as they used formerly to do, and it would become clear thereby whether G-d preferred them or the priests.
Why are their names called - of the mules - yemim, as it is written (Genesis 36:24), "who found the yemim."
and Azrikam - Heb. וְאֶת וְאֶת, similar to (Gen. 36:24): “and Aiah and Anah (וְאַיָּה וְעַנָה),” and similarly, (Ps. 76:7): “and chariot and horse (וָרֶכֶב וָסוּס) were stunned.”
It is good to hope in stillness. The vav of וְיָחִיל is superfluous just like the vav of “וְאַיָּה וַעֲנָה” (Bereishis 36:24. ) [is superfluous in וְאַיָּה. It is good for man to hope, and remain silent and wait for God’s salvation.
וממחרת והנותר ממנו AND ON THE MORROW ALSO THE REMAINDER OF IT — i. e. what remained on the first day, יאכל MAY BE EATEN; — this ו (that of והנותר) is redundant (the text being equivalent to וממחרת הנותר ממנו יאכל); there are many similar examples in Scripture: (Genesis 36:24) “And these are the sons of Zibean: And Ajah (ואיה) and Anah”; (Daniel 8:13): “to give and the Sanctuary (וקדש) and the host to be trampled under foot”.
spears Heb. וְהָרְמָחִים. The “vav” is superfluous, like the “vav” of (Gen. 36: 24): “And these are the sons of Zibeon: Aiah (וְאַיָה) and Anah.”
chariot and horse were stunned Heb. ורכב וסוס. The “vav” of ורכב is superfluous, as (Gen. 36: 24): “These are the sons of Ziv’on: Ayyah (ואיה) and Anah.” The “vav” of ואיה is superfluous.
Because they will lay siege to the city, etc. It is not the siege that causes the starvation which leads to people eating the flesh of their sons. Rather, the siege causes torment and agony of starvation that leads to people eating the flesh of their sons. Thus the וי"ו of ובמצוק is superfluous like the וי"ו of (Bereishis 36:24), “[These are the sons of Tzivon:] (and) Ayoh and Anoh (ואיה וענה).”
And not because his power is strong. ולא מן קדם דחיליה תקיף means “but not because he has great strength.” Rashi attributes the explanation to Rabbi Yaakov rather than to Onkelos only as regards the meaning of ושלחתי את ידי , who explained it as, “for once I send forth My Hand and strike [Egypt]” he will immediately send you out. The Re”m writes: “But [according to this,] I do not know how to explain the ו of אחרי כן ישלח אתכם (And then he will send you out).” It would seem the answer is: The ו is [superfluous] like the ו in (Bereishis 36:24): ואלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה (And these are the children of Tziv’on: and Ayah and Anah).
ויקח קרח, “Korach took, etc.” According to Nachmanides the word ויקח, -seeing that the Torah does not spell out what it was that Korach took- refers to Korach “consulting” with his heart to embark on a certain course of action, the details of which the Torah will reveal shortly. The root לקח may be employed when speaking of “taking” advice, etc. It also occurs in Scripture in the context of embarking on a good and wholesome plan, as in Job 15,12 מה יקחך לבך, “How your heart has carried you away!” Another example of the use of that word in such a context is Proverbs 8,10 קחו מוסרי ואל כסף, “accept my discipline instead of silver!” Ibn Ezra explains the word ויקח as an abbreviated version of “Korach took for himself a number of men, etc.” Some commentators believe that the predicate of the words ויקח קרח is Datan and Aviram and that the letter ו in ודתן , is extraneous. We encounter something analogous in Genesis 36,24 ואיה וענה where there also appears no need for the letter ו in the word ואיה. The meaning of the phrase in our verse then would be ויקח קרח דתן ואבירם, “Korach took Datan and Aviram.” Ibn Ezra, in trying to fix the point in time when Korach’s rebellion took place, claims that it occurred in the desert of Sinai [way before the debacle with the spies and the resultant lack of a future for his generation. Ed.] The flashpoint for the rebellion was the exchange of the privileges formerly accorded to the firstborn for the Levites. The rebels believed that Moses had acted high-handedly and that G’d had not initiated this switch. They believed that what had occurred was an act of nepotism on the part of Moses who wanted to fill the most coveted positions in the nation with members of his immediate family. They included not only his brother and nephews, but even the sons of Kehat, and the Levites in general as they were members of his tribe. Datan and Aviram used this as a pretext for rebelling, seeing that they, as members of the tribe of Reuven, had both already been deprived of their status as “firstborns,” and the tribe of Joseph had i.e. members of that tribe, had been given this preferred status. Perhaps they thought that Joshua, who was Moses’ personal valet and a member of the tribe of Ephrayim, whose own status within the tribe of Joseph had already been amended through his being nominated as the senior of Joseph’s sons by his grandfather Yaakov, although he was chronologically the junior, had been promoted as an arbitrary act by Moses. The Levites, generally, resented that only Moses’ immediate family had been accorded the status of priests, not the whole tribe. Nachmanides accuses Ibn Ezra of speculating, seeing that he cited no sources to support his theory. He does not accept the theory that the Torah reports events other than in chronological order, unless, of course the Torah itself, by giving a date for a happening, draws our attention to the fact that it was not recorded in chronological order, such as the events in Numbers 9,1 which clearly occurred earlier than the count described in Numbers chapter 1-2.
Hizkuni asks a question. There were mules in the time of Isaac, since Rashi writes that Isaac’s mule was better than the silver and gold of Abimelech. (Rashi, Genesis, 26:13.) The explanation is that there were mules, but these mules were produced when a female horse mated with a donkey by themselves. However, Anah, the son of Esau, went and with his hands, caused a female horse to mate with a donkey. Therefore, the verse says that he brought many mules into the world. That is why no mule can ever have offspring, since the Holy One does not want that creatures should increase that God did not create, when He created the world. The blessing that God gave to all of His creatures did not apply to a creature combining two species. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 36:24.)
Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai recited this verse about him: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah” (Genesis 36:20), and it is written: “And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah” (Genesis 36:24). The first verse portrays Zibeon and Anah as brothers, while the second states that they are father and son. Rather, this teaches that Zibeon engaged in sexual intercourse with his mother and begot Anah, so that he was both Anah’s father and his brother. From the fact that the first verse equates Zibeon and Anah by referring to both of them as Seir’s sons despite Anah being a grandson of Seir, it is clear that grandchildren are equal to children, contrary to the Sadducees’ assertion.
The Gemara interrupts the recounting of the baraita and questions Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai’s inference: But perhaps there were two people named Anah, so that one Anah was Zibeon’s son, and the other his brother? Rabba said: I will state a matter that even King Shapur did not state. And who is this King Shapur? This cannot be a reference to Shapur, king of Persia; rather, it must be a moniker for someone else. He is Shmuel, whose legal rulings were accepted by the public like the edicts of a king by his subjects. Some state a different version, that it was Rav Pappa who said: I will state a matter that even King Shapur did not state. And who is this King Shapur? He is Rabba. The verse goes on to state: “This is Anah” (Genesis 36:24), indicating that he is the same Anah mentioned initially, earlier in the verse. Accordingly, there was only one Anah, who was both Zibeon’s brother and Zibeon’s son.
Apropos white mules, which were likened to the Angel of Death, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Why are the mules called yemim (see Genesis 36:24)? It is because their terror [eimatam] is cast over all creatures, as Rabbi Ḥanina says: In all my days, no man has asked me about a wound caused him by a white mule and survived, indicating that they are extremely dangerous. The Gemara asks: But haven’t we seen that some people survive after being wounded by a white mule? The Gemara answers: Say instead, no man has asked me about a wound caused him by a mule and the wound healed. The Gemara asks: But haven’t we seen that such wounds heal? The Gemara answers: The wound that we say does not heal is one caused by a mule the top of whose legs are white.
Fire and hybrids were not created in the six days of Creation but they were in the Divine plan of the six days of Creation (Tosephta Berakhot 5:31, as reason for the benediction over fire as will be explained later. In the Tosephta, R. Yose disagrees and says the fire of hell was created on the Second Day; in the opinion of the Babli (Pesaḥim 54a) hell and its fire precede the Creation. The Yerushalmi takes no position on this. The text of this and the following two sections are also in Bereshit rabba 82(17); there is a parallel in Babli Pesaḥim 54a. As is normal in the Talmudim, a proposition of subjects A B is discussed in order B A.) . Hybrids (Gen.36:24): “These are the sons of Ẓiv‘on, Ayyah and Anah. He is the Anah who invented the yemim in the prairie.” What is yemim? Rebbi Yehudah (Son of Rebbi Simon, an Amora of the third/fourth generation in Galilee, known as preacher.) ben Simon said ἡμίονος (“Half she-ass, mule”) and the rabbis say ἥμισυς (“half”), half horse and half donkey. These (This and the following sentence are redundant. The sentences are copied here from Kil’aim 8:3. The reading “R. Jonah” is from the Venice print in Kil’aim, the Rome manuscript here, and Bereshit rabba. There is no Amora who is called Rebbi Jehudah (reading of the Venice print and Leyden ms.) without mention of his father’s name. In the Babli (Ḥullin79a), the criterion is ascribed to Rav Papa, fifth generation Babylonian Amora.) are its signs: Rebbi Jonah says, if it has small ears, its mother is a horse and its father a donkey. If they are large, its mother is a donkey and its father a horse. Rebbi Mana ordered those of the patriarch’s estate: If you want to buy a mule (Latin mulus,i, m. “mule”.) , you should buy one with small ears whose mother is a horse and whose father is a donkey.
Rather, the void of Gehenna was created before the world was created, and its fire was created only on the second day of the week. And the thought arose in God’s mind to create our fire on Shabbat eve; however, it was not actually created until the conclusion of Shabbat, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: The thoughts of two phenomena arose in God’s mind on Shabbat eve, but were not actually created until the conclusion of Shabbat. At the conclusion of Shabbat, the Holy One, Blessed be He, granted Adam, the first man, creative knowledge similar to divine knowledge, and he brought two rocks and rubbed them against each other, and the first fire emerged from them. Adam also brought two animals, a female horse and a male donkey, and mated them with each other, and the resultant offspring that emerged from them was a mule. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel disagrees and says that the first mule was in the days of Anah, as it is stated: “And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah; this is Anah who found the mules in the wilderness, as he fed the donkeys of Zibeon his father” (Genesis 36:24).
The interpreters of Torah symbolism [ḥamurot] would say: Anah was the product of an incestuous relationship, and as a result he was spiritually unfit to produce offspring. Therefore, he brought an example of unfitness, i.e., an animal physically unfit to produce offspring, into the world, as it is stated: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan, and Shoval, and Zibeon, and Anah” (Genesis 36:20). And it is also stated: “And these are the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah” (Genesis 36:24). One verse describes both Anah and Zibeon as sons of Seir, meaning that they are brothers, while the other verse describes Anah as Zibeon’s son. Rather, this teaches that Zibeon cohabited with his mother, the wife of Seir, and fathered Anah from her. He is called Seir’s son although in fact he was the offspring of Seir’s son and Seir’s wife.
The sons of Lotan: Hori and Homam; and Lotan’s sister was Timna.
These are the sons of Tzivon: Ayoh and Anoh. He is the same Anoh who found the mules [mighty ones] in the desert while tending the donkeys for his father, Tzivon.
And these are the sons of Sebeon, Aja and Anah: he is Anah who coupled the onagers with the she--asses, and after a time found mules which had come forth from them, when he was tending the asses of Sebeon his father.
| וְאֵ֥לֶּה בְנֵֽי־עֲנָ֖ה דִּשֹׁ֑ן וְאׇהֳלִיבָמָ֖ה בַּת־עֲנָֽה׃ | 25 P | The children of Anah were these: Dishon and Anah’s daughter Oholibamah. |
ואלה בני ענה, “and these are the offspring of Anah:” even though the verse mentions both בני ענה as well as בת ענה they are the same person.
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ANAH: DISHON AND OHOLIBAMAH THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH. Anah the father of Oholibamah is not the same Anah mentioned in the first part of our verse, (If they are one and the same person Scripture should have read: And these are the children of Anah: Dishon and Oholibamah.) because if he is, there would be no need to mention him again. He is rather to be identified with the Anah mentioned in the preceding verse. (Anah the son of Zibeon mentioned in verse 24. The Anah mentioned in the first part of our verse is Anah the brother of Zibeon mentioned in verse 20. Thus Oholibamah was Zibeon’s granddaughter (Krinsky). Cf. I.E.’s comments on verse 2.)
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ANAH: DISHON AND OHOLIBAMAH THE DAUGHTER OF ANAH. Such is the way of Scripture when referring to daughters, as in the expression, and his daughter Dinah. (Further, 46:15.) Now this Anah was the fourth son of Se’ir the Horite, enumerated above, (Verse 20 here.) after Zibeon his brother, for the section enumerates seven sons (Verses 20-21 here.) of Se’ir the Horite in the order of their birth. This Anah had another son also called by the name Dishon as was his uncle, (Verse 21 here.) and he had a daughter called Oholibamah, which was also the name of her relative, the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon. (Verse 2 here.) This is why Scripture says concerning Esau’s wife, Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, (Verse 2 here.) in order to relate that she was the daughter of Anah who had found the mules, and granddaughter of Zibeon, not Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the son of Se’ir the Horite, Zibeon’s brother. However, in the opinion of some of our Rabbis (Pesachim 54a.) there is in this entire section only one man called Anah, and he was Zibeon’s son. (Verse 24 here.) Since Zibeon committed incest with his mother, the wife of Se’ir the Horite, Scripture thus enumerates Anah among Se’ir the Horite’s sons (Verse 20 here.) because people considered him as Se’ir’s son and called him “Anah the son of Se’ir,” and he grew up among his sons because Se’ir thought he was his son. Scripture, however, enumerates him a second time as Zibeon’s son (Verse 24 here.) in keeping with the true facts. This is the interpretation of the symbolizing interpreters as is mentioned in Tractate Pesachim, (Pesachim 54a.) but it is not the consensus of opinion in the Gemara and is not at all the plain meaning of Scripture.
And these are the children of Ana: Dishon and a girl, Oholivama, daughter of Ana. She is mentioned because she was Esau’s wife. 28
ואלה בני ענה, דישון ואהלבימה בת ענה, “this is the offspring of Anah; Dishon and Oholivamah daughter of Anah.” This is the way the Bible lists names of girls, as for instance in Genesis 46,15 ואת דינה בתו, “and his daughter Dinah.” This Anah was the fourth son of Seir, being a brother of Tzivon; he is listed after Tzivon, as they are listed in order of their prominence, not their ages. He had another son, named Dishon, the same name as that of his uncle, and this son had a daughter whose name was Oholivamah, the same name as her relative the Oholivamah who was a daughter of Anah, son of Tzivon. In order to avoid confusion, the Torah writes in connection with Oholivamah the wife of Esau, that she was the daughter of Anah who was the son of Tzivon, seeing that she had been the daughter of the Anah who had discovered the mules. In other words, she was a granddaughter of Tzivon. She was not the Oholivamah who was the daughter of Anah, who was the son of Seir the Chivi, a brother of Tzivon. Ibn Ezra writes that “Oholivamah the daughter of Anah,” does not refer to the Anah mentioned at the end of the verse (24 as the father of Oholivamah), for if it had been, there would have been no reason to mention him once more. He must therefore be the one mentioned at the end of the first verse, and there was only one Oholivamah. Our sages explain that there was only one man called Anah, the result of his father Tzivon having slept with his mother. This Anah was raised in the house of Seir the Chori together with his other sons. This is why he is enumerated together with the sons of Tzivon, seeing he was his son. Rabbeinu Tam believes that Anah was a woman and proves it from the line “Oholivamah, daughter of Anah” (verse 13). Anah herself was a daughter of Tzivon. As to the apparent contradiction, seeing the Torah writes: "הוא ענה" which means “he is the Anah, etc.;” this means that she inherited part of Seir’s estate together with Tzivon, her uncle’s other sons. (compare Talmud Baba Batra 116) Rashi claims that the reason why Oholivamah is described as the daughter of Anah was because Anah slept with his mother the wife of Tzivon and that he sired Oholivamah from that union. This is why she was referred to as “the daughter of Anah.and the daughter of Tzivon.”
These are the children of Anoh: Dishon, and Oholivomoh the daughter of Anoh.
And these are the children of Anah: Dishon; and Ahalibama was the daughter of Anah.
| וְאֵ֖לֶּה בְּנֵ֣י דִישָׁ֑ן חֶמְדָּ֥ן וְאֶשְׁבָּ֖ן וְיִתְרָ֥ן וּכְרָֽן׃ | 26 P | The sons of Dishon (Dishon Heb. Dishan; but cf. vv. 21, 25, 28, and 30, and 1 Chron. 1.41.) were these: Hemdan, Eshban, Ithran, and Cheran. |
Heb. Dishan; but cf. vv. 21, 25, 28, and 30, and 1 Chron. 1.41.
ואלה בני דישן, “these are the sons of Dishan, etc.” This is the same Dishan mentioned earlier in verse 21, the fifth son of Seir HaChori. Sometimes the Torah spells his name דישון; other times it spells the name דישן. It is the same person each time. We find such differences in the spelling of the names of one and the same person elsewhere, such as in Kings where Chirom is sometimes spelled חירם other times חירום (compare Kings I 7,9). This principle applies only when these names appear in different verses. When both spellings appear in the same verse, however, it is clear that two different people of similar names are meant. The spelling is changed so that we become aware that the Torah refers two separate people.
AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF DISHAN: HEMDAN AND ESHBAN. This Dishan is identical with Dishon, the fifth son of Se’ir, (Verse 21 here.) it being of no consequence whether he is called Dishan or Dishon, except when both names are mentioned in one verse (Verse 21 here.) in order to distinguish between them. Similarly, And Hirom made the pots… (I Kings 7:40.) So Hiram made an end of doing all the work. (In the same verse. Since Hirom and Hiram refer to the same person, there is no objection even if both names are used in the same verse. The case is different with Dishon and Dishan, who are two persons.) It was necessary for Scripture to call him Dishan here so that it should not be thought that he is identical with Dishon the son of Anah mentioned nearby [in Verse 25] for the purpose of ascribing his children to him, for so it would have appeared.
And these are the children of Dishon: Hemdan, Eshban, Yitran, and Keran.
ואלה בני דישון, חמדן וגו', “and these are the sons of Dishon, Chemdon, etc.” This refers to Dishon the fifth son of Seir, and it does not matter that once he is referred to as דישון and another time as דישן. These two spellings would refer to different people only if they would appear in the same verse. In that instance, the difference in the spelling would alert us to the fact that the Torah refers to two different people whose names sound alike. We encounter a similar situation in Kings I 7,40 ויעש חירום, “Chirom constructed etc,” and ויכל חירם, “Chiram completed.” In this verse the Torah had to refer to Dishon once with a letter ו and once without it, in order to make sure that we understand that these are two different people and not the Dishon son of Anah who had been mentioned before, unless, of course, he had changed his name.
“The order of confession (of sins) (Viddui, ודוי, confession of sins, is a prerequisite for expiation and atonement in the Bible for sins committed individually or collectively. In the Bible there is usually a pardoning by God following the confession. Examples of this are found in the stories of Cain, (Genesis 4:13) David, (Psalms 32,41,51, and 69), Judah with Tamar (Genesis 36:26), Achan and the spoils of Jerico (Joshua 7:19-21), Saul and the Amalekite booty (I Samuel 15:24-25). There are also examples of Biblical confessions made for the nation; Moses and the golden calf worshipping (Exodus 32:31), the high priest’s confession on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:6, 11, 21) and the confession of Ezra (9:6, 7, 15) and Nehemiah (1:6,7;9:2,33-35). Prior to the destruction of the Temple confessions had to precede special sin and guilt sacrificial offerings. The person confessing had to place his hands upon the head of the animal sacrifice to transfer his sins to the animal (Leviticus 1:4). The Bible gives no wording for these confessions but there is in the Mishna the wording for the confession of the high priest on Yom Kippur: “O God, I have committed iniquity, transgressed, and sinned before Thee, I and my house. O God forgive the iniquities and transgressions and sins which I have committed and transgressed and sinned before Thee I and my house as it is written in the Law of Thy servant Moses, ‘For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall ye be clean before the Lord’” (Leviticus 16:30; Yoma 3:8). In rabbinic times it became an accepted custom to confess one's sins before seeking atonement and the confession of sins became an integral part of the synagogue ritual. On the Day of Atonement it became a focal point of the service. According to the Talmud (Yoma 87b) the simple statement "Truly, we have sinned" is sufficient for confession, but elaborate formulas of confession have evolved. The Ashamnu "We have incurred guilt" is the prayer on Yom Kippur that is inserted into the fourth benediction of the reader's repetition of the Amidah (see footnote 43). The prayer consists of two parts, each of which contains an alphabetical listing of sins probably committed by people during the year for which they are seeking atonement on Yom Kippur. The first alphabetical confession is known as the Viddui Katan, the "Small Confession". The second part of the Ashamnu is known as the Viddui Gadol, the "Great Confession". It is also known as the Al Ḥet "For the sin which I committed before Thee" which is the statement that precedes each specified sin. These confessionals are first mentioned in geonic liturgy (see footnote 19). Additions to the enumerated sins have evolved to include all possible transgressions since a person might have unintentionally forgotten about a sin during the year which must be confessed in order to receive atonement. The sins are all confessed in the first person plural, "we", communally, thus a person may even confess a sin he is sure he did not commit. In addition to Yom Kippur, the Ashamnu is also recited during the Seliḥot Services prior to Yom Kippur (see footnote 14). It is also recited in the Minḥah Afternoon Service on the Eve of Yom Kippur and ten times during the Day itself. The Ashamnu is also included in the daily service of the Ḥasidic rite, and on Monday and Thursday it is recited by the Sephardi, Italian, and Yemenite communities. The viddui, confession of sins, can also be said by individuals silently at appropriate occasions especially when one is about to die. The viddui said on the Day of Atonement in the singular has become acceptable as a death confessional. A bridegroom also recites this viddui in the singular during the Minḥah Service before his wedding, the wedding day being considered a day of judgment for the bride and groom. Editorial Staff, E. J., v. 5, pp. 878-80.) during Minḥah (Minḥah, מנחה, is the Afternoon Service which is one of the three daily services, the Morning Service being called the Shaḥarit (see footnote 17) and the Evening Service being called the Arvit or Ma'ariv Service (see footnote 144). The Minḥah Service possibly derives its name from the minḥah sacrificial offering performed at the Temple in Jerusalem in the afternoon. A lamb was sacrificed at the Temple at dusk. The Minḥah Service consists of the following parts: the Ashrei (Psalm 145 preceded by Psalms 84:5 and 144:15 and closed by Psalm 115:18); the Amidah (see footnote 17); the Taḥanun (see footnote 10); and it is concluded with the Aleinu (see footnote 17). On the Sabbath and on fast days a portion of the Torah is read before the Amidah and in some rites portions dealing with daily sacrifices are read before the Ashrei. On Sabbaths part of the portion from the Torah of the coming week is read. The Minḥah Prayer can begin any time after the sixth and one-half hour of the day, which mean any time after 12:30 P. M. If Minḥah is prayed at this time of the day it is called Minḥah Gedolah or the "major" Minḥah. If Minḥah is prayed after the nine and one-half hour, which means after 3:30 P. M., it is called Minḥah Ketannah or the "minor" Minḥah. The Minḥah Service must though be completed before the twelfth hour, that is, before sunset, (Ber. 4:1; Ber 26b-27a). The Shulḥan Arukh, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, 324 states that one may pray both Minḥah Gedolah and Minḥah Ketannah provided that one is obligatory (ḥovah) and the other is a voluntary act (reshut). But this is only allowed for the extremely pious. The third meal on the Sabbath, Se'udah Shelishit is usually eaten between the Minḥah, Afternoon Service, and the Ma'ariv, or Evening Service. It has become the custom during the daily service to wait and begin the Minḥah Service shortly before sunset, so that the congregation can wait a few moments and then not have to reassemble (for a third time, having also assembled in the morning for Shaḥarit) for the Evening, Ma'ariv Service which on Sabbaths and holidays can be recited immediately following the sunset. On weekdays, it can be recited even before sunset. cf., Aaron Rothkoff, E. J., v. 12, pp. 31-32.) (the Afternoon Prayer) on the Eve of Yom Kippur” - Containing six paragraphs. One needs to confess during Minḥah (the Afternoon Prayer) before the (last) meal before fasting. (Se'udah ha-Mafseket, סעודה המפסקת, is the term given to the last meal which is eaten immediately prior to the fast of Yom Kippur and the fast of Tishah be-Av. It contains the last food which is eaten until the fast has been completed.) Hagah: If one is alone he says it (the confessional) after he finished his Silent Prayer, but the public reader (Shelia'aḥ Ẓibbur, שליח צבור, is the public reader or the envoy or messenger of the community. It is the term given to an individual in public synagogue worship who officiates as the reader or the cantor, ḥazzan, the one who chants the liturgy. The main function of the sheli'aḥ ẓibbur is to lead the congregation in communal worship by chanting (or reading) aloud certain prayers or parts of them. He also recites the doxology of calling the congregation to worship (Barekhu) and he repeats the Amidah (see footnote 17 and 43). He also recites most Kaddish (see footnote 177) prayers which is a prayer in praise of God, and he leads the congregation in responsive readings and hymns. The Shulḥan Arukh, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, 53:4-9 lists the qualifications of a sheli'aḥ ẓibbur. He must have humility, be acceptable to the congregation, know the rules of prayer, and the proper pronunciation of the Hebrew text, have an agreeable voice, be properly dressed, and have a beard. The beard however was later not required except on the High Holydays. Except for the recital of hymns and psalms (e.g., pesukei de-zimra, see footnote 17) the sheli'aḥ ẓibbur had to be a male past the age of bar mitzvah, thirteen years old. c.f., Editorial Staff, E. J., v. 14, pp. 1355-56.) says his (confessional) on Yom Kippur during the Silent Prayer, (Ha-Tefillah, התפילה, "The Prayer" is a synonym for the Amidah, עמידה, the Silent Prayer said standing which is recited individually during each of the daily services, the Shaḥarit, Morning Service (see footnote 17), Minḥah, Afternoon Service (see footnote 40), and the Arvit (or Ma'ariv), the Evening Service (see footnote 144). It is also recited for the Musaf, the Additional Service (see footnote 166) on the Sabbath and festivals, and on Yom Kippur for a fifth time during the Ne'ilah, the concluding prayer (see footnote 191). During a congregational prayer that is when there is a minyan, a quorum of at least ten adult males, the reader (see footnote 41) repeats the Amidah outloud and on festivals a number of additions are made. Originally the repetition was for the uneducated people who did not know the prayers. Upon hearing each blessing they could respond, "Amen" and thus fulfill their religious obligation of reciting the Amidah. The Amidah of Arvit, the Evening Service, was originally optional but it long ago became obligatory to recite it silently but it is not repeated outloud except on the Sabbath eve when an abbreviated version of it in one single benediction is recited. The word Ha-Tefillah for this prayer originated in the Talmud where it was referred to as "The Prayer" par excellence. It is also known as the Amidah for it is said "standing" and as the Shemoneh-Esreh (18) for it originally had eighteen benedictions in the daily worship while today it contains ninteen. The Amidah takes on various forms for different occasions. On weekdays there are ninteen benedictions, on fast days an additional benediction is added when the reader repeats the prayer, (in ancient times on some public fasts six prayers were added to the regular ones, Ta'an. 2:2-4). On Sabbaths and festivals there are only seven benedictions in the Amidah except for the Musaf Service (see footnote 166) on Rosh HaShanah where there are nine. All the various forms of the Amidah have six blessings in common, the first and last three, with the middle changing according to the occasion. The first three benedictions praise God and the last three basically express thanksgiving. On the weekdays the intermediate benedictions are petitions and the Amidah is therefore predominantly a prayer of supplication where praise, petition, and thanksgiving are included. In most of the benedictions the one praying addresses God as "Thou" for it is through the Amidah that one communicates with God. The pronoun, "we" is also used throughout the Amidah which indicates that it is to be a communal prayer. Even though at times it is said individually, the worshipper is considered a member of the congregation. On Sabbaths and on festivals the central prayer concerns the specialness of the day or one aspect of that part of the day (that is, morning, afternoon, or evening on the Sabbath), and there is no petition, only praise, the special blessing of the day, and thanksgiving. On the Day of Atonement the central blessing called Kedushat ha-Yom, the sanctification of the day, is concluded specially as follows: "Barukh…Melekh moḥel ve-sole'aḥ le-avonoteinu…mekaddesh Yisrael ve-Yom ha-Kippurim," "Blessed…King who pardons and forgives our iniquities…who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Atonement". On Yom Kippur also the third blessing (of the first three standard blessings of praise) is elaborated to contain the prayer "u-Vekhen Ten Paḥekha", "Now therefore impose Thy awe", which is an ancient petition for the eschatological Kingdom of God. On the Day of Atonement the silent recital of the Amidah is followed by the viddui, a confession of sins (see footnote 39) which is not written as a benediction. When the reader repeats the Amidah the viddui is inserted into the fourth, the central, benediction. Two confessions are recited, one short and one long which are both arranged in alphabetical order. The sins which every person might have committed during the year are included and enumerated upon. Since this prayer is part of community worship, the pronoun "we" is used, "we have transgressed, etc." (see also footnote 17). Joseph Heinemann, E. J., v. 2, pp. 838-45.) (טור). (Tur, טור, see footnote 23.)
Judah is a lion’s whelp; from the prey, my son, thou art gone up (ibid. 49:9). That is, you escaped being struck down by the sons of Joseph because you did say: What profit is it if we slay our brother? (ibid. 37:26).
The sons of Dishon. But it the Torah (Gen 36:26) it says, “These are the sons of Dishan,” with a qameṣ. In truth, they were the sons of Dishon; for Dishon—with a ḥolem—was the fifth of Seir’s sons, whereas Dishan—with a qameṣ—was the seventh of Seir’s sons. This is in fact how the text records them in the Torah: “Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan” (Gen 36:21). But when it records their progeny it calls both of them “Dishan”—with a qameṣ: “The sons of Dishan were Hemdan and Eshban” (Gen 36:26)—then the sons of Ezer—and then: “the sons of Dishan were Uz and Aran” (Gen 36:28). Ezra, however, wrote “Dishon” for both of them. Apparently, concerning their names, they were not particular about the distinction between “Dishan” and “Dishon.”
The sons of Dishon: Hamran—with a resh; but in the Torah (Gen 36:26) this appears as “Hemdan,” with a dalet. I have already provided the reasons for such variations (v. 7).
Hamran and Eshban But in the Pentateuch (Gen. 36:26) it is written, “Hemdan.” At first, they were precious and desirable (חֲמוּדִין וְנֶחֱמָדִין) as righteous men, but at the end they were as ugly as a donkey. So is the way of a donkey: at first it is pretty and at the end it becomes ugly, but a horse is at first ugly and later pretty.
The sons of Anah: Dishon. The sons of Dishon: Hamran, Eshban, Ithran, and Cheran.
These are the sons of Dishon: Chemdan, Eshban, Yisran and Keran.
And these are the sons of Dishon, Hemdan, and Jisban, and Jithran, and Keran.
| אֵ֖לֶּה בְּנֵי־אֵ֑צֶר בִּלְהָ֥ן וְזַעֲוָ֖ן וַעֲקָֽן׃ | 27 P | The sons of Ezer were these: Bilhan, Zaavan, and Akan. |
אלה בני אצר, These are the sons of Ezer, etc. This verse may be understood homiletically. Yalkut Shimoni on Proverbs 2, asks rhetorically why the Jewish people are frequently poor. G'd answered because He wanted to ensure that they would have enduring riches in the Hereafter (Proverbs 8,21). If someone wants to assure himself of such an enduring inheritance he must be willing to endure poverty or some other problems in this world. The word אצר in this verse is equivalent to אוצר, treasure. People desirous of accumulating treasures in the world to come must be prepared to suffer afflictions in this world, i.e. בלהן, זעון ועקן. Such afflictions will ultimately prove to be blessings.
These are the children of Ezer: Bilhan, Zaavan, and Akan.
Zaavan and Jaakan—with a yod; but in the Torah (Gen 36:27) this appears as “Vaakan,” with a vav.
It is unclear what motivated Judah to make this suggestion. Did he do so to spare Joseph’s life? Or did he hope for material gain beyond the satisfaction of destroying a hated brother? (Sanhedrin 6b.) Both possibilities are latent in his argument. Regardless of his true motivation, the brothers agreed to the sale: “And his brothers listened to him” (Genesis 36:27).
These are the sons of Eitzer: Bilhan, Za’avan and Akan.
These are the sons of Etser, Bilhan, and Zaavan, and Akan.
| אֵ֥לֶּה בְנֵֽי־דִישָׁ֖ן ע֥וּץ וַאֲרָֽן׃ | 28 P | And the sons of Dishan were these: Uz and Aran. |
These are the children of Dishan: Utz and Aran. The name Utz also appears in the list of the sons of Aram (10:23). Consequently, it is uncertain whether the land of Utz belonged to the Arameans or Edomites. 29
The sons of Dishon. But it the Torah (Gen 36:26) it says, “These are the sons of Dishan,” with a qameṣ. In truth, they were the sons of Dishon; for Dishon—with a ḥolem—was the fifth of Seir’s sons, whereas Dishan—with a qameṣ—was the seventh of Seir’s sons. This is in fact how the text records them in the Torah: “Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan” (Gen 36:21). But when it records their progeny it calls both of them “Dishan”—with a qameṣ: “The sons of Dishan were Hemdan and Eshban” (Gen 36:26)—then the sons of Ezer—and then: “the sons of Dishan were Uz and Aran” (Gen 36:28). Ezra, however, wrote “Dishon” for both of them. Apparently, concerning their names, they were not particular about the distinction between “Dishan” and “Dishon.”
These are the sons of Dishon: Utz and Aran.
These are the sons of Dishan, Hutz and Aram.
| אֵ֖לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֣י הַחֹרִ֑י אַלּ֤וּף לוֹטָן֙ אַלּ֣וּף שׁוֹבָ֔ל אַלּ֥וּף צִבְע֖וֹן אַלּ֥וּף עֲנָֽה׃ | 29 P | These are the clans of the Horites: the clans Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, |
These are the chieftains of the Horites: the chieftain of Lotan, the chieftain of Shoval, the chieftain of Tzivon, the chieftain of Ana,
“Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau, and she bore Amalek to Elifaz. These are the sons of Ada wife of Esau” (Genesis 36:12). “Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau” – Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: Why do I [need for the verse] to expound and say: “Timna was a concubine of Elifaz son of Esau”? It is to inform us of the praiseworthiness of the household of Abraham our patriarch, to what extent the kingdoms and realms wished to cleave to him. Who was Lotan? He was one of the rulers, as it is stated: “The chieftain of Lotan” (Genesis 36:29), and it is written: “Lotan’s sister was Timna” (Genesis 36:22). “Timna was a concubine…” She said: ‘Since I am not worthy to marry him as a wife, I will be his maidservant.’ The matters can be inferred a fortiori: If the wicked Esau, who had to his credit only one mitzva, because he honored his father, kingdoms and realms wish to cleave to him, all the more so that they would wish to cleave to the righteous Jacob, our patriarch, who fulfilled the Torah in its entirety.
Our Rabbis were taught: (Num. 15, 30) "But the person that doth aught with a high hand; this refers to Menasseh b. Hezekiah who sat and lectured on topics with the object of fault-finding," saying, "Could not Moses have found something better than (Gen. 36, 22) "And Lotan's sister was Thimna, or, (Ib.) she was a concubine of Eliphaz b. Esau," or that of (Ib. 13, 14) "And Reuben went in the days of the wheat harvest and found mandrakes in the field." A heavenly voice was then heard saying (Ps. 50, 20) "Thou sittest and speakest against thy brother, against thy own mother's sons thou utterest slander, etc." And to him also applies the words of tradition: (Is. 5, 18) Wee unto those that draw iniquity with the cords of falsehood, and as with a wagon-rope, sinfulnesses." What does a wagon-rope mean? A. Assi said: "In the beginning, the evil inclination appears as thin as the thread of a spider's web; and finally he becomes as thick as a wagon rope." Since we have already arrived at it, let us see what does And Lotan's sister was Thimna really mean. Thimna was a princess, as it is written (Gen. 36, 40) Duke Thimna, and dukedom means a kingdom without a crown. She desired to become a proselyte, but Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not accept her. And she went and became the concubine of Eliphaz b. Esau, saying it is better to be a servant in this nation than to be a princess of another. And her offspring was Amalek, who troubled Israel as a punishment to their parents, who ought not to have driven her away.
ותמנע היתה פילגש AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE — This is stated to tell you in what importance Abraham was held — how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said (v. 22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”, and Lotan was one of the chieftains inhabiting Seir — he was one of the Horites who had dwelt there from ancient times. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife would that I might become your concubine!” In Chronicles (1 Chronicles 1:36) Scripture enumerates her amongst the children of Eliphaz, thus intimating that he took Seir’s wife and from the two of them Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. This is why it is stated, “and Lotan’s sister was Timna”, and why Scripture does not enumerate her amongst Seir’s children, merely stating that she was sister to Lotan, Seir’s son, (see 5:20) because she was his sister from one mother and not from one father (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev 1).
Manasseh began by mocking a few verses and ultimately violated the entire Torah. The Gemara asks: With regard to that verse that we came to discuss, in any event, what is the significance of the phrase in the verse “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”? The Gemara explains: Timna was the daughter of kings, as it is written: “The chief of Lotan” (Genesis 36:29), and: “The chief of Timna” (Genesis 36:40), and each chief is a member of a monarchy, albeit without a crown. That is why they are called chief and not king.
These are the chiefs of the Chorites: Chief Lotan, Chief Shoval, Chief Tzivon, Chief Anoh.
These are the chieftains of the families: Rabba Lotan, Rabba Shobal, Rabba Sebeon, Rabba Anah,
| אַלּ֥וּף דִּשֹׁ֛ן אַלּ֥וּף אֵ֖צֶר אַלּ֣וּף דִּישָׁ֑ן אֵ֣לֶּה אַלּוּפֵ֧י הַחֹרִ֛י לְאַלֻּפֵיהֶ֖ם בְּאֶ֥רֶץ שֵׂעִֽיר׃ | 30 P | Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. Those are the clans of the Horites, clan by clan, in the land of Seir. |
the chieftain of Dishon, the chieftain of Ezer, the chieftain of Dishan; these are the chieftains of the Horites, according to their chieftains in the land of Se’ir.
Chief Dishon, Chief Eitzer, Chief Dishan. These are the chiefs of the Chorites based on the ranks of chiefs in the Land of Se’ir.
Rabba Dishon, Rabba Etser, Rabba Dishan: these are the chieftains of the families, according to their principalities, whose habitation was of old in the land of Gabla.
| וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ הַמְּלָכִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר מָלְכ֖וּ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ אֱד֑וֹם לִפְנֵ֥י מְלׇךְ־מֶ֖לֶךְ לִבְנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ | 31 J | These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the Israelites. |
Speak unto the children of Israel: When a man or woman shall commit any sin that men commit, to commit a trespass against the L-rd, and that soul is guilty. Then they shall confess their sin which they have done; and he shall make restitution for his guilt in full. . . . (Numbers 5:6) Bereishis 40 I heard from my Master that the pleasure of sin comes from the sparks of the Primordial Kings that fell in the Shattering [of the Vessels] into the Bright Shell (Kelipas Nogah). (The Zohar and Lurianic writings speak of a cataclysmic even at the early stages of the creation called the “Breaking of the Vessels,” or the “Death of the Eight Kings,” based upon the verse from Genesis 36:31: “These are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.” According to this teaching, the light that emanated from the G-dhead to fill the vessels of creation was too strong, and the eight lower Sefiros, from Da’at to Malchus, shattered and fell into the Kelipas Nogah, a realm of creation that stands between the pure and the impure. (See Sefer HaTanya for a full discussion of this level of creation and our relationship to it.) These are the sparks of holiness that are enclothed in and enliven all elements of creation. They are the spiritual root of all physical pleasure, including the pleasure derived from sin. It is the role of human beings to uplift these sparks to their supernal root. This is done through the path of Torah and mitzvos, and in the case of sin, through the act of repentance, as this teaching of the Baal Shem Tov explains.)
“And these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned a king to the children of Israel.” (Bereshit, 36:31) In this Parsha the Holy One, blessed be He, began to show the ever so fine birrurim (birrurs) between Israel and the nations of the world. The kelipa (“shell” or evil force) of Edom is the greatest of them all, as there is only a slight and fine difference between it and Israel, for immediately after Israel begins his life, Eisav begins his (as Rashi notes that the first seed to conceive was Israel, then Eisav). Thus we see a great difference between Israel and all the nations of the world. Even with the Ishmaelites, even though they are of the seed of Avraham, still there is a great difference, because from the mother’s side they have no connection to Israel. Yet compared to Israel we see no visible difference, for they both appear clean regarding their mother, but it was the will of the blessed Creator that Yaakov would be the chosen one, and this is as it is written (Malachi, 1:2), “Is not Eisav Yaakov’s brother?” “Brother” meaning that the two were equal, or that at the time of conception when the level of one over the other is unrecognizable for as of yet there are no mitzvot and good deeds, no sin or transgression, and both are from Yitzchak and Rivka. Yet nevertheless, “and I loved Yaakov and hated Eisav,” meaning that it was only God’s will. This is as it is written (Yechezkel, 23:20), “for their flesh is that of asses, and their urine of horses.” That is to say, that at the moment of conception God made it clear that this drop will be in the purity of Kedusha (holiness), and the other the urine of horses. Even though nothing evil was recognized in Eisav, he is anyhow compared to a pig (Vayikra Rabba, 13:5). It is written in the Gemara (Bechorot 8a), “an apple tree grows after sixty days, and so too does a pig give birth after sixty days.” For the letter samech (which is sixty) is in the form of a bow, and a bow is a refuge of strength, meaning that Eisav says that he finds a refuge of strength in God since he was born from Yitzchak and Rivka just like us, for Israel is likened to an apple. Yet God is the one who clarifies that with Eisav it is only on the surface, while Israel is truly cleaving to God. And whoever is knowledgeable in the names of the kings can see this explicitly.
Rashi (Bereishis 37:1), citing the Midrash Tanchuma (Vayeshev 1), compares the mention of Eisav's descendants to a gem that fell into sand. One sifts through the sand (Eisav's descendants) to find the gem (Yaakov and Bnei Yisrael). The Torah details the generations from Noach to Avraham to establish Avraham’s lineage, but why list Eisav's descendants, who were born after Yaakov? The explanation is that Yaakov's perfection came through overcoming these negative forces. The Torah first lists the kings of Edom (Bereishis 36:31) and then states "And Yaakov dwelt" (Bereishis 37:1). This sequence shows that the negative forces exist so the righteous can overcome them and achieve greater heights. This aligns with "And one nation will get strength from another nation" (Bereishis 25:23). Eisav’s power exists only to perfect the side of holiness. Thus, Eisav’s strength comes from Yaakov. When negative forces dominate, their true purpose isn't clear. The Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni 1:140) likens this to chaff boasting that the field was planted for it. Yet, when the wheat is fully grown, the chaff is blown away. The chaff does protect the wheat, but this becomes clear only once the wheat is fully developed.
In addition: the truth is that the refinements in Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah of the 288 sparks through Torah and mitzvot (that man fulfills) in thought, speech, and deed are superior in their source to the nefesh-ruach-neshamah34 of man. They are of ס“ג8 of the internal aspect of Adam Kadmon,48 (See On Learning Chassidus.) while the nefesh-ruach-neshamah that has already been corrected through מ“ה8 issues from the “forehead” (of Adam Kadmon) in the form of a mere reflection (of it). Hence the verse, “Before a king ruled….”49 (Genesis 36:31. “Before” (not in time but on a preceding plane) the Condensation (Tzimtzum, see Translator’s Explanatory Notes to On Learning Chassidus), the Light of the En Sof shone forth “abundantly,” in greater measure than the absorptive capacities of the vessels. The “shattering of the vessels” took place, and the “sparks” scattered. This intolerable and unviable situation is called tohu (after Genesis 1:2) and refers to the period in the verse, “before a king ruled.” Tikkun took the place of tohu, a sharp diminution of Light and an increase in vessels, the process of downward progression with all the Worlds involved, culminating in our world. The mission of man is to call forth increased Divine light into the world, the “vessels.” Man is to elevate the fallen sparks by utilizing the material world for Divine purpose (performance of mitzvot, etc.), rather than indulgence, and by rejecting what G–d has forbidden him.) For this reason man sustains himself on foods of the inorganic, vegetative, and living classes, and purifies them by the מ“ה8 within him, and lives through them because they are of ס“ג.8
לפני מלך מלך לבני ישראל, ”before a king ruled over the Children of Israel;” the “king” referred to here is none other than Moses. We know that he was the equivalent of a crowned king from Deuteronomy 33,5: ויהי בישורון מלך, “he was King over Yeshurun” (pseudonym for Jewish people). The reason he was described by this “title” was that he had been the saviour of the Israelites when he took them out of Egypt.” [The word מלך is derived from מוליך, leading. He who is the leader of others is described as their “king,” i.e. מלך. Ed.] It would be incorrect to understand the comparison of historical developments between the descendants of Esau with those of the Jewish people who did not have a crowned head until Samuel crowned Shaul as their king about 400 years after Moses’ death as recorded in Josephus, for after the kings mentioned here at least 40 kings whose names we know ruled over Edom before the ascent to the throne of the Jewish people by King David. Here only eight of these kings have been named. There were 14 generations between Avraham and King Shaul. When David ascended the throne of the Jewish people he deprived the Edomites of their King. We know this from Samuel II 8,14: וישם באדום נציבים ויהיו כל אדום עבדים לדוד, “he appointed governors in Edom, and all of Edom became a vassal state to David.” You find confirmation of this in Chronicles I 18,13.
AND THESE ARE THE KINGS. Some say that this chapter records a prophecy. (Our verse reads, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel. Saul was Israel’s first king. Thus our chapter appears to deal with the post Mosaic period. These commentaries explain that Moses wrote our chapter as prophecy.) However, Yitzchaki (Some identify him with Isaac ben Solomon Israeli (c. 850-950). He was a philosopher, Biblical commentator and court physician to the caliphs in Egypt and Kairouan.) claims in his book that this chapter was composed during the reign of King Jehoshaphat. (A ninth-century king of Judah. Jehoshaphat was the eighth Hebrew king to reign starting from Saul. In his days the Edomites no longer had kings for they were subject to Judah. This is the reason that once the eighth Hebrew king ascended the throne it was written that the Edomites, too, had eight kings.) He explained the generations as he saw fit. Was he not rightly named Yitzchak? (A play on Gen. 27:36.) Everyone that heareth his interpretation will laugh at him. (A play on Gen. 21:6.) For he identified Hadar (v. 39) with Hadad the Edomite (I Kings 11:14) (A contemporary of King Solomon.) and also said that Mehetabel (v. 39) is to be identified with the sister of Tahpenes the queen of Egypt. (Pharaoh gave his wife Tahpenes’ sister to Hadad in marriage.) Far be it for one to believe that our chapter was written in the days of Jehoshaphat as Yitzchaki maintains. Indeed his book is fit to be burned. Why did Yitzchaki maintain that it is impossible for eight Edomite kings to have reigned before Moses (Yitchaki claimed that there were too few years between the establishment of the Edomite kingdom and Moses for eight Edomite kings to reign, for from Esau’s death, when the Edomite kingdom was established, until the Revelation at Sinai, when Moses reigned, only 193 years passed. The computation of the 193 years is as follows: The Israelites spent 210 years in Egypt, starting with Jacob’s descent to Egypt. Jacob lived there 17 years before he died. Esau died on the very day that Jacob did (Sotah 13a). We thus subtract 17 from 210 and we get 193 (Cherez).) when we find double the number of kings in Israel in about the same number of years? (The kingdom of Israel lasted for 241 years during which time Israel had 19 kings (Krinsky). I.E. says that Israel had double the number of kings of the Edomites. Either he uses a round number or does not count Zimri (I Kings 16:15) who reigned seven days; Zechariah (II Kings 15:8) who reigned six months; and Shallum who reigned a month (Ibid., v. 13). Thus Israel had 16 kings in 241 years. Why, then, is it so hard to believe that eight Edomite kings reigned in 193 years (Krinsky)? Cherez explains that the first 16 kings of Israel reigned 210 years. Thus Israel had 16 kings in 210 years.) Furthermore, there were also proportionally many more kings of Judah in the same time period than the eight Edomite kings who reigned till the age of Moses. (Judah had 21 kings in 500 years (Krinsky). Hence why couldn’t the Edomites have eight kings in 193 years.) The truth is that king, in before there reigned any king over the children of Israel, refers to Moses who was king over Israel, and so it is written, And there was a king in Jeshurun (Deut. 33:5).
ואלה המלכים אשר מלכו בארץ אדום, And these are the names of the kings who ruled in the land of Edom, etc,. The Torah enumerated all who intermarried with Edom or supplied kings to Edom to tell us that ultimately they too would be destroyed when Edom would fall. Bereshit Rabbah 83 explains that because Bazrah provided a king for Edom (verse 33), it too would ultimately share the fate of Esau because it had helped Edom to its feet again when it had already been close to annihilation. Isaiah 34,6 refers to that time when G'd is described as killing many in Bazrah, linking it with the slaughter that would take place in Edom. The same applies to the other cities mentioned in our chapter.
This chapter also alludes to the ultimate redemption of the Jews which will be a long time arriving; this is why G'd listed the number of kings who would rule over Edom who in turn preceded the kings of Israel. The author expresses the hope that just as after the destruction of the Temple we experienced a series of kings who ruled over Edom, this in turn would be followed by a series of kings ruling Israel until such time as the final redemption (6000 years) would materialise (based on the assumption that the period of ימות המשיח is the seventh millenium; compare one view in Sanhedrin 99).
ואלה המלכים אשר מלכו בארץ אדום, “and these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text all of the kings listed here were descendants of Esau. There were a total of eight of them, namely: Bela ben Be-or, Yovav ben Zerach, Chusham, Haddad ben Bedad, Samlah, Saul of Rechovot, Baal Chanan ben Achbar, and Hadar. Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 75,11 state that these eight kings corresponded to the eight times Yaakov called Esau אדוני, “my lord.” According to this Midrash G’d immediately told Yaakov that as a consequence of his demeaning himself in front of Esau, Esau would produce eight kings before Yaakov’s descendants would produce the first king. (compare the beginning of our portion to see the eight times Yaakov called Esau: “my lord”). An additional allusion to this is found in the eight words of the verse beginning with the word תמנע as I have already pointed out in my commentary on verse 12. The names of the places mentioned by our portion as belonging to Edom are: Bazra and Teyman; the former has been mentioned also in Isaiah 34, 6 ”for the Lord holds a sacrifice in Bazrah, a great slaughter in the land of Edom.” The name Teyman is mentioned in Ovadiah 9 “your warriors shall lose heart O Teyman and not a man of Esau’s mount shall survive the slaughter.” Interestingly, we find that not a single king mentioned in the list given by the Torah was the son of his predecessor. This is in sharp contrast to the kings who ruled over Israel, most of whom were succeeded by their sons. The reason the Torah reports all these seemingly irrelevant details is that it wanted to demonstrate that Yitzchak’s blessing that Esau would live by the sword came true.
ואלה המלכים, the kings of the nation Edom are mentioned at length in the Torah before any kings of the Jewish nation. According to what we read here eight kings and eleven Alufim ruled in Edom before the first Jewish king was crowned. The kings that ruled over Edom were not hereditary dynasties, i.e. father bequeathing his throne to his son, but the Edomites appointed outsiders as their kings. This was the basic difference between the power structure in Edom and that in the Jewish state afterwards. Even though the Edomites were politically organised, had experience in being ruled centrally by a king, this did not help them once the Jewish people began to be organised under the rule of kings. Already the very first of the Jewish kings, Sha-ul, fought a war against the Edomites, and the Edomites could not defeat him. King David, a few years later, totally subdued the Edomites, resulting in that nation being enslaved to Israel. This situation continued until the reign of Yehoram son of Yehoshaphat, (about 150 years later ) According to Bereshit Rabbah 83,1 this is the meaning of Proverbs 20,21 נחלה מבוהלת בראשונה ואחריתה לא תבורך, “an inheritance gained hastily at the outset, will not be blessed in the end.” The Midrash there also states that both the Edomites and the Israelites appointed eight Kings. The eight Edomite Kings were: Bela, Yovav, Chusham, Haddad, Simla, Sha-ul, Baal Chanan, and Hadar. The Jewish Kings were Sha-ul, Ish Boshet, David, Solomon, Rechavam, Aviah, Assa, Yehoshaphat, and during the reign of his son Yehoram the Edomites rebelled.
AND THESE ARE THE KINGS THAT REIGNED IN THE LAND OF EDOM. This was written in order to relate that the blessing of Isaac was fulfilled in Esau. He had said to him, And by thy sword shalt thou live, (Above, 27:40.) and they prevailed over the sons of Se’ir the Horite and reigned over them in their land. These cities mentioned here were provinces in the land of Edom, for Bozrah (Verse 33 here.) belonged to Edom, as it is written, For the Eternal hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of Edom. (Isaiah 34:6.) Similarly, the land of the Temanites, (Verse 34 here.) is also of Edom, as it is said concerning it, And thy mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed, to the end that every one may be cut off from the mount of Esau, (Obadiah 1:9.) as are all the cities mentioned here. Scripture, however, relates that these kings did not succeed their fathers, as was the case in Israel. The expression, Before there reigned any king, means “many years before.” But before there reigned any king does not mean that these kingdoms of Edom continued to exist until the kingdom of Israel. Instead, it means to say that at that time the Edomites will not have sovereignty, in order to fulfill Isaac’s words, and thou shalt serve thy brother. (Above, 27:40.) It is possible that all these kings had already passed away in the days of Moses (Ramban here implies that the expression before there reigned any king, refers to Moses. This coincides with the opinion of Ibn Ezra expressed in his commentary on Verse 31.) as they were old when they crowned them, and their lives were not prolonged.
לפני מלך מלך, before Moses arose as the saviour of Israel. All national heads of a people are automatically called “king,” regardless of their constitutional function. I have found in the historic writings of Josephus a list of about 40 such kings in Israel before the establishment of the Davidic dynasty.
’ואלה המלכים וגו AND THESE ARE THE KINGS etc. — There were eight and Jacob raised an equal number in whose days the kingdom of Esau temporarily ceased to exist, viz., Saul, Ishbosheth, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Asa, Abiah and Jehoshaphat. For of the days of Yoram his (Jehoshaphat’s) son it is written, (2 Kings 8:20) “In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah and made a king over themselves”, whereas in the days of Jehoshaphat it is written, (1 Kings 22:48) “And there was no king in Edom: a deputy was king”.
לפני מלך וגו׳. Esaus Geschick entwickelt sich nach den natürlichen Kausalitätsverhältnissen des "Schwertes". Während Jakobs Nachkommen noch in ägyptischer Sklaverei schmachteten und ihnen noch nicht der erste Führer in Mosche erstanden war. blühte schon Edom als Staat mit einer ganzen Reihe königlicher Dynasten. Ein Gegensatz, auf den Josua 24, 4 hinweist: ואתן לעשו את הר שעיר לרשת אותו ויעקב ובניו ירדו מצרים!
ואלה המלכים, the Torah informs us that the Edomites had to appoint outsiders, members of other tribes, as their kings, seeing that they did not find a suitable personage for such a task among their own. Not only that, but none of the kings whom they did appoint raised a son fit to take over the position of king from his father.
Before any king reigned. Before Moshe reigned over them.
Yaakov established a corresponding number in whose days Eisov’s kingdom ceased... Rashi means: It is written [about Yaakov and Eisov], “One government will be mightier than the other” (25:23), implying they will not be simultaneously great [see Rashi there]. Thus, when the kings of Yisrael ruled, Eisov’s kingdom ceased that entire period, as Rashi proceeds to explain.
About the days of Yoram his son, it is written: “In his days Edom revolted...” Since Yoram was at the end, the kingdom of Eisov began immediately in his time. And so too in the time of Shaul who was the first king, the kingdom of Eisov immediately ceased.
Thus far, the chapter has listed the chieftains of the Edomite and Horite tribes. When kings began to rule in Edom, the system of government became more centralized. And these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel. During the years when Esau’s descendants developed as an independent nation with a central government, Jacob’s children were in exile in Egypt and could not appoint a king over themselves. It is possible that the Israelite king to which the verse alludes is Moses, who led the entire Jewish nation. It is similarly stated: “He became king in Yeshurun, when the heads of the people were assembled, the tribes of Israel together.” 30
ואלה המלכים, “and these were the kings, etc.” The Torah narrates all this in order to show that Yitzchok’s blessing to Esau that he would survive by his sword was fulfilled, seeing that his descendants had overpowered the tribe of the Chori and they ruled over them and their lands for hundreds of years, as the cities mentioned are all part of the land of Edom. The Torah also informs us that the Kings of Edom were not automatically the sons of the former kings so that no dynasties had been founded.
לפני מלוך מלך בישראל, “before a king ruled over Israel.” This does not mean that the kings mentioned here ruled during the entire period until King Sha-ul became king (some 800 years later than the time frame during which Yaakov and Esau lived). What the Torah did mean to show was that once the Israelites had a king, the Edomites did not, so that Yitzchok’s blessing to Yaakov (when he thought that Esau stood before him) “your mother’s sons will prostrate themselves before you,” (27,29) was fulfilled. It is quite possible that the last of the kings mentioned in this chapter already died during the days of Moses, a view held by Ibn Ezra. Ibn Ezra feels that if we did not understand the history in that way, whence did Moses know the names of Edomite kings who lived long after he himself had died. Some commentators hold that Moses’ prophetic insights enabled him to record the names of as yet unborn Edomite Kings. Nachmanides disagrees with such an interpretation, saying that there would be no point in Moses’ prophetic insight including such matters, moreover, if so, how many years of history beyond his death was Moses able to foresee in such detail, and when did such prophetic insight stop? The proper explanation is that all these Edomite kings lived before the Torah was given to the Jewish people. Many ruled simultaneously over different parts of that kingdom. [The Midianites also had 5 kings, (Numbers 31) and the Canaanites in the time of Joshua had 31 kings simultaneously. Ed.] It is also possible that each of these kings ruled only for a short period.
This is what would be demanded by these cogent considerations and this is, indeed, corroborated by experience and by the testimony of the prophets. And this is the intent of the verse (Genesis 36:31): "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before a king reigned over the children of Israel." Why must Scripture state "before a king reigned…" if not to inform us that precisely because there was no king in Israel in those days there was a king in Edom. For if Israel had attained to kingdom there would be no king in Edom, kingdom indeed departing from them, as we see, when a king arose in Israel. For David, king of Israel, appointed deputies over them and did not allow them kings, this situation obtaining until the time of Yehoshafat, as it is written of that time (I Kings 22:48): "There was no king in Edom; a deputy was king." And this situation persisted until the time of Yehoram, of whom (because of his sins and his following the house of Achav) it is written (II Kings 8:20): "In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah and they made a king over themselves." And they had kings until the exile, as it is written (Ibid 22): "And Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah until this day," the Jews not being sufficiently righteous to cut off a king from Edom. In the time of the second Temple, however, Edom was subservient to Israel, Hyrcanus making them guards of Jerusalem and causing them to enter the covenant of circumcision. And in the days of Agrippas, when Jerusalem was taken, Edomite regiments came to the assistance of Judah.
The kings that have reigned in the land of Edom are enumerated (Gen 36:51, seq.) on account of the law, “Thou mayst not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother” (Deut. 17:15). For of these kings none was an Edomite; wherefore each king is described by his native land; one king from this place, another king from that place. Now I think that it was then well known how these kings that reigned in Edom conducted themselves, what they did, and how they humiliated and oppressed the sons of Esau. Thus God reminded the Israelites of the fate of the Edomites, as if saying unto them, Look unto your brothers, the sons of Esau, whose kings were so and so, and whose deeds are well known. [Learn therefrom] that no nation ever chose a foreigner as king without inflicting thereby some great or small injury upon the country.
Dix KELIM sortirent d’abord et leurs lumières ensuite. Les lumières descendirent vers KETER, HOKHMAH et BINAH qui les intégrèrent, [en revanche] les sept TAHTONOT (Inférieures, de HESSED à MALKHOUT) elles, non. Simultanément, leur KELIM se brisèrent et chutèrent vers le bas et leurs lumières remontèrent à leur place. Et les concernant, il dit : « Ce sont les rois qui régnèrent dans le pays d'Édom, avant qu'un roi régnât sur les enfants d'Israël » (Genèse 36 :31).
He opened with the verse, “And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom” (Bereshit 36:31), as said, “For, lo, the kings were assembled, they came on together” (Tehillim 48:5). Where were they assembled – in the land of Edom, where judgments have a hold. “They came on together,” as written, “and… died… reigned in his place” (Bereshit 36:31-39). “As soon as they saw, they were astounded; they were affrighted; they rushed away” (Tehillim 48:6), because they could not continue to exist where they were but were destroyed and died, since the king’s insignia were not yet prepared and the holy city, that is, Malchut, and its walls were not yet ready, (as said above in the Greater Gathering of Naso, section 12; study there).
Now, contemplate that there is yet another verse which presents a difficulty. This is the verse, (Ezekiel 28:13) “You were in Eden-עדן, the Garden-Gan-גן of God-Elohi”m-אלהי״ם,” which seems to indicate that Eden-עדן is the Garden-Gan-גן. I shall therefore untie the bonds of doubt regarding this. Chiram-חירם, King of Tyre-Tzor-צור, ascended to the inception of thought-Machshavah-מחשבה, which is Eden-עדן, and is the grape-Anav-ענב. However, this matter is concealed in several things in creation, and relates to the verse, (Genesis 36:31) “These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom.” (This refers to the eight kings of the world of Chaos (Tohu), the first seven about which the verse states, “He reigned and he died,” [which refers to the matter of the shattering of the vessels (Shevirat HaKeilim)] whereas about the eighth it does not say “he died.” That is, it is the eighth king of the world of Chaos (Tohu) who is the root of the repair of the shattering. See at greater length in Shaar HaYichud of Rabbi DovBer of Lubavitch, translated as The Gate of Unity, Ch. 20 and 46, and the notes and citations there.) This is the secret of the verse, “You were in Eden-עדן, the Garden-Gan-גן of God-Elohi”m-אלהי״ם.” That is, when you arose in Thought-Machshavah-מחשבה, which is Eden-עדן, you came out by way of the roots of the plantings in the Garden-Gan-גן, and were affixed in the place that you were affixed. If you merit it, you shall hear awesome secrets of Kabbalah, given from mouth to mouth about this; matters that are the concealed depths of the world.
Another matter, “Jacob sent messengers” (Genesis 32:4) – why did he send messengers to him? Rather, this is what he said: ‘I will send him messengers; maybe he will repent.’ He said to them: ‘Say to him: Do not say Jacob remains as he was when he departed from his father’s house, as it is stated: “For with my staff I crossed…” (Genesis 32:11), “He commanded him, saying” (Genesis 32:5) – say to him: Do not say that when he departed from you he took anything from the household property. Rather, [tell him that] I acquired all these as my wages, through my effort,’ as it is stated: “And now I have become two camps” (Genesis 32:11). At the moment that Jacob called Esau “my lord,” the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You abased yourself and called him “my lord” eight times. As you live, I will establish eight kings from his descendants before your descendants,’ as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned [in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31). He [Jacob] said to them [the messengers]: ‘Say to him: If you are prepared for peace, I am with you, and if for war, I am with you. I have warriors, courageous and strong, who say something before the Holy One blessed be He, and He performs their will on their behalf,’ as it is stated: “He performs the will of those who fear him” (Psalms 145:19). That is why David came to give praise and acclaim before the Holy One blessed be He, who helped him when he fled from Saul, as it is stated: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow” (Psalms 11:2). What is written thereafter? “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous man do?” (Psalms 11:3). He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, if You had distanced and forsook Jacob, who is the pillar and foundation of the world, as it is stated: “The righteous man is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25), “what can the righteous man do?”’ Regarding that moment, it is stated: “Some on chariots and some on horses, but we invoke the name of the Lord our God” (Psalms 20:8).
“Messengers [malakhim]” – these were flesh and blood messengers. The Rabbis say: Actual angels. Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: Hagar was Sarah’s maidservant and five angels happened upon her, (See Genesis 16:7–12.) this one who is the beloved of the household, all the more so. If several angels escorted Eliezer, (See Genesis 24:7 and Bereshit Rabba 59:10.) who was a slave of the household, this one, who was the beloved of the household, all the more so. Rabbi Yosei said: Joseph was the youngest of the tribes and three angels escorted him; that is what is written: “A man found him” (Since the “man” is unidentified and appears by chance, and also plays a crucial role in the story, the midrash understands that the mysterious man was, in fact, an angel.) (Genesis 37:15), “the man asked him” (Genesis 37:15), “the man said to him” (Genesis 37:17); this one, who was the father of them all, all the more so. “Before him” – before the one whose time to assume kingship was before his. (See Genesis 36:31.) Rabbi Yehoshua said: He removed his royal purple garment and cast it before him. He said to him: ‘Two starlings cannot sleep on one board.’ (Our kingdoms cannot overlap.) “To Esau his brother” – although he is Esau, he is his brother. “To the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” – he is ruddy, his cooked food is red, his land is red, his mighty are red, his garment is red, and a red one will exact retribution from him in red garments. He is ruddy – “the first emerged ruddy” (Genesis 25:25); “his cooked food is red” – “feed me please from that red, red dish” (Genesis 25:30); “his land is red” – “to the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom” (Red, adom, is similar to Edom. See Genesis 25:30.) ; “his mighty are red” – “mighty ones are colored scarlet…” (Nahum 2:4); and a red [adom] one will exact retribution from him – “my beloved is clear and ruddy [adom]” (Song of Songs 5:10); in red garments – “why is there red on your garments?” (Isaiah 63:2).
“These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before the reign of a king for the children of Israel” (Genesis 36:31). “These are the kings who reigned…” – Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “Of oaks from Bashan they crafted your oars; [your rudder they made of ivory inlaid in boxwood from the isles of the Kitites]” (Ezekiel 27:6). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Idolaters were likened to a ship; just as a ship, they manufacture a mast for it from [wood from] one place and anchors from [wood from] another place, so, idolaters, “[Hadad died, and] Samla of Masreka [reigned in his stead]” (Genesis 36:36) “[Samla died,] and Shaul of Reḥovot of the river [reigned in his stead]” (Genesis 36:37). (When they would appoint kings, they would bring them in to reign from different places. ) “These are the kings.” “An estate seized hastily at the start” (Proverbs 20:21) – “these are the kings.” “Will not be blessed at its end” (Proverbs 20:21) – “saviors will ascend Mount Zion [to judge the mountain of Esau]” (Obadiah 1:21). (The verse “An estate seized hastily at the start will not be blessed at its end” refers to Edom, which had kings before Israel, but which will eventually be judged and destroyed. )
Rabbi Aivu said: Before a king reigned in Israel, [but once there was a king in Israel], (Addition to the text based on Matnot Kehuna, Nezer HaKodesh, Etz Yosef. ) “[There was no king] in Edom; an official was king” (I Kings 22:48) (Officials from Judah were installed as governors of Edom (see II Samuel 8:14). ) – “These are the kings [who reigned in the land of Edom before the reign of a king for the children of Israel].” Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina [said]: When this one crowns kings, this one appoints judges. (When Edom had kings, Israel had judges but no kings. ) When this one appoints chieftains, this one appoints princes. (When Nebuchadnezzar conquered the region, neither Edom nor Israel had kings; Edom had chieftains and Israel had princes, a lower status than chieftains (Etz Yosef). ) Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: This one crowned eight and that one crowned eight. (There were eight kings of Edom before there was a king in Israel, and eight kings of Israel during whose reigns there was no king in Edom.) This one crowned eight: Bela, Yovav, Ḥusham, Hadad, Samla, Shaul, Baal Ḥanan, Hadar. And that one crowned eight: Shaul, Ish Boshet, David, Solomon, Reḥavam, Aviya, Asa, Yehoshafat. Nebuchadnezzar came and mingled these with those, and abrogated these and those, [as it is stated:] “Who rendered the world like a wilderness and destroyed its cities” (Isaiah 14:17). Evil (Evil Merodakh, king of Babylon.) came and accorded greatness to Yehoyakhin. (Yehoyakhin had been king of Judah; see II Kings 25:27–30. ) Aḥashverosh came and accorded greatness to Haman. (Haman, like Edom, was a descendant of Esau. )
What is written prior to this matter? “These are the kings [who reigned in the land of Edom before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31). And here it is written: “Jacob settled” – Rabbi Ḥunya said: This is analogous to one who was walking on the way and saw a pack of dogs. He was afraid of them and he sat in their midst. (Dogs pursue those who run, so he sat and did not run.) So, when our patriarch Jacob saw Esau and his chieftains, he feared them and settled in their midst. Rabbi Levi said: This is analogous to a blacksmith whose [forge] was open to a plaza, and his son, a goldsmith, opened opposite him. He saw many bundles of thorns being brought into the city. He said: ‘Where will all these bundles be stored?’ There was a certain clever man there. He said to him: ‘Are you afraid of these? One spark will emerge from your [forge] and one spark from your son’s, and you will burn them.’ So, when Jacob saw Esau and his chieftains, he was afraid. The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Are you afraid of these? One spark from you and one spark from your son will burn all of them. That is what is written: “The house of Jacob will be fire, and the house of Joseph a flame” (Obadiah 1:18) – “Jacob settled.” “This is the legacy of Jacob. Joseph, seventeen years old, was herding the flock with his brothers, and he was a lad with the sons of Bilha, and with the sons of Zilpa, his father’s wives; Joseph brought evil report of them to their father” (Genesis 37:2). So said the Sages: “This is the legacy [toledot] of Jacob, Joseph” – all of these offspring [toladot] resulted only due to the merit of Joseph and because of him. Did Jacob not go to Laban only for Rachel? All these offspring were waiting until Joseph was born. (Jacob was afraid to return to his father in the land of Canaan, which would require him to confront Esau, until Joseph was born. ) That is what is written: “It was, when Rachel bore Joseph” (Genesis 30:25) – when the rival of that wicked one (Esau) was born, “Jacob said to Laban: Release me, and I will go” (Genesis 30:25). Who caused them to descend to Egypt? Joseph. Who supported them? Joseph. The sea was split only due to the merit of Joseph. That is what is written: “The waters saw You, God; the waters saw You and were frightened” (Psalms 77:17); “the depths sounded its voice” (Habakkuk 3:10); “with Your arm, You redeemed Your people, the sons of Jacob and Joseph” (Psalms 77:16). Rabbi Yudan ben Rabbi Shimon said: The Jordan, too, split only due to the merit of Joseph. Another matter: “Jacob settled” – so said the Sages: Jacob our patriarch did not enjoy settlement until he resided in his father’s residence. Which is that? It is the land of Canaan, as it was there that his father, Isaac, resided. Another matter: The numerical value of “residence [megurei]” is two hundred and fifty-nine (Mem – 40; gimmel – 3; vav – 6; resh – 200; yod – 10. Together they sum to 259.) – [corresponding to the years] from the day that the Holy One blessed be He said to Abraham: “Know [that your descendants shall be strangers in a land that is not theirs]” (Genesis 15:13) – until the time that Jacob our patriarch settled in the land of his father’s residence [megurei].
(Exodus 15:14) "Peoples heard — they quaked": When the peoples heard that Pharaoh and his hosts were lost in the sea, that the rule of Egypt had ended, and that their idolatry had been overthrown, they began quaking, this being the thrust of "Peoples heard; they quaked." Variantly: "Peoples heard; they quaked": When the peoples heard that the Holy One Blessed be He had lifted the horn of Israel and brought them into Eretz Yisrael, they began quaking — at which the Holy One Blessed be He said to them: Fools that you are. Many kings reigned before Me (i.e., in My presence) and Israel was not wrathful (against them), viz. (Genesis 36:31) "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom." And many rulers arose from you, and Israel was not wrathful, viz. (Ibid. 29) "Chief Lotan, Chief Shoval." And now you grow wrathful! I, likewise, will give you "wrath" not to your liking, viz. (Psalms 99:1) "The L–rd reigns — let the peoples quake!"...
Another interpretation: “The Lord spoke to Moses and to Aaron” – that is what is written: “The voice of my beloved, behold, he is coming” (Song of Songs 2:8). When Moses went and said to Israel: ‘So said the Holy One blessed be He to me: “Today you are leaving, in the month of spring”’ (Exodus 13:4), they said to him: ‘Where is He?’ He said to them: ‘He is about to arrive: “The voice of my beloved, behold, he is coming, [leaping upon the heights, bounding upon the hills]”’ (Song of Songs 2:8). Rabbi Yehuda said: What is “leaping upon the heights?” The Holy One blessed be He said: If I scrutinize the actions of Israel they will never be redeemed. Rather, at whom will I look? At their saintly forefathers, as it is stated: “Moreover, I have heard the cry of the children of Israel…[and I have remembered my covenant]” (Exodus 6:5) (The covenant was made with the patriarchs.) – on the merit of their forefathers I am redeeming them. Therefore, it is written: “Leaping upon the heights,” and heights mean nothing other than the forefathers, as it is stated: “Hear, O heights, the Lord’s grievance [and the mighty ones, foundations of the earth]” (Micah 6:2). ( Eitanim, meaning mighty ones, is a term that the Sages used for the patriarchs.) Another interpretation: Rabbi Neḥemya said: What is “leaping upon the heights?” [It is not to be understood literally.] Rather, the Holy One blessed be He said: Israel does not have deeds that would warrant their being redeemed, except by the merit of the elders, as it is stated: “Go, and gather the elders of Israel” (Exodus 3:16), and heights are nothing other than the elders, as Yiftaḥ’s daughter says to her father: “I will go down in the heights” (Judges 11:37). Was she going to the heights? Rather, she was saying: To the elders, as she was going to show the elders that she was a pure virgin. (She therefore did not deserve the fate decreed for her by her father’s vow.) That is why it is written: “Leaping upon the heights.” Another interpretation: Rabbi Elazar said: What is “leaping upon the heights”? The Holy One blessed be He said: I arranged for Esau that he would establish kings, as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom” (Genesis 36:31). If I allow Esau to establish more kings, how will Israel survive? Rather, I will supplant them and render them chieftains, as it is stated: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau” (Genesis 36:15). (The midrash is reading the verses out of chronological order, as if the chieftains came after the kings.) Heights mean nothing other than idolaters, as it is stated: “Behold, four chariots (The chariots represent four idolatrous nations.) are emerging from between the two heights” (Zechariah 6:1).
When these Romans referred to the "Master," and it seemed to mean Jacob, they referred to him sarcastically, seeing that Isaac had designated him as such in the blessings, i.e. הוה גביר לאחיך. They did not mean to challenge the validity of Isaac's blessing; they felt that Jacob/Israel had already outlived the period during which it was valid. Now that Israel's fortunes had declined, they felt sure that their turn had come. The kingdom of Edom had, after all, undergone a period during which eight Jewish kings reigned and the Edomites themselves did not even have a king. [Edom had lost its independence, as Rashi elaborates on 36,31 at the end of Parshat Vayishlach.] The Romans believed that Isaac's warning had been fulfilled when the first Temple was destroyed and the Jewish people endured 70 years of exile. Even after the rebuilding of the Temple five major manifestations of G–d's Presence in their land were never regained. Because of this the Romans were sure that the star of Israel was in permanent decline. They viewed the 70 years of exile as the reversal of the seventy years that David and Solomon ruled over greater Israel in all its glory.[I do not quite understand that figure. According to our best known sources that period was at least 73 years. Maybe David's reign is counted only after the capture of Jerusalem. Ed.]
וישלח יעקב...כה תאמרון לאדוני לעשו, Yaakov sent......thus you shall say to my lord, to Esau: Yaakov was punished for referring to Esau as “my lord.” G–d said to him: “I have said to your mother that the older of her sons will serve the younger” (Genesis 25,23) and you have taken it upon yourself to address your elder brother as “my lord” eight times? This is why in this portion we will read that eight kings ruled over the kingdom of Esau (Edom) before the first king ruled over Israel. This is why this very point has been recorded in this portion at the end of this portion (Genesis 36,31-43)
ואלה הבגדים אשר יעשו, “These are the garments they are to make, etc.” Our sages in Erchin 16 say that just as the sacrifices themselves were instruments of atonement for the Jewish people, so the priestly garments (when worn at the right time in the right place by the right people) were also instruments helping the Jewish people to achieve atonement. This is the reason that the section dealing with the priestly garments was written right next to the section dealing with the sacrifices themselves (the consecration offerings 29,18). The breastplate would atone for sins committed erroneously by judges, as is written: ועשית חושן משפט, “you are to make the breastplate of judgment” (verse 15). The ephod would secure atonement for the sin of idolatry committed inadvertently as we are reminded by Hoseah 3,4: “and there will be no ephod and no teraphim.” It is also written in Judges 8,27 that Gideon converted gifts of gold given to him into a garment called ephod, something that was accounted a sin for him [seeing he did not treat it as a garment but as a sort of monument. Ed.]. The robe called מעיל secured atonement for loose use of one’s tongue, לשון הרע; this is symbolized by the bells at the lower hem of that tunic, מעיל. This robe had a number of bells at the lower edge of which could be heard when the High Priest wearing it was approaching. Just as the evil tongue is something that was spread in public, so the atonement procedure was by means of a garment heard in public. When evil was spoken in private by someone, (who was unaware that he was guilty of unfair comments) the means of atonement for this was the incense. The checkered tunic, כתונת תשבץ, would secure atonement for blood spilled inadvertently. This has been alluded to in Genesis 36,31: “they dipped the tunic in blood.” This tunic resembled a type of shirt and was worn next to the skin (like a T-shirt with sleeves). It was embroidered with gold threads designed in a checkered manner so that it appeared to have “stripes” through it. This is what is meant by (28,39) “you shall make the tunic of a box-like knit of fine linen.” The word תשבץ is the same as משבצות זהב (compare Maimonides Hilchot Klei Hamikdash 9,19). The headgear worn by the High Priest, i.e. the מצנפת, would obtain forgiveness for haughty bearing and deportment. It was appropriate that something worn high on top of one’s head should be the symbol by means of which haughtiness could be atoned for. The אבנט, belt, would secure atonement for lewd fantasies and other sinful thoughts. Our sages in Jerusalem Talmud Yuma 7,3 claim that the length of this belt was 32 cubits (about 20 meters) The golden head band, ציץ, worn by the High Priest on his forehead would atone for effrontery. We have a verse in Jeremiah 3,3 describing effrontery as associated with the forehead. The prophet speaks of the “brazenness of a harlot,” using the word מצח to define brazenness. Aaron had a total of eight garments of which the Torah lists only six. The Torah did not mention his linen trousers as only the garments Moses was to dress him in qualified for this paragraph. The headband, being made of pure gold, is also not enumerated as one of the garments, as, strictly speaking, it was an ornament rather than a garment. The instruction for Aaron to wear linen pants was given only in verse 42 after Moses had already been instructed to dress him in his garments. Had Moses been meant to dress Aaron in his pants the instructions to dress Aaron would not have been written only at the end of verse 42 The function of the pants as a means of securing atonement extended to sins of a sexual or incestuous nature as man is perceived as using his legs to run after chances to obtain sexual gratification.
A kabbalistic approach: The words ואף גם זאת are meant to include the כנסת ישראל the spiritual concept of the people of Israel. [The word אף then is understood as “also.” Ed.] The כנסת ישראל is known as זאת, as we know from Psalms 118,23 מאת ה' היתה זאת, “the כנסת ישראל emanated from the Lord,” (as well as from Genesis 49,28), and the verse would contain a promise that wherever the physical people of Israel would be exiled to an element of the Shechinah would remain with them. This is the deeper meaning of the words in verse 44: “I will not despise them and reject them to the point of totally destroying them.” This idea is also reflected in the hymn composed by Assaph (Psalms 80,15) “look down from heaven and see; take note of this (זאת) vine.” The words “look down from heaven and see,” are similar to Kings I 8, 32 ואתה תשמע השמים, “and You will listen (to the prayer) from heaven.” The words ופקד גפן זאת, “and take note of this vine,” should be understood as “and take not of the vine of זאת,” i.e. of the כנסת ישראל known as זאת. Among his other words Assaph also explained here that this vine known as זאת is well known through the wickedness referred to in verse 14 of the same Psalm as חזיר מיער, where the letter ע is suspended. The suspension of that letter is supposed to allude to the religion of the Romans. I have already mentioned this in connection with Genesis 36,31 about the kings of the Kingdom of Edom who preceded the first Jewish king. (See verse 39 there commencing with the words: “A Midrashic approach”. Ed.).
These are the kings who reigned in the Land of Edom before any king reigned over the Children of Israel.
These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel.
| וַיִּמְלֹ֣ךְ בֶּאֱד֔וֹם בֶּ֖לַע בֶּן־בְּע֑וֹר וְשֵׁ֥ם עִיר֖וֹ דִּנְהָֽבָה׃ | 32 J | Bela son of Beor reigned in Edom, and the name of his city was Dinhabah. |
AND BELA THE SON OF BEOR. Bela is not to be identified with Balaam the son of Beor, (Cf. Num. 22:5. Adding a mem to Bela spells Baalam. Because of this and their father having the same name, some consider them to be the same. Cf. Targum Jonathan on this verse.) and neither is Baalam the son of Laban the Aramean. (The rabbis identify Beor with Laban. Cf. Sanhedrin 105a.) The Midrash which states that Baalam is the son of Laban is probably based on the fact that both were sorcerers (So Cherez. The point is that since Baalam was a sorcerer and Laban was one, too, Balaam was a “son” (spiritual not actual) of Laban. For an alternate interpretation see Krinsky.) because “none of the words of our sages of blessed memory ever fall to the ground.” (A paraphrase of I Sam. 3:19.) We cannot identify Baalam with Bela because Bela was an Edomite and Baalam an Aramean. (According to Cherez.) We are also not to identify Jobab the son of Zerah (v. 33) with Job, as Yitzchaki (This is the same Yitzchaki mentioned in I.E.’s comments on verse 31 (Weiser).) the windbag does.
Bela son of Beor reigned in Edom. Due to the similarity between their names, some commentaries identify this ruler with Bilam son of Beor. 31 However, the context and chronology suggest otherwise. 32 And the name of his city was Dinhava. The mention of these kings’ cities indicates that they did not inherit the throne from one another, in the manner of a dynasty. 33
“On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:72). “On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” – what was the reason for the prince of Asher to present his offering after the prince of Dan? It is because Dan is named for judgment [din], and Asher is named for its confirmation [ishuro]; that is why the Holy One blessed be He commanded Asher to present his offering after Dan, because the judge must confirm his judgment, just as it says: “Seek justice, confirm it for the oppressed” (Isaiah 1:17). “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:73). “His offering was [one] silver dish…” – Rabbi Tanḥuma said: The names of all the tribes were called for the redemption of Israel and for their praise. Asher’s name was called for the redemption of Israel, just as it says: “All the nations will praise [ve’ishru] you, as you will be a desired land, said the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 3:12), and for their praise, just as it says: “Happy [ashrei] is the nation for whom this is so; happy is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalms 144:15). Israel’s happiness [ishuran] is only because they chose the Holy One blessed be He to be God for them and the Holy One blessed be He chose them to be a treasured nation for Him. That is why when the prince of Asher came to present his offering, he presented his offering for the sake of the choice, that the Holy One blessed be He chose Israel from all the nations, just as it says: “The Lord has chosen you to be His treasured people of distinction [from all the peoples that are on the face of the earth]” (Deuteronomy 14:2), as it is stated: “Happy is the one whom You choose and draw near…” (Psalms 65:5). Therefore, he presented his offering of a silver dish, corresponding to the nations of the world, who were initially attributed to Abraham. (See Genesis 17:5.) “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – these are the seventy descendants of Noah and the sixty queens, as Solomon said: “They are sixty queens” (Song of Songs 6:8). Who were they? They were the sixteen sons of Ketura, Yishmael and his twelve sons, and Esau and his seventeen sons and grandsons. How so? The sons of Elifaz are eight and they are: “The sons of Elifaz: Teman, Omar, Tzefi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek” (I Chronicles 1:36); they, with Elifaz, are eight. There it is written: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau: The sons of Elifaz firstborn of Esau: The chieftain of Teiman,… the chieftain of Koraḥ, the chieftain of Gatam, the chieftain of Amalek…” (Genesis 36:15–16). They are nine, (They are nine with the addition of Koraḥ, who is listed in the verse in Genesis but does not appear in the verse in Chronicles.) Re’uel with his sons are five, as it is stated: “The sons of Re’uel: Naḥat, Zeraḥ, Shama, and Miza” (I Chronicles 1:37), that is fourteen. The sons of Esau are three: (Besides Elifaz and Re'uel.) “[The sons of Esau…] Yeush, Yalam, and Koraḥ…” (I Chronicles 1:35), that is seventeen. And the eleven chieftains who are tallied at the end, as it is stated: “These are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names: The chieftain of Timna…” (Genesis 36:40), that is fifty-seven. If you say: Are they not fifty-eight, Timna was the daughter of Elifaz. It is completed with three kings of Edom who were descendants of Edom. (See Genesis 36:32–34.) They are: Bela son of Beor (Genesis 36:32), who was named after Esau, who was a glutton [bela] and sold his birthright because of his gluttony. “Son of Beor” (“Beir” can mean animal; see Exodus 22:4.) – the son of one who rendered himself like an animal, as it is stated: “Feed me [haliteni] now from that red stuff, as I am exhausted” (Genesis 25:30), just as it says: One may not forcibly feed an animal, but one may place food in its mouth [malitin]. (Shabbat 155b.) The second, “Yovav son of Zeraḥ from Botzra” (Genesis 36:33). Botzra was of Edom, as it is stated: “Who is this, coming from Edom, with crimsoned garments from Botzra, resplendent in His attire, striding in His abundant strength? I speak with justice, potent to save” (Isaiah 63:1). The third, “Ḥusham of the land of the Temanite” (Genesis 36:34), and Teman was the land of Edom, as it is stated: “Your mighty, Teman, will be broken, so that each man from the mountain of Esau will be eliminated by slaughter” (Obadiah 1:9). But the other kings were from other places and other nations, that is sixty. Why did he call all these dishes [ke’arot]? It is because the Holy One blessed be He disqualified all of them. Ke’ara is nothing other than an expression of leprosy, just as it says: “Recessed [shekaarurot], deep green” (Leviticus 14:37). “Silver [kesef]” – due to shame, as they will all go “to reviling and eternal disgrace” (Daniel 12:2). From where is it derived that kesef is an expression of shame. It is as in the Jerusalem Targum, they call disgrace kisufa. “One silver basin” – this is Israel, whom the Holy One blessed be He separated out from them, just as it says: “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself…” (Psalms 135:4). And it says: “I took your father, Abraham, from beyond the river, and I led him throughout the land of Canaan, and I multiplied his descendants, and I gave him Isaac” (Joshua 24:3). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel…” – just as it says: “With seventy people, your ancestors descended to Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:22). “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering [leminḥa]” – as the Holy One blessed be He dispatched to the nations of the world and to Israel prophets of them and among them. That is leminḥa, just as it says: “The spirit of the Lord will rest [venaḥa] upon him” (Isaiah 11:2), and it says: “The spirit rested [vatanaḥ] upon them” (Numbers 11:26). The Holy One blessed be He wished to give His Torah to all of them, as it is stated: “He said: The Lord came from Sinai, [and shone from Seir for them, He appeared from Mount Paran]” (Deuteronomy 33:2). “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:74). “One [gold] ladle” – from all of them, the Holy One blessed be He chose only Israel, as it is stated: “Unique is my faultless dove, unique to her mother, pure to the one who bore her” (Song of Songs 6:9). That is why they are the happiest of the nations, just as it says: “Girls see her and laud her, and queens and concubines praise her” (Song of Songs 6:9) – these are the nations. Why did the Holy One blessed be He choose them? It is because all the nations rejected the Torah and did not want to receive it, but these wanted and chose the Holy One blessed be He and His Torah, which is five books corresponding to the five fingers on the hand, and received the Ten Commandments at Sinai. That is, “one gold ladle of ten shekels.” What is “filled with incense”? It is because they all said: “All that God spoke we will perform and we will heed” (Exodus 24:7); they accepted upon themselves Torah study and action. (These are sometimes compared to a pleasant smell. See Vayikra Rabba 30:12.) “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:75). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:76). “One young bull…” – these three species of burnt offering, why? They correspond to the three crowns that the Holy One blessed be He gave to Israel for this: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of kingship. The crown of Torah, this is the Ark, as it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown upon it all around” (Exodus 25:11). The crown of priesthood, this is the golden altar, in whose regard it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown for it all around” (Exodus 30:3). The crown of kingship, this is the table, as it is written: “He crafted a crown of gold for it all around” (Exodus 37:11). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to a good name, which is action, just as we learned: Study is not the principal matter but action, as action atones for the person, like what we learned: Repentance and good deeds are a shield before punishment. That crown corresponds to the candelabrum, to realize what is stated: “For mitzva is a candle, and Torah is light” (Proverbs 6:23). Why is Torah called light? It is because it illuminates for the person what he should do. And because the Torah teaches the person how he shall perform the will of the Omnipresent, therefore, the reward of study is great. And one who causes another to perform an action is greater than one who performs it, as it is stated: “The act of righteousness will be peace and the work of righteousness will be quiet and security forever” (Isaiah 32:17). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:77). “And for the peace offering, two bulls…” – as the Holy One blessed be He gave two Torahs to Israel: the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. He gave them the Written Torah, in which there are six hundred and thirteen mitzvot, in order to fill them with mitzvot and accord them merit, as it is stated: “The Lord desires for the sake of His righteousness; He will make the Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21). He gave them the Oral Torah, so they would excel through it among the other nations. That is the reason that He did not give it in writing, so that the Ishmaelites would not falsify it the way that they did to the Written Torah and say that they are Israel. In that regard, the verse said: “I write for him much of My Torah, but it is regarded like a strange matter” (Hosea 8:12). The Holy One blessed be He said: If I write for Israel much of My Torah – this is the Mishna, which is greater than the Bible – “it will be regarded like a strange matter.” “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these three species of peace offerings correspond to the priests, Levites, and Israelites. Alternatively, corresponding to the three types of greatness that the Holy One blessed be He conferred upon them in reward for the fact that they received the Torah. They are: being a treasure, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, as it is stated: “You shall be treasured for Me from among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine. You shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:5–6). They were three species of five each for a total of fifteen, corresponding to the Torah, that is five books, and the Ten Commandments, which they received, which were written on two tablets, five on this tablet and five on that tablet. Another matter: It corresponds to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the twelve tribes, as they are the primary chosen ones, just as it says: “Because He loved your forefathers, He chose their descendants after them, and He took you out before Him, with His great power, from Egypt” (Deuteronomy 4:37). “This was the offering of Pagiel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran.”
“And you, draw Aaron your brother near to you, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, to serve Me: Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, Elazar and Itamar, Aaron’s sons” (Exodus 28:1). “And you, draw Aaron your brother near to you,” that is what is written: “From it will come a cornerstone, from it a peg, from it a bow of war” (Zechariah 10:4). Come and see: When the early nations would seek to appoint a king for themselves, they would bring [a man] from anywhere and appoint him over them, as it says: “He reigned in Edom” (Genesis 36:32), from Dinhava, from Basra, and likewise, all of them. (The Torah (Genesis 36:32–39) lists various kings of Edom and where they were from; the first two were from Dinhava and Basra, respectively. These places were not in Edom. ) But Israel is not so. Their great ones are from them, their kings are from them, their priests are from them, their prophets are from them, their princes are from them, as it is stated: “From it will come a cornerstone,” this is King David, as it is stated: “The stone that the builders rejected became the cornerstone” (Psalms 118:22). (The Sages apply this verse to King David (see Midrash Tehillim 118), who was a humble shepherd and the youngest and least prominent of his brothers before he was appointed king. ) “From it a peg” this is the High Priest, as it is stated: “I will affix him as a peg in a secure place” (Isaiah 22:23). “From it a bow of war,” as it is stated: “They were armed with bows, both right and left-handed” (I Chronicles 12:2). “From it every oppressor will be gone together” (Zechariah 10:4), these are the judges’ scribes. And likewise it says: “And you, draw Aaron your brother near to you, and his sons with him.” From where? It is from among the children of Israel. This is analogous to a king who had a friend and sought to appoint a treasurer, and he appointed [his friend] over his entire treasury. Sometime later, he sought to appoint a military chief of staff, and that friend thought that perhaps he would choose him, but he did not choose him. [The king] said to him: ‘Go and appoint a military chief of staff.’ He said to him: ‘My lord, from which noble family?’ He said to him: ‘From your noble family.’ So too, the Holy One blessed be He sought to appoint someone over the labor of the Tabernacle, and He selected Moses as the administrator over the judges and over everything. When the Holy One blessed be He sought to appoint a High Priest, Moses thought that perhaps he would become the High Priest. The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Go and appoint a High Priest for Me.’ He said before Him: ‘From what tribe shall I appoint for You?’ He said to him: ‘From the tribe of Levi.’ At that moment, Moses rejoiced. He said: ‘My tribe is so beloved.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘It is Aaron, your brother.’ That is why it is stated: “And you, draw Aaron your brother near to you.” The Rabbis say: All forty years that Israel was in the wilderness, Moses served in the high priesthood. Some say: He served only during the seven days of inauguration. Rabbi Berekhya says in the name of Rabbi Simon: All forty years Moses served in the high priesthood, as it is stated: “The sons of Amram, Aaron and Moses; [Aaron was separated that he should be most holy, he and his sons forever, to offer before the Lord, to serve Him, and to bless in His name forever]” (I Chronicles 23:13), and it is written: “And Moses, the man of God, [his sons are named among the tribe of Levi]” (I Chronicles 23:14). (The implication of the verse is that Moses’ sons were regular Levites, but he himself functioned as a priest.)
כי לא דבר רק הוא מכם FOR IT IS NOT A VAIN THING FOR YOU — it is not for nothing that you are to occupy yourselves laboriously with it. because much reward depends on it, כי הוא חייכם FOR IT IS YOUR LIFE (life is the reward). Another explanation: There is not one empty (ריק i.e., apparently superfluous) word in the Torah that, if you properly expound it, has not a grant of reward attached to it for doing so. You can know this, for so did our Rabbis say: It states (Genesis 36:22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”; (Genesis 36:32) “and Timna was concubine [to Eliphaz, Esau’s son]”. Why is this stated? Because she (Timna) said, “If I am unworthy to become his (Elphaz's) wife, would that I would become his concubine!”. And why all this (why does Scripture enter into all these details of her birth and marriage; of what interest is it to us)? To tell you in what distinction Abraham was held — that rulers and kings (Lotan was one of the chieftains of Seir, cf. Genesis 36:20—21) were eager to connect themselves by marriage to his descendants (Sifrei Devarim 336:1; cf. Rashi on Genesis 36:12).
Bela, son of Be’or reigned in Edom, and the name of his city was Dinhavah.
In Edom reigned Bileam. the son of Behor, and the name of the city of the house of his kingdom was Dinhaba.
| וַיָּ֖מׇת בָּ֑לַע וַיִּמְלֹ֣ךְ תַּחְתָּ֔יו יוֹבָ֥ב בֶּן־זֶ֖רַח מִבׇּצְרָֽה׃ | 33 J | When Bela died, Jobab son of Zerah, from Bozrah, succeeded him as king. |
יובב בן זרח מבצרה JOBAB, THE SON OF ZERAH OF BOZRAH — Bozrah was one of the Moabite cities, as it is said (Jeremiah 48:24 which chapter is a prophecy against Moab), “[Judgment is come upon…] and upon Keriath and upon Bozrah etc.” Because it produced a king for Edom it is to be smitten together with them (the Edomites), as it is said (Isaiah 34:6) “For the Lord hath a slaughtering in Bozrah, [and a great slaughter in the Land of Edom]’ (Genesis Rabbah 83:3).
Because it provided a king for Edom it is destined to be smitten together with them... Rashi is answering the question: Why does the verse identify Yovav by his father, if it [also] identifies him by his place? [The place alone should suffice,] as with “Samlah of Masriekah” (v. 36), etc. Rashi answers: Yovav was not well known by his place. Scripture mentions his place only in order to teach, “It is destined to be smitten...” (R. Hendel)
Bela died, and Yovav son of Zerah, of Botzra, another city in Edom, reigned in his stead.
“On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:72). “On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” – what was the reason for the prince of Asher to present his offering after the prince of Dan? It is because Dan is named for judgment [din], and Asher is named for its confirmation [ishuro]; that is why the Holy One blessed be He commanded Asher to present his offering after Dan, because the judge must confirm his judgment, just as it says: “Seek justice, confirm it for the oppressed” (Isaiah 1:17). “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:73). “His offering was [one] silver dish…” – Rabbi Tanḥuma said: The names of all the tribes were called for the redemption of Israel and for their praise. Asher’s name was called for the redemption of Israel, just as it says: “All the nations will praise [ve’ishru] you, as you will be a desired land, said the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 3:12), and for their praise, just as it says: “Happy [ashrei] is the nation for whom this is so; happy is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalms 144:15). Israel’s happiness [ishuran] is only because they chose the Holy One blessed be He to be God for them and the Holy One blessed be He chose them to be a treasured nation for Him. That is why when the prince of Asher came to present his offering, he presented his offering for the sake of the choice, that the Holy One blessed be He chose Israel from all the nations, just as it says: “The Lord has chosen you to be His treasured people of distinction [from all the peoples that are on the face of the earth]” (Deuteronomy 14:2), as it is stated: “Happy is the one whom You choose and draw near…” (Psalms 65:5). Therefore, he presented his offering of a silver dish, corresponding to the nations of the world, who were initially attributed to Abraham. (See Genesis 17:5.) “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – these are the seventy descendants of Noah and the sixty queens, as Solomon said: “They are sixty queens” (Song of Songs 6:8). Who were they? They were the sixteen sons of Ketura, Yishmael and his twelve sons, and Esau and his seventeen sons and grandsons. How so? The sons of Elifaz are eight and they are: “The sons of Elifaz: Teman, Omar, Tzefi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek” (I Chronicles 1:36); they, with Elifaz, are eight. There it is written: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau: The sons of Elifaz firstborn of Esau: The chieftain of Teiman,… the chieftain of Koraḥ, the chieftain of Gatam, the chieftain of Amalek…” (Genesis 36:15–16). They are nine, (They are nine with the addition of Koraḥ, who is listed in the verse in Genesis but does not appear in the verse in Chronicles.) Re’uel with his sons are five, as it is stated: “The sons of Re’uel: Naḥat, Zeraḥ, Shama, and Miza” (I Chronicles 1:37), that is fourteen. The sons of Esau are three: (Besides Elifaz and Re'uel.) “[The sons of Esau…] Yeush, Yalam, and Koraḥ…” (I Chronicles 1:35), that is seventeen. And the eleven chieftains who are tallied at the end, as it is stated: “These are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names: The chieftain of Timna…” (Genesis 36:40), that is fifty-seven. If you say: Are they not fifty-eight, Timna was the daughter of Elifaz. It is completed with three kings of Edom who were descendants of Edom. (See Genesis 36:32–34.) They are: Bela son of Beor (Genesis 36:32), who was named after Esau, who was a glutton [bela] and sold his birthright because of his gluttony. “Son of Beor” (“Beir” can mean animal; see Exodus 22:4.) – the son of one who rendered himself like an animal, as it is stated: “Feed me [haliteni] now from that red stuff, as I am exhausted” (Genesis 25:30), just as it says: One may not forcibly feed an animal, but one may place food in its mouth [malitin]. (Shabbat 155b.) The second, “Yovav son of Zeraḥ from Botzra” (Genesis 36:33). Botzra was of Edom, as it is stated: “Who is this, coming from Edom, with crimsoned garments from Botzra, resplendent in His attire, striding in His abundant strength? I speak with justice, potent to save” (Isaiah 63:1). The third, “Ḥusham of the land of the Temanite” (Genesis 36:34), and Teman was the land of Edom, as it is stated: “Your mighty, Teman, will be broken, so that each man from the mountain of Esau will be eliminated by slaughter” (Obadiah 1:9). But the other kings were from other places and other nations, that is sixty. Why did he call all these dishes [ke’arot]? It is because the Holy One blessed be He disqualified all of them. Ke’ara is nothing other than an expression of leprosy, just as it says: “Recessed [shekaarurot], deep green” (Leviticus 14:37). “Silver [kesef]” – due to shame, as they will all go “to reviling and eternal disgrace” (Daniel 12:2). From where is it derived that kesef is an expression of shame. It is as in the Jerusalem Targum, they call disgrace kisufa. “One silver basin” – this is Israel, whom the Holy One blessed be He separated out from them, just as it says: “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself…” (Psalms 135:4). And it says: “I took your father, Abraham, from beyond the river, and I led him throughout the land of Canaan, and I multiplied his descendants, and I gave him Isaac” (Joshua 24:3). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel…” – just as it says: “With seventy people, your ancestors descended to Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:22). “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering [leminḥa]” – as the Holy One blessed be He dispatched to the nations of the world and to Israel prophets of them and among them. That is leminḥa, just as it says: “The spirit of the Lord will rest [venaḥa] upon him” (Isaiah 11:2), and it says: “The spirit rested [vatanaḥ] upon them” (Numbers 11:26). The Holy One blessed be He wished to give His Torah to all of them, as it is stated: “He said: The Lord came from Sinai, [and shone from Seir for them, He appeared from Mount Paran]” (Deuteronomy 33:2). “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:74). “One [gold] ladle” – from all of them, the Holy One blessed be He chose only Israel, as it is stated: “Unique is my faultless dove, unique to her mother, pure to the one who bore her” (Song of Songs 6:9). That is why they are the happiest of the nations, just as it says: “Girls see her and laud her, and queens and concubines praise her” (Song of Songs 6:9) – these are the nations. Why did the Holy One blessed be He choose them? It is because all the nations rejected the Torah and did not want to receive it, but these wanted and chose the Holy One blessed be He and His Torah, which is five books corresponding to the five fingers on the hand, and received the Ten Commandments at Sinai. That is, “one gold ladle of ten shekels.” What is “filled with incense”? It is because they all said: “All that God spoke we will perform and we will heed” (Exodus 24:7); they accepted upon themselves Torah study and action. (These are sometimes compared to a pleasant smell. See Vayikra Rabba 30:12.) “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:75). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:76). “One young bull…” – these three species of burnt offering, why? They correspond to the three crowns that the Holy One blessed be He gave to Israel for this: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of kingship. The crown of Torah, this is the Ark, as it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown upon it all around” (Exodus 25:11). The crown of priesthood, this is the golden altar, in whose regard it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown for it all around” (Exodus 30:3). The crown of kingship, this is the table, as it is written: “He crafted a crown of gold for it all around” (Exodus 37:11). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to a good name, which is action, just as we learned: Study is not the principal matter but action, as action atones for the person, like what we learned: Repentance and good deeds are a shield before punishment. That crown corresponds to the candelabrum, to realize what is stated: “For mitzva is a candle, and Torah is light” (Proverbs 6:23). Why is Torah called light? It is because it illuminates for the person what he should do. And because the Torah teaches the person how he shall perform the will of the Omnipresent, therefore, the reward of study is great. And one who causes another to perform an action is greater than one who performs it, as it is stated: “The act of righteousness will be peace and the work of righteousness will be quiet and security forever” (Isaiah 32:17). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:77). “And for the peace offering, two bulls…” – as the Holy One blessed be He gave two Torahs to Israel: the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. He gave them the Written Torah, in which there are six hundred and thirteen mitzvot, in order to fill them with mitzvot and accord them merit, as it is stated: “The Lord desires for the sake of His righteousness; He will make the Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21). He gave them the Oral Torah, so they would excel through it among the other nations. That is the reason that He did not give it in writing, so that the Ishmaelites would not falsify it the way that they did to the Written Torah and say that they are Israel. In that regard, the verse said: “I write for him much of My Torah, but it is regarded like a strange matter” (Hosea 8:12). The Holy One blessed be He said: If I write for Israel much of My Torah – this is the Mishna, which is greater than the Bible – “it will be regarded like a strange matter.” “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these three species of peace offerings correspond to the priests, Levites, and Israelites. Alternatively, corresponding to the three types of greatness that the Holy One blessed be He conferred upon them in reward for the fact that they received the Torah. They are: being a treasure, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, as it is stated: “You shall be treasured for Me from among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine. You shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:5–6). They were three species of five each for a total of fifteen, corresponding to the Torah, that is five books, and the Ten Commandments, which they received, which were written on two tablets, five on this tablet and five on that tablet. Another matter: It corresponds to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the twelve tribes, as they are the primary chosen ones, just as it says: “Because He loved your forefathers, He chose their descendants after them, and He took you out before Him, with His great power, from Egypt” (Deuteronomy 4:37). “This was the offering of Pagiel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran.”
“Bela died, and Yovav, son of Zerah, of Botzra, reigned in his stead” (Genesis 36:33). “Bela died” (Genesis 36:33) – Rabbi Abahu said: This is analogous to a prince who was involved in litigation with someone and [the other litigant’s] sustenance ran out. Someone came and supplied him with sustenance. The king said: ‘I will contend only with the one who provided him with sustenance.’ So, the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Kingdom had already been uprooted from Edom, and Botzra came and provided them with kings? That is why I will contend only with Botzra,’ as it is stated: “For there is a sacrifice to the Lord in Botzra…” (Isaiah 34:6). Rabbi Berekhya said: Nevertheless, “and a great slaughter in the land of Edom” (Isaiah 34:6). (Although God’s anger is directed primarily at Botzra, He also brings great slaughter to Edom. )
the palaces of Bozrah—It is between Moab and Edom, and it belonged to the land of Moab, but it was attracted to Edom. And it set up a king for them when the first king died, and it is said: (Gen. 36: 33) “Jobab the son of Zerah from Bozrah.” [from Gen. Rabbah 83:3]
in Bozrah It is from the land of Moab, but since it supplied a king for Edom, as it is stated (Gen. 36:33): “And Jobab son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead,” it will, therefore, suffer with them. This is found in Pesikta.
from Bozrah Our Rabbis said (see Makkoth 12a): “The heavenly prince of Edom is destined to commit two errors. He thinks that Bozrah is identical with Bezer in the desert, which was a refuge city. He will also err insofar as it affords refuge only for inadvertent murder, but he killed Israel intentionally.” There is also an Aggadic midrash (see above 34:6) that because Bozrah supplied a king for Edom when its first king died, as in Gen. (36:33), “And Jobab the son of Zerah from Bozrah reigned in his stead,” and Bozrah is of Moab, according to the matter that is stated (Jer. 48:24): “Upon Kerioth and upon Bozrah.”
that Bozrah shall become desolation, reproach, waste, and a curse Bozrah was one of the cities of Moab, but because it raised up a king for Edom, as the matter is stated, “And Jobab the son of Zerah from Bozrah” (Gen. 36:33), it will suffer with them.
Bela died, and he was succeeded as king by Yovav, son of Zerach, from Botzroh.
And Bela died, and in his stead reigned Jobab the son of Zerach of Botsra.
| וַיָּ֖מׇת יוֹבָ֑ב וַיִּמְלֹ֣ךְ תַּחְתָּ֔יו חֻשָׁ֖ם מֵאֶ֥רֶץ הַתֵּימָנִֽי׃ | 34 J | When Jobab died, Husham of the land of the Temanites succeeded him as king. |
Yovav died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his stead. Teman was one of the Edomite chieftains mentioned above (verse 15).
“On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:72). “On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” – what was the reason for the prince of Asher to present his offering after the prince of Dan? It is because Dan is named for judgment [din], and Asher is named for its confirmation [ishuro]; that is why the Holy One blessed be He commanded Asher to present his offering after Dan, because the judge must confirm his judgment, just as it says: “Seek justice, confirm it for the oppressed” (Isaiah 1:17). “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:73). “His offering was [one] silver dish…” – Rabbi Tanḥuma said: The names of all the tribes were called for the redemption of Israel and for their praise. Asher’s name was called for the redemption of Israel, just as it says: “All the nations will praise [ve’ishru] you, as you will be a desired land, said the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 3:12), and for their praise, just as it says: “Happy [ashrei] is the nation for whom this is so; happy is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalms 144:15). Israel’s happiness [ishuran] is only because they chose the Holy One blessed be He to be God for them and the Holy One blessed be He chose them to be a treasured nation for Him. That is why when the prince of Asher came to present his offering, he presented his offering for the sake of the choice, that the Holy One blessed be He chose Israel from all the nations, just as it says: “The Lord has chosen you to be His treasured people of distinction [from all the peoples that are on the face of the earth]” (Deuteronomy 14:2), as it is stated: “Happy is the one whom You choose and draw near…” (Psalms 65:5). Therefore, he presented his offering of a silver dish, corresponding to the nations of the world, who were initially attributed to Abraham. (See Genesis 17:5.) “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – these are the seventy descendants of Noah and the sixty queens, as Solomon said: “They are sixty queens” (Song of Songs 6:8). Who were they? They were the sixteen sons of Ketura, Yishmael and his twelve sons, and Esau and his seventeen sons and grandsons. How so? The sons of Elifaz are eight and they are: “The sons of Elifaz: Teman, Omar, Tzefi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek” (I Chronicles 1:36); they, with Elifaz, are eight. There it is written: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau: The sons of Elifaz firstborn of Esau: The chieftain of Teiman,… the chieftain of Koraḥ, the chieftain of Gatam, the chieftain of Amalek…” (Genesis 36:15–16). They are nine, (They are nine with the addition of Koraḥ, who is listed in the verse in Genesis but does not appear in the verse in Chronicles.) Re’uel with his sons are five, as it is stated: “The sons of Re’uel: Naḥat, Zeraḥ, Shama, and Miza” (I Chronicles 1:37), that is fourteen. The sons of Esau are three: (Besides Elifaz and Re'uel.) “[The sons of Esau…] Yeush, Yalam, and Koraḥ…” (I Chronicles 1:35), that is seventeen. And the eleven chieftains who are tallied at the end, as it is stated: “These are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names: The chieftain of Timna…” (Genesis 36:40), that is fifty-seven. If you say: Are they not fifty-eight, Timna was the daughter of Elifaz. It is completed with three kings of Edom who were descendants of Edom. (See Genesis 36:32–34.) They are: Bela son of Beor (Genesis 36:32), who was named after Esau, who was a glutton [bela] and sold his birthright because of his gluttony. “Son of Beor” (“Beir” can mean animal; see Exodus 22:4.) – the son of one who rendered himself like an animal, as it is stated: “Feed me [haliteni] now from that red stuff, as I am exhausted” (Genesis 25:30), just as it says: One may not forcibly feed an animal, but one may place food in its mouth [malitin]. (Shabbat 155b.) The second, “Yovav son of Zeraḥ from Botzra” (Genesis 36:33). Botzra was of Edom, as it is stated: “Who is this, coming from Edom, with crimsoned garments from Botzra, resplendent in His attire, striding in His abundant strength? I speak with justice, potent to save” (Isaiah 63:1). The third, “Ḥusham of the land of the Temanite” (Genesis 36:34), and Teman was the land of Edom, as it is stated: “Your mighty, Teman, will be broken, so that each man from the mountain of Esau will be eliminated by slaughter” (Obadiah 1:9). But the other kings were from other places and other nations, that is sixty. Why did he call all these dishes [ke’arot]? It is because the Holy One blessed be He disqualified all of them. Ke’ara is nothing other than an expression of leprosy, just as it says: “Recessed [shekaarurot], deep green” (Leviticus 14:37). “Silver [kesef]” – due to shame, as they will all go “to reviling and eternal disgrace” (Daniel 12:2). From where is it derived that kesef is an expression of shame. It is as in the Jerusalem Targum, they call disgrace kisufa. “One silver basin” – this is Israel, whom the Holy One blessed be He separated out from them, just as it says: “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself…” (Psalms 135:4). And it says: “I took your father, Abraham, from beyond the river, and I led him throughout the land of Canaan, and I multiplied his descendants, and I gave him Isaac” (Joshua 24:3). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel…” – just as it says: “With seventy people, your ancestors descended to Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:22). “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering [leminḥa]” – as the Holy One blessed be He dispatched to the nations of the world and to Israel prophets of them and among them. That is leminḥa, just as it says: “The spirit of the Lord will rest [venaḥa] upon him” (Isaiah 11:2), and it says: “The spirit rested [vatanaḥ] upon them” (Numbers 11:26). The Holy One blessed be He wished to give His Torah to all of them, as it is stated: “He said: The Lord came from Sinai, [and shone from Seir for them, He appeared from Mount Paran]” (Deuteronomy 33:2). “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:74). “One [gold] ladle” – from all of them, the Holy One blessed be He chose only Israel, as it is stated: “Unique is my faultless dove, unique to her mother, pure to the one who bore her” (Song of Songs 6:9). That is why they are the happiest of the nations, just as it says: “Girls see her and laud her, and queens and concubines praise her” (Song of Songs 6:9) – these are the nations. Why did the Holy One blessed be He choose them? It is because all the nations rejected the Torah and did not want to receive it, but these wanted and chose the Holy One blessed be He and His Torah, which is five books corresponding to the five fingers on the hand, and received the Ten Commandments at Sinai. That is, “one gold ladle of ten shekels.” What is “filled with incense”? It is because they all said: “All that God spoke we will perform and we will heed” (Exodus 24:7); they accepted upon themselves Torah study and action. (These are sometimes compared to a pleasant smell. See Vayikra Rabba 30:12.) “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:75). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:76). “One young bull…” – these three species of burnt offering, why? They correspond to the three crowns that the Holy One blessed be He gave to Israel for this: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of kingship. The crown of Torah, this is the Ark, as it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown upon it all around” (Exodus 25:11). The crown of priesthood, this is the golden altar, in whose regard it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown for it all around” (Exodus 30:3). The crown of kingship, this is the table, as it is written: “He crafted a crown of gold for it all around” (Exodus 37:11). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to a good name, which is action, just as we learned: Study is not the principal matter but action, as action atones for the person, like what we learned: Repentance and good deeds are a shield before punishment. That crown corresponds to the candelabrum, to realize what is stated: “For mitzva is a candle, and Torah is light” (Proverbs 6:23). Why is Torah called light? It is because it illuminates for the person what he should do. And because the Torah teaches the person how he shall perform the will of the Omnipresent, therefore, the reward of study is great. And one who causes another to perform an action is greater than one who performs it, as it is stated: “The act of righteousness will be peace and the work of righteousness will be quiet and security forever” (Isaiah 32:17). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:77). “And for the peace offering, two bulls…” – as the Holy One blessed be He gave two Torahs to Israel: the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. He gave them the Written Torah, in which there are six hundred and thirteen mitzvot, in order to fill them with mitzvot and accord them merit, as it is stated: “The Lord desires for the sake of His righteousness; He will make the Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21). He gave them the Oral Torah, so they would excel through it among the other nations. That is the reason that He did not give it in writing, so that the Ishmaelites would not falsify it the way that they did to the Written Torah and say that they are Israel. In that regard, the verse said: “I write for him much of My Torah, but it is regarded like a strange matter” (Hosea 8:12). The Holy One blessed be He said: If I write for Israel much of My Torah – this is the Mishna, which is greater than the Bible – “it will be regarded like a strange matter.” “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these three species of peace offerings correspond to the priests, Levites, and Israelites. Alternatively, corresponding to the three types of greatness that the Holy One blessed be He conferred upon them in reward for the fact that they received the Torah. They are: being a treasure, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, as it is stated: “You shall be treasured for Me from among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine. You shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:5–6). They were three species of five each for a total of fifteen, corresponding to the Torah, that is five books, and the Ten Commandments, which they received, which were written on two tablets, five on this tablet and five on that tablet. Another matter: It corresponds to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the twelve tribes, as they are the primary chosen ones, just as it says: “Because He loved your forefathers, He chose their descendants after them, and He took you out before Him, with His great power, from Egypt” (Deuteronomy 4:37). “This was the offering of Pagiel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran.”
(Exodus 15:14) "Peoples heard — they quaked": When the peoples heard that Pharaoh and his hosts were lost in the sea, that the rule of Egypt had ended, and that their idolatry had been overthrown, they began quaking, this being the thrust of "Peoples heard; they quaked." Variantly: "Peoples heard; they quaked": When the peoples heard that the Holy One Blessed be He had lifted the horn of Israel and brought them into Eretz Yisrael, they began quaking — at which the Holy One Blessed be He said to them: Fools that you are. Many kings reigned before Me (i.e., in My presence) and Israel was not wrathful (against them), viz. (Genesis 36:31) "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom." And many rulers arose from you, and Israel was not wrathful, viz. (Ibid. 29) "Chief Lotan, Chief Shoval." And now you grow wrathful! I, likewise, will give you "wrath" not to your liking, viz. (Psalms 99:1) "The L–rd reigns — let the peoples quake!"...
Yovav died, and he was succeeded as king by Chusham from the land of the Teimanites [South].
And Jobab died, and in his stead reigned Husham of the South country;
| וַיָּ֖מׇת חֻשָׁ֑ם וַיִּמְלֹ֨ךְ תַּחְתָּ֜יו הֲדַ֣ד בֶּן־בְּדַ֗ד הַמַּכֶּ֤ה אֶת־מִדְיָן֙ בִּשְׂדֵ֣ה מוֹאָ֔ב וְשֵׁ֥ם עִיר֖וֹ עֲוִֽית׃ | 35 J | When Husham died, Hadad son of Bedad, who defeated the Midianites in the country of Moab, succeeded him as king; the name of his city was Avith. |
וימלוך תחתיו הדד, “Haddad reigned in his stead.” The second time the word Haddad appears, it is spelled with the letter ד, whereas the third time it is spelled with the letter ר, i.e. הדר.
WHO SMOTE MIDIAN IN THE FIELD OF MOAB. The intent thereof is to tell of Hadad’s prowess, for the Midianites had come into the field of Moab to overpower them, but he was victorious over them all. Baal-hanan the son of Achbor (Verse 38 here.) was of the same place as Shaul of Rehoboth by the River, (Verse 37 here.) in whose stead he reigned, and therefore Scripture does not ascribe another city to him. It is possible that “Hanan” is the name of a place, and he was the master thereof, which accounts for his name Baal-hanan, and afterwards he became king.
המכה את מדין בשדה מואב WHO SMOTE MIDIAN IN THE FIELD OF MOAB — for Midian came to war against Moab and the king of Edom went to assist Moab. From here we learn that although Midian and Moab were at strife one with the other yet in the time of Balaam they made peace in order to band themselves against Israel (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 3).
Husham died, and Hadad son of Bedad, who had one notable accomplishment in that he smote Midyan, a mainly nomadic tribe that had settled temporarily near Edom and Moav, in the field of Moav, was the king who reigned in his stead. And the name of his city was Avit.
“Moav said to the elders of Midyan: Now this assembly will lick clean all our surroundings, as the ox licks clean the grass of the field. And Balak son of Tzipor was king of Moav at that time” (Numbers 22:4). “Moav said to the elders of Midyan” – what is the nature of the presence of the elders of Midyan here? (In the land of Moav.) It is because they were seeing Israel achieving victory in an unnatural way. They said: ‘Their leader achieved prominence in Midyan, we will ascertain from them what are his attributes.’ The elders of Midyan said to them: 'His power is only in his mouth.' They said to them: 'We, too, will come against them with a person whose power is in his mouth.' “Moav said to the elders of Midyan” – but do you not find that the Midyanites waged war against the Moavites, as it is stated: “Who smote Midyan in the field of Moav” (Genesis 36:35), and the enmity between them is permanent. This is analogous to two dogs that were fighting with one another. A wolf came against one of them. The other said: ‘If I do not help it, today it will kill that one and the next day it will come against me.’ That is why Moav aligned with Midyan. “Now this assembly will lick clean all our surroundings, as the ox licks clean [the grass of the field]” – just as the ox, its might is in its mouth, so, too, these, their power is in their mouths. Just as the ox, in everything that it licks clean there will be no sign of blessing; these too, in every nation that they touch, there will be no sign of blessing. Just as an ox gores with its horns; these, too gore with their prayers, as it is stated: “And his horns are the horns of the wild ox” (Deuteronomy 33:17). “And Balak son of Tzipor was king of Moav at that time” – was he not initially a prince, as it is stated: “[…the Midyanite chiefs,] Evi and Rekem [and Tzur...the princes of Sihon]”? (Joshua 13:21). (Tzur is identified as being Balak (Matnot Kehuna). In Bemidbar Rabba 20:25, the daughter of Tzur says that her father is Balak.) It is, rather, that once Siḥon was killed, they crowned him in his place at that time, as the circumstances caused him [to be appointed].
(Numb. 22:4:) SO MOAB SAID UNTO THE ELDERS OF MIDIAN. Do you not find that the Midianites were at war with the Moabites? It is so stated (in Gen. 36:35): WHO SMOTE MIDIAN IN THE PLAIN OF MOAB, . Moreover, the hatred between them had existed from time immemorial. is comparable [to two] dogs who were hostile to each other. (Sifre, Numb. 31:1-2 (157); Sanh. 105a.) A wolf came against one of them. His companion said: If I do not help him, will kill this today. tomorrow he will come against me. Therefore Moab formed an alliance with Midian.
(Numb. 22:4:) “So Moab said unto the elders of Midian.” What is the relevance of [mentioning] the elders of Midian here? (Numb. R. 20:4.) It is simply that they saw Israel conquering in a way that was not customary for conquerors. They said, “Their leader (i.e., Moses) was raised in Midian. Let us learn through them what his character is like.” The elders of Midian said to them, “His power is only in his mouth.” They said to them, “We also will bring someone against them who has power in his mouth.” (Numb. 22:4:) “So Moab said unto the elders of Midian.” Do you not find that the Midianites were at war with the Moabites? It is so stated (in Gen. 36:35), “[and Hadad ben Bedad,] who smote Midian in the plain of Moab, [reigned in his place].” Moreover, the hatred between them had existed from time immemorial. The matter is comparable to two dogs who were hostile to each other. (Sifre, Numb. 31:1-2 (157); Sanh. 105a.) [When] a wolf came against one of them, his companion said, “If I do not help him, [the wolf] will kill this [dog] today. [Then] tomorrow he will come against me.” Therefore Moab formed an alliance with Midian. (Numb. 22:4, cont.:) “As the ox licks up [the grass of the field].” Just as the ox has its power in its mouth, so do they have their strength in their mouth. Just as everything an ox licks up has no sign (Gk.: semeion.) of blessing, [so] also whatever these lick up have no sign of blessing. Just as an ox gores with its horns, [so] also do these gore with their prayer, as stated (according to Deut. 33:17), “and his horns are the horns of a wild ox, [and with them he gores the nations].”
(Bamidbar 31:1-2) "And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying: Take the revenge of the children of Israel, etc.": This is in praise of the leaders of Israel. They do not depart from the world until they take Israel's revenge, which is the revenge of Him who spoke and brought the world into being. "from the Midianites": But were the Moavites not the initiators? As it is written (Bamidbar 22:4) "And Moav said to the elders of Midian, etc." and (Ibid. 7) "And the elders of Moav went and the elders of Midian, etc." They had never made peace with each other — except when it came to warring with Israel. An analogy: Two sheep dogs were always at odds with each other, until a wolf came to snatch a lamb from the flock, when one of them, standing up against it, the other said: If I don't help him now, he will kill the lamb and then will turn against me and kill me — whereupon they made peace with each other and took on the wolf. Likewise, Moav and Midian were never at peace with each other, viz. (Bereshit 36:35) "… who smote Midian in the field of Moav." But when they came to make war against Israel, they made peace with each other. Why, then, "from the Midianites"? For they "counseled" against Israel. "the Midianites" — they "inveighed" ("midaynin") against Israel.
ויאמר מואב אל זקני מדין, “Moav said to the elders of Midian, etc.;” They were their neighbours and they were contractually allied to them. We know this from Genesis 36,35: where Midian is referred to as having made common cause with Moav. Combined, they had defeated Haddad ben B’dad.
We have to remember that according to Bamidbar Rabbah 20,4 Balak used to be one of the princes of Midian, but the Moabites had appointed him as their king out of fear from the Israelites. When the Torah writes that "Balak saw," it reveals that the former prince of Midian who had seen what the Israelites had done a short while previously to the mighty king Sichon of the Emorites was just as much afraid of the Israelites as the Moabites. There was no need for the Torah to spell this out as everybody had taken note of the defeat of the mighty king Sichon. Subsequently, the Torah mentions that even Moav was afraid of Israel. The fact that both Moav and Midian feared Israel brought them closer together and they made peace with one another as is evident from the proposal made by the elders of Moav to the elders of Midian. Our sages also say in that same Midrash that the proof that the Moabites and the Midianites were warring is the verse המכה את מדין בשדה מואב, (Genesis 36,35). There was always hatred between these two peoples. The Midrash describes their relationship as like that of two dogs which always fight each other until threatened by a wolf. The reason that the Moabites humbled themselves and appointed someone from Midian as king over them instead of vice versa was that the Moabites needed the counsel of the Midianites amongst whom Moses had lived for many years.
ויאמר מואב אל זקני מדין, “Moav said to the elders of Midian, etc.” The sudden consultation between two peoples whom we know as enemies of one another (Genesis 36,35) is remarkable. Fear of the Israelites drove these two people into each other’s arms. When two dogs which were fighting one another perceive themselves as being threatened by a wolf, they suddenly start to cooperate. Here too the survival instinct drove Midian and Moav to bury their hatchets. Why did the Moabites choose the Midianites to consult with? [There were other nations in the region. Ed.]. They had realized that Moses’ success was due to supernatural forces. Having learned that the leader of the Israelites, Moses, had spent many decades in Midian they wanted to find out more about his personality and abilities. The Midianites explained to their Moabite neighbors that Moses’ power was not of a military nature but lay only in his mouth. Thereupon the Moabites (Balak) decided to fight Moses by means of someone (Bileam) whose power was also in his mouth (Tanchuma Balak 3). They were under the impression that Moses was simply a superior astrologer.
ולבכותה, and to weep for her. These two verbs are used on occasion without the prepositions אל and על as for instance in Psalms 69,11 ואבכה בצום נפשי, “when I wept and fasted;” the meaning of the prefix ב in front of צום is equivalent to the preposition על, “I fasted on account of the threat to my soul.” Compare also Genesis 36,35 ויבך אותו אביו, “his father wept for him.”
אל זקני מדין AND MOAB SAID] TO THE ELDERS OF MIDIAN But did not these (Moab and Midian) always hate one another, just as is stated, (Genesis 36:35) “who had smitten Midian in the country of Moab”, from which it is evident that Midian had come against Moab in war? But out of fear of Israel they now made peace between themselves (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 3; cf. Sanhedrin 105a). And what induced Moab to take counsel of Midian? When they saw that Israel was victorious in a supernatural manner they said: the leader of these people grew up in Midian; let us ask them what is his chief characteristic. They replied to them; “His power lies only in his mouth (in prayer)”. Whereupon they said: “Then we must come against them with a man whose power lies in his mouth” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 3).
Chusham died, and he was succeeded as king by Hadad, son of Bedad, who attacked [killed] Midian [the Midianites] in the field of Moav, and the name of his city was Avis.
and Husham died, and in his stead reigned Hadad the son of Bedad, who slew the Midianites when he arrayed war with them in the fields of Moab, and the name of the city of the house of his kingdom was Avith.
| וַיָּ֖מׇת הֲדָ֑ד וַיִּמְלֹ֣ךְ תַּחְתָּ֔יו שַׂמְלָ֖ה מִמַּשְׂרֵקָֽה׃ | 36 J | When Hadad died, Samlah of Masrekah succeeded him as king. |
Hadad died, and Samla of Masreka reigned in his stead.
“These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before the reign of a king for the children of Israel” (Genesis 36:31). “These are the kings who reigned…” – Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “Of oaks from Bashan they crafted your oars; [your rudder they made of ivory inlaid in boxwood from the isles of the Kitites]” (Ezekiel 27:6). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Idolaters were likened to a ship; just as a ship, they manufacture a mast for it from [wood from] one place and anchors from [wood from] another place, so, idolaters, “[Hadad died, and] Samla of Masreka [reigned in his stead]” (Genesis 36:36) “[Samla died,] and Shaul of Reḥovot of the river [reigned in his stead]” (Genesis 36:37). (When they would appoint kings, they would bring them in to reign from different places. ) “These are the kings.” “An estate seized hastily at the start” (Proverbs 20:21) – “these are the kings.” “Will not be blessed at its end” (Proverbs 20:21) – “saviors will ascend Mount Zion [to judge the mountain of Esau]” (Obadiah 1:21). (The verse “An estate seized hastily at the start will not be blessed at its end” refers to Edom, which had kings before Israel, but which will eventually be judged and destroyed. )
Hadad died, and he was succeeded as king by Samlah of Masriekah.
And Hadad died, and in his stead reigned Simlah of Masrekah.
| וַיָּ֖מׇת שַׂמְלָ֑ה וַיִּמְלֹ֣ךְ תַּחְתָּ֔יו שָׁא֖וּל מֵרְחֹב֥וֹת הַנָּהָֽר׃ | 37 J | When Samlah died, Saul (Saul Or “Shaul.”) of Rehoboth-on-the-river succeeded him as king. |
There is also a faculty of daat elyon, (The “upper” or “superior” daat.—In the sefirot scheme of yosher, in which the sefirot form three parallel triads (chochmah-chesed-netzach; binah-gevurah-hod; keter-tiferet-yesod; see Addendum, Mystical Concepts in Chassidism, s.v. Body of the Sefirot), daat does not proceed from and succeed chochmah and binah, but keter. This is the faculty of daat elyon. On this level, daat unites the point of chochmah with binah by a radiation from keter. This is the essential, or original, union of these sefirot so that chochmah may be externalized in binah. That this union may bear offspring, i.e., that the radiation from chochmah and binah will extend into the lower sefirot (the middot) to irradiate them, this is the function or faculty of daat tachton. See Etz Chaim 8:3 f.; Torah Or, Toldot 19a ff. and Mishpatim 75b; Likkutei Torah, Shir Hashirim 30 ff.; Addendum, ibid., s.v. Daat, and Body of the Sefirot.) which is the faculty of the bond and joiner of the source of the intellect [which apprehends the profoundness of the apprehended notion which is a point and a flash flashing over his intellect] so that it extends downward. Thereby the profoundness of the apprehended notion will come to be understood in the expansion of the elucidation, in length and breadth, which is the faculty of binah, referred to as rechovot hanahar, (The widths (or expansions) of the river (binah); Zohar III:142a (on Genesis 36:37). See Shaarei Orah (Gikatilla), ch. 8; Maamarei Admur Hazaken Haketzarim, p. 266; and cf. Zohar I:141b.) as will be explained in its place.
Or “Shaul.”
Samla died, and Shaul of Rehovot on the Euphrates river reigned in his stead.
When corrupted choice darkens the light of the life of “broad spaces by the river,” (Hebrew, reḥovot hanahar: a kabbalistic term based on Gen. 36:37, meaning the broadening of wisdom. Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, the founder of Chabad, characterizes reḥovot hanahar as the spreading of the kabbalistic sefi-ra of ḥokhma (wisdom), which he likens to a wellspring, into the sefira of bina (intellect), which he compares to a river (Likutei Torah, Shir hashirim 39b).) which grows and overspills the borders of Israel, such choice mars the foundation of Israel’s natural excellence—though it cannot destroy it. But it can plunge that treasure deep, deep down into the depths, until it disappears for a long time, eons and eons. The people will long for light, when there is none, until the time of the End.
This being so, these two Sefirot, Understanding-Binah and Kingship-Malchut, are aligned and correspond to each other. It is from the quality of Understanding-Binah that all blessings come to the quality of Kingship-Malchut. This secret is hinted in the verse, (Genesis 2:10) “A river-Nahar-נהר went out of Eden-עדן,” referring to the [river-Nahar-נהר] of Understanding-Binah which comes forth from the place of the Crown-Keter, through wisdom-Chochmah, which is called Desire-Ratzon, and the Understanding-Binah is called, “The expanse of the River-Rechovot HaNahar-רחובות הנהר.” (Genesis 36:37; Also see Shaar HaYichud of Rabbi DovBer of Lubavitch, also known as a Tract on Contemplation (Kuntres HaHitbonenut), Ch. 1 and on.) The verse continues, (Genesis 2:10) “to water the Garden-Gan-גן,” referring to the Sefirah of Kingship-Malchut, which receives every manner of beneficence and blessing that flows through the Sefirah of Understanding-Binah.
The explanation of this verse is that the aspect called “If only-Lu-לו” (This refers to the six upper emotive qualities, each of which possess six, totaling thirty-six, which is the numerical value of “If only-Lu-לו-36.”) should be drawn forth to the quality of “This-Zot-זאת,” from the source of wisdom-Chochmah, which is called “good intellect-Sechel Tov-שכל טוב,” (See Psalms 111:10 – “The beginning of wisdom is fear of HaShem-יהו״ה, good intellect (Sechel Tov-שכל טוב) to all their practitioners.”) by means of the righteous-Tzaddik who is the foundation of the world. (This is a reference to the quality of foundation-Yesod, which is the quality through which beneficence is bestowed, and is the subject of the next gate, although he is beginning to introduce some of the terms relating to this quality insofar as it relates to the quality of kingship-Malchut.) They then will find “good intellect-Sechel Tov-שכל טוב” and eat of the fruit of the righteous-Tzaddik who is called good-Tov-טוב, as it states, (Isaiah 3:10) “Say of the righteous-Tzaddik-צדיק that he is good-Tov-טוב; for they shall eat the fruits of their deeds.” The continuation of the verse, “they would understand it from their end,” means that they should draw forth from the “width of the river-Rechovot HaNahar-רחובות הנהר,” (Genesis 36:37; This is one of the terms that relates to the quality of understanding-Binah, which is compared to the expanse of a river.) from the source of understanding-Binah, to this quality of this-Zot-זאת, which is called “The End of Days-Acharit HaYamim-אחרית הימים,” as it states, (Genesis 49:1) “Gather together and I shall tell you what will befall you in the End of Days-Acharit HaYamim-אחרית הימים.” Similarly, the verse states, (Jeremiah 31:16) “There is hope for your end-Acharitecha-אחריתך – the word of HaShem-יהו״ה.”
“These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before the reign of a king for the children of Israel” (Genesis 36:31). “These are the kings who reigned…” – Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “Of oaks from Bashan they crafted your oars; [your rudder they made of ivory inlaid in boxwood from the isles of the Kitites]” (Ezekiel 27:6). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Idolaters were likened to a ship; just as a ship, they manufacture a mast for it from [wood from] one place and anchors from [wood from] another place, so, idolaters, “[Hadad died, and] Samla of Masreka [reigned in his stead]” (Genesis 36:36) “[Samla died,] and Shaul of Reḥovot of the river [reigned in his stead]” (Genesis 36:37). (When they would appoint kings, they would bring them in to reign from different places. ) “These are the kings.” “An estate seized hastily at the start” (Proverbs 20:21) – “these are the kings.” “Will not be blessed at its end” (Proverbs 20:21) – “saviors will ascend Mount Zion [to judge the mountain of Esau]” (Obadiah 1:21). (The verse “An estate seized hastily at the start will not be blessed at its end” refers to Edom, which had kings before Israel, but which will eventually be judged and destroyed. )
Samlah died, and he was succeeded as king by Sha’ul from Rechovos-by-the-river [P’ras].
And Simlah died, and instead of him reigned Shaul, who was of Rohoboth on the Pherat.
| וַיָּ֖מׇת שָׁא֑וּל וַיִּמְלֹ֣ךְ תַּחְתָּ֔יו בַּ֥עַל חָנָ֖ן בֶּן־עַכְבּֽוֹר׃ | 38 J | When Saul died, Baal-hanan son of Achbor succeeded him as king. |
Shaul died, and Baal Hanan son of Akhbor reigned in his stead.
בעל חנן בן עכבור He was from the place in which Sha-ul had ruled before him. This is why no other city is mentioned in connection with him. It is also possible that the name of his city was Chanan, and that the word בעל חנן simply means that he was in authority over the city known as Chanan.
Sha’ul died, and he was succeeded as king by Ba’al-Chanan, son of Achbor.
And Shaul died, and in his stead reigned Baal Hanan bar Akbor.
| וַיָּ֘מׇת֮ בַּ֣עַל חָנָ֣ן בֶּן־עַכְבּוֹר֒ וַיִּמְלֹ֤ךְ תַּחְתָּיו֙ הֲדַ֔ר וְשֵׁ֥ם עִיר֖וֹ פָּ֑עוּ וְשֵׁ֨ם אִשְׁתּ֤וֹ מְהֵֽיטַבְאֵל֙ בַּת־מַטְרֵ֔ד בַּ֖ת מֵ֥י זָהָֽב׃ | 39 J | And when Baal-hanan son of Achbor died, Hadar succeeded him as king; the name of his city was Pau, and his wife’s name was Mehetabel daughter of Matred daughter of Me-zahab. |
MEHETABEL THE DAUGHTER OF MATRED, THE DAUGHTER OF ME-ZAHAB. This is to be explained (Scripture lists her as having two fathers, Metrad and Me-zahab.) in the same manner as we interpret Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon (v. 2). (See I.E.’s comments on verse 2. Metrad was her father and Me-zahab her grandfather (Krinsky).) On the other hand Scripture may be listing Mehetabel’s mother and father. (I.E. does not identify which one was the father and which one the mother (Krinsky).)
ME-ZAHAB. This was his name. (That is, Me-zahab is a proper name.) However, Saadiah Gaon says that Me-Zahab means a goldsmith. (Our verse should thus be rendered: Mehetabel the daughter of Matred, the daughter of a goldsmith. Cf. Onkelos.) Others say Me-zahab alludes to those who make gold out of copper. (That is, Me-zahab means an alchemist.) However, the latter is sheer nonsense. (The interpretation is nonsense (Cherez) or the belief in alchemy is nonsense (Krinsky).)
ושם אשתו מהיטבאל בת מטרד בת מי זהב, “the name of his wife was Mehetabel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Me-zahav.” The Torah provides these details to teach that the wife of Hadad was the daughter of a wealthy man whose entire pursuit in life was the amassing of material wealth. The gold was as plentiful in his house as water. A Midrashic approach to the verse commencing with the words “these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom.” These kings were direct descendants of Esau as appears from the reading of the text. According to Shemot Rabbah 15,4 [not exactly, Ed.] these were all descendants of Esau, idol worshippers, indulging in promiscuous sex, and possessing great material wealth. Bereshit Rabbah 83,4 states that the name Mehetabel is an allusion to the fact that they tried to please many deities. The name “daughter of Matred” is interpreted as an allusion that she who had first been prepared and beautified for her husband was subsequently a source of trouble for her husband as the people of his generation indulged in illicit sex with her. The word “daughter of golden waters,” is an allusion to the material wealth of these people. They said of gold and silver: “so what?” (they had so much of it they did not treasure it). The whole paragraph teaches that the descendants of Esau were all wicked people. These verses contain further allusions to the characteristics of Esau’s descendants throughout the ages. We are told, in the same Midrash for instance, that the name אלוף מגדיאל “chieftain of Magdiel,” is an allusion to Rome and its Empire. In Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 38 we are told that Esau received 100 provinces or countries during the period between then and the ascendancy of the Roman Empire as a reward for clearing out all of his belongings from the land of Israel at that time and leaving Yaakov free to live there unimpeded by his presence or the presence of any of his belongings. This is derived from the wording אלוף מגדיאל אלוף עירם, suggesting that the former name is that of a city, the latter that of a person. Daniel prophesied concerning the Roman Empire (Daniel 11,36) “The king will do as he pleases and he will exalt himself greater than any god, and about the G’d of the gods he will speak fantastic things.” This is why the term מגדיאל is applied to this king in the Torah, a reference to גדול, “great”. Actually, he was the tenth of these Alufim, ”chiefs.” This is what Daniel said (7,24) ”And the ten horns- from that kingdom ten horns will arise, and another will arise after them who will be different from the former.” What Daniel had in mind was that ten kings would arise of whom the tenth would rule over Rome, and that his Empire would spread from Rome outwards. encompassing most of the civilised part of the globe. Concerning that nation, the Torah did not provide us with its name. All our prophets also constantly mention the greatness of that Empire without revealing its name. Daniel, who compared various Empires to “the lion,” “the bear,” and to “the leopard,” did not reveal the name of the fourth beast to which the fourth Empire could be compared. All he said concerning this unnamed beast (7,7) was that “it is excessively terrifying, awesome and strong; with immense iron teeth, it was eating and crumbling and trampling the rest with its feet.” Isaiah (13,1) also speaks of messages to or concerning the Empire of Egypt, (19,1) the Empire of Babylon (15,1) and the Empire of Moav. When it comes to specifying to whom the fourth message is addressed, all he said was (21,11) “a call comes to me from Seir:” משא דומה אלי קורא משעיר, שמר מה מלילה, שמר מה מליל, “watchman, what of the night? Watchman what of the night?” Elsewhere (Isaiah 35,9) the prophet speaks of ”no lion shall be there, no ferocious beast shall set foot on it, these shall not be found there but the redeemed shall walk it.” We also find that the prophet Jeremiah mentions all these various Empires without naming the last one. Compare Jeremiah 5,6: ”therefore the lion of the forest strikes them down, the wolf of the desert ravages them; a leopard lies in wait by their towns whoever leaves them will be torn to pieces.” In the whole Torah only Moses, and in Psalms only Assaph, mentions the name of the fourth beast. The name עירם is a reference to Rome and it is the subject of Psalms 80,14 in Assaph’s psalm where he wrote יכרסמנה חזיר מיער, “wild boars gnaw at it (Israel).” You will note that the letter ע in the word מיער has been suspended above the line. leaving the letters that remain as an allusion to Rome, i.e. רמי, this is why here when the tenth chief is mentioned, the Torah amplifies by adding the word עירם in addition to the name אלוף מגדיאל, the letters in the word עירם being the same as those in Assaph’s psalm where he speaks of מיער. In other words: “who is this אלוף מגדיאל? Answer: none other than the חזיר מיער, the wild boar mentioned in Psalms 80,14. The letters in the word עירם may be read as מעיר, an allusion to Numbers 24,19 והאביד שריד מעיר, “he (the redeemer of Israel) will destroy the remnant of the city (Rome).” Isaiah 25,2 may also be understood in the same vein כימת מעיר לגל קריה בצורה למפלה, “forYou have turned a city into a stone heap never to be rebuilt.” The letters in the word מעיר can also be rearranged to read ירעם. Concerning this word, David said in Psalms 18,14 וירעם בשמים ה’ ועליון יתן קולו ברד וגחלי אש, that in “the future the Lord will thunder from heaven, the Most High will give forth with His voice- hail and fiery coals.” He will destroy Rome. Daniel prophesied similarly concerning the end of the Roman Empire when he wrote in Daniel 7,11 “I was watching. Then because of the sound of the haughty words which the horn spoke, I watched till the beast was slain and its body destroyed and consigned to the fire’s burning” The prophet Ovadiah also prophesied concerning the destruction of Edom when he wrote (Ovadiah 1) that the Celestial Court had ordained the destruction of Edom and his entire prophecy concerns only this subject and the justification for the destruction of Edom. The Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni near the end of Isaiah) remarks that only two prophets described their prophesies as חזון, “a vision,” i.e. Isaiah and Ovadiah. The numerical value of the combined letters in that word totals 71. Isaiah cursed Edom in the Celestial Court, whereas Ovadiah judged Edom in that same Court. There is a book called פרקי היכלות, from which our author quotes on occasion in which the various afflictions that Rome will experience in the future are discussed, i.e. that the decline of that Empire will be so drastic that a person will offer it for sale for a small copper coin and he will not find anyone willing to buy it even at that price. Included in these ten אלופים you also find one who is described here as אלוף עלוה, whereas in Chronicles I 1,51, he is described as אלוף עליה. In order to maintain the uniformity of the Torah and to counter accusations of inaccuracy, the name in Chronicles is read as אלוף עלוה just as in the Torah. The reason the spelling is different is that it is an illusion to the negative characteristic of the descendants of Esau who speak untruths and do not even write their names truthfully. Psalms 144,8 alludes to such practices and refers to people who speak lies in order to make G’d’s words appear not to be true. Bereshit Rabbah 83,1 describes the fact that in the early stages, before Israel had kings of its own, the Edomite nation was in a state of some turmoil, as evident from the fact that their leaders are referred to as merely אלופים, whereas subsequently, after the Israelites had elected a king, the Edomites were presided over by kings who possessed the authority which the word implies. Eventually they would suffer the fate predicted in Ovadiah 21 when “the liberators would march up on Mount Zion to wreak judgment on Mount Esau; and dominion shall be the Lord’s.” A kabbalistic approach to the above chapter: The words: “and these are the kings who reigned over the land of Edom,” are an allusion to the numerous worlds G’d had created (prior to our universe) and before He had manifested Himself as G’d in this universe. This is meant by the words לפני מלך מלך לבני ישראל, “before a king reigned for the Israelites.” During this period G’d “experimented” by creating worlds and then destroying them until eventually, He co-opted the attribute of Mercy and created the present universe. I am unable to explain all these things in detail as they are beyond me. It is a cardinal principle of the kabbalistic approach that there is no qualitative difference between the various matters described in the written Torah, and that statements such as: “Hear O Israel the Lord your G’d is one,” and statements such as “the name of the wife of Hadar was Mehetabel.” Seeing that the entire written Torah is understood as an elongated name of G’d as we have learned from Nachmanides, how could there be one part of the written Torah which is more important than any other part? We are entitled to wonder why the wife of King Hadar rated mention more than the wives of any of the other Kings of Edom. We would dearly love to know who this woman was who has not been mentioned elsewhere in the Torah. How do we profit by knowing the name of a woman when we have not been told anything about her virtues or otherwise?
I will now proceed to enlighten you about this subject. The Torah first mentions that one of the kings was called Hadad (verse 35) whereas in verse 39 we are told that a King by the name of Hadar followed the King Baal Chanan. Both these names are derived from the expression הוד והדר both of which expressions describe attributes, character traits. The meaning of the name (הדד (בן בדד whose letters comprise a numerical value of 13 is that that King possessed 13 character traits. These traits derive from the ten emanations (the numerical value of the word בדד, whereas בן means “derived from”). The 13 characteristics are the ones required to guide this terrestrial universe along the lines G’d desires. This world is also perceived as the world of בחינה, “perceptions”, i.e. in which we have to decide what is right and what is wrong and act accordingly. [I believe the term is borrowed from the writings of the author of Chovot Halevovot and means that by means of observing both the evidence of our eyes that there was a Creator, etc., as well as the evidence of history and how G’d revealed His attribute of Mercy as well as that of Justice, we can form a more or less accurate picture of both the wisdom and the Justice which are the foundations of this universe. Ed.] Hadad called the name of the city which was his capital עוית, “something corrupt,” to symbolise the presence of the evil urge which is bent on corrupting man. It was a place from which onlookers perceived perverted justice as emanating. In verse 39 the Torah goes on to write וימלך הדר תחתיו, “Hadar ascended the throne in his place, and the name of his capital was פעו, (a reference to flying creatures)” as the souls would fly from there. The word “his city (capital)” i.e. עירו, is derived from the expression עיר וקדיש, in Daniel 4,10, i.e. “a wakeful flying angel.” The wife of this Hadar was called מהיטבאל, Mehetabel, a reference to the attribute of “goodness” which G’d promised Moses to let parade in front of him (compare Exodus 33,19). This attribute is also known as אל seeing that G’d had said of Moses [to Miriam and Aaron in Numbers 12,8, Ed.] that the latter was thoroughly at home and trusted in G’d’s entire “house,” i.e. in His universe. The house is the place where a human being feels “good,” at ease. When the Torah continued to describe Mehetabel as “the daughter of Matred,” this is a euphemism and does not refer to Matred being an actual mother of Mehetabel and her as being a biological daughter of someone called Matred. The expression בת מטרד means that Mehetabel in turn was a derivative of the major attribute Matred. We find the term בת as meaning a measure (attribute) in Kings I 7,26 where the size of the basin in which the priests washed their hands before proceeding to perform Temple service is described as containing 2000 such measures of water. This attribute was capable of misleading man’s thoughts as our sages said when they sought to explain how Rabbi Elisha ben Avuyah (known as אחר, “the other one, the heretic,” as he took the wrong theological-philosophical turn). The Talmud Chagigah 14 described this Elisha as becoming guilty of קצץ בנטיעות, becoming a heretic in his thinking. The Torah here explains further that this attribute (Matred) was one which was composed of a combination of Mercy and Justice; the Torah alludes to this by calling it בת מי זהב, “a derivative of water and gold.” The Shechinah, which is also known as בת, is perceived as radiating in 6 directions all combining elements of the attribute of Mercy as well as elements of the attribute of Justice. We also know that the letter ד in the Holy Tongue is sometimes substituted for by the letter ת, so that the word מטרד could be understood as מטרת, the Aramaic translation of משמרת, “protective supervision.” In Psalm 121 we encounter this word (שמר) no fewer than 6 times when the psalmist describes G’d as watching over him in every direction. Up until now, the Torah spoke about what goes on in the celestial regions of the universe. From here on it addresses itself to what goes on in our terrestrial regions. These “lower” regions are presided over by “mere” אלופים, mortal chiefs, rather than מלכים, “kings, celestial attributes, forces.” May the Lord grant us the wonderful insights which the prophet Hoseah prayed for (Hoseah 6,3) when he described the heart as gaining knowledge of G’d comparing this new-found knowledge to a fountain of water gushing forth. After all, the Torah has been compared to a fountain of water as we know from Solomon who is on record in Song of Songs 4,15 מעין גנים באר מים חיים ונוזלים מן לבנון, “purified in a garden spring, a well of living waters flowing clean from the Lebanon.” We also have an assurance from the prophet Isaiah 12,3 concerning the future insights we shall be accorded when he wrote ושאבתם מים בששון ממעיני הישועה, “and you will draw waters joyfully from the fountains of salvation.”
וימלוך תחתיו הדר...ושם אשתו וגו', we do not know why both his wife’s name and that of her father have been mentioned.
בת מי זהב THE DAUGHTER OF ME-ZAHAB — meaning מהו זהב what value has gold? He was so rich that gold had no value in his eyes (Genesis Rabbah 83:4).
And Baal Hanan son of Akhbor died, and Hadar reigned in his stead, and the name of the city was Pa’u; and his wife’s name was Mehetavel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Mei Zahav. It is unclear why the name of his wife and her lineage are mentioned here. Mei Zahav is either simply a name without any particular significance, a title meaning goldsmith, 34 or an epithet for a very rich person. Perhaps the wealth of Mehetavel’s grandfather enabled Hadad to stabilize his reign.
This is as written, “As we have heard, so have we seen…” (Ibid. 9), none of them endured, but she, Malchut, exists now in the aspect of the male that dwells with her. This is the meaning of, “and Hadar reigned in his place, and the name of his city was Pa’u; and his wife’s name was Mehetavel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Mei-Zahav” (Bereshit 36:39), surely Mei-Zahav, as we explained in the Gathering.
Come and behold, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakai used to say that 300 legal decisions are derived from the verse, "and his wife's name was Mehetabel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezehab" (Beresheet 36:39). This he revealed only to Rabbi Eliezer, who was with him. That shows how many secrets of the Torah are in every deed in the Torah. In each word, there is wisdom and true doctrine. Therefore the words of the Torah are holy words, by which to conceive wondrous things, as it is written, "Open you my eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of Your Torah" (Tehilim 119:18).
“Baal Ḥanan son of Akhbor died, and Hadar reigned in his stead, and the name of the city was Pa’u and his wife’s name was Mehetavel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Mei Zahav” (Genesis 36:39). “Baal Ḥanan died” – Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Simon, Rabbi Levi said: They would adorn [their] gods [metivei elohot]. “Mehetavel” – they would adorn themselves for idol worship. “Daughter of Matred” – they would erect castles [turiyot] for idol worship. Rabbi Simon said: They would adorn women. “Mehetavel” – they would adorn her for her husband and then would take [toredin] her from her husband. “Daughter of Mei Zahav” – they were preoccupied with their sustenance; once they became wealthy, [they would say:] What is gold [mahu dahava]? What is silver? (They would boast that gold and silver were no longer valuable in their eyes. ) “The chieftain of Magdiel, the chieftain of Iram. These are the chieftains of Edom, according to their settlements in their apportioned land. He is Esau, father of Edom” (Genesis 36:43). “The chieftain of Magdiel, the chieftain of Iram” – on the day that Diocletian assumed the throne, Rabbi Ami saw in his dream: Today, Magdiel assumed the throne. He said: ‘One more king is required for Edom.’ “The chieftain of Iram” – Rabbi Ḥanina of Tzippori said: Why is he called Iram? Because he is destined to pile [laarom] treasures for the messianic king. Rabbi Levi said: There was an incident involving a certain ruler in Rome who would squander his father’s treasures. Elijah appeared to him in a dream. He said to him: ‘Your fathers gathered and you squander?’ He did not move from there until he refilled them. (The ruler immediately made it his top priority to replenish the treasures. )
The Arizal explains the reason that the Torah (Deut. 20,16) has demanded that the Jewish people kill every member of these seven Canaanite nations: לא תחיה כל נשמה. When the Torah instructs us how to relate to other nations (such as שעיר, i.e. אדום, עמון, and מואב however), it only commanded (Deut. 2,9 et al) the Jewish people under Moses not to make war against those nations. The seven Canaanite nations represent seven קליפות, i.e. שבעה כלים שנשברו, negative aspects of the seven emanations which comprise what we called בנין, the constructive forces enabling the creation of a perfect physical universe. Although, as we explained in connection with the name "Samael," even Satan had his root in something holy, i.e. א-ל, the spiritual decline of these descendants of the original Canaan, the cursed, was such that no vestige of sanctity was left in them. This meant automatically that no נשמה, spiritually elevated soul of theirs, would survive. The other three nations whose land G–d had promised as part of ארץ ישראל still retained vestiges of holiness. These were the קיני, קניזי and קדמוני, whose lands G–d had also promised Abraham (Genesis 15,19) when He promised us the Holy Land. These nations had their origin in the "upper" three emanations. The promise that we will inherit their lands in the future can be fulfilled when the last vestiges of sanctity will have vanished from these three nations. At such a time the commandment not to let a soul survive will also be applicable to those three nations. The Arizal wants to equate the three nations Edom, Ammon and Moab with the Keynee, Kenizi and Kadmoni respectively. The very names of these three nations allude to their having had a superior origin, שעיר alludes to Deut. 33,2, where G–d is portrayed as coming from Se-ir to give Israel the Torah. The name Moab means "from the אב, "the father," another allusion to the higher emanation חכמה, seat of undiluted holiness. The name Ammon is close to the word נועם, an allusion to the emanation בינה. שעיר is none other than אדום. The seven kings whom the Torah describes in the Torah (Genesis 36,31-39) as having ruled in the land of Edom before Israel had a king were not part of that nation. Apparently they had subjugated the country. This is why the Torah, when telling us that a particular king ruled over Edom, informs us of his country of origin. We are told in 2,20: והעמונים קראו להם זמזומים, that the Ammonites called the Refa-im Zamzumim. The word זמזום is derived from זמם, planned, thought out. In other words these רפאים had the "superior" emanation חכמה somewhere in their background. Their descendants were the mixed multitude who joined the Jewish people at the Exodus and converted to Judaism. This explains why they still had enough of a spark of sanctity in them to recognize the spiritual rejuvenation that was taking place at the time of the Exodus. On the other hand, anyone who plans something evil and uses his superior intelligence negatively, is similarly descended from them. The name סיחון, one of the kings of the Canaanite nations, suggests the word סייח, a young ass. The Hebrew word for donkey is חמור, the same letters as חומר, matter. The Canaanites were concerned with matter to the exclusion of the spirit. The name Og, king of Bashan, evokes similar considerations. The Arizal concludes that because the lands of these kingdoms were situated East of the river Jordan which symbolized the foundation of the feminine aspect in the emanations, these kingdoms could not have been subdued by anyone but Moses. Spiritually speaking, Moses represented the "middle" line between the left (feminine) side of the diagram of the emanations and the right (masculine) side. Moses was the carrier of the symbol of the Holy Covenant. He broke the tablets and salvaged the sanctity contained in them. When the Torah describes the defeat of the שני מלכי האמורי, "the two kings of the Emorite" (3,8), the first letters of these three words form the name משה. G–d said to Moses (2,31): ראה החילותי תת לפניך את סיחון, "See, I have begun to hand over to you Sichon, etc." This means that the patron of this kingdom, the שר, had been subjugated by Moses. The land of Israel is perceived as the "feminine" part of the union between the people of Israel and its land. Taking possession of the land of Israel, ביאת הארץ, is a euphemism for the union between Israel and its land as husband and wife. [I have rephrased some of this. Ed.]
A kabbalistic approach: the words “it is an eternal covenant” mean that the covenant described as a “salt-like covenant” is an eternal covenant. Just as salt preserves the meat indefinitely, so this type of covenant endures indefinitely. The major ingredient of salt is water. Due to the power of the sun which shone upon it it turns into salt. In other words, salt represents a fusion of the elements fire and water. Similarly, the covenant is a combination of the attributes Mercy and Justice. This is the mystical dimension of Genesis 36,39 בת מי זהב, (compare author’s comment on page 544 our translation on the meaning of the word בת). The whole verse explains to us that this covenant is the “salt of the universe.” it ensures that the universe endures, or, G’d forbid, will be destroyed if the covenant is breached. We have proof of this from Deut. 29,22 where the earth around Sodom and Gomorah which had undergone a rain of sulfur and salt some 500 years earlier is described as still unfit to produce vegetation. At first glance, describing salt as a destructive agent and using it as an example of an enduring covenant, i.e. something positive, appears contradictory. However, this is not so. The two statements are merely two halves of the same coin.
ארץ חטה ושעורה, “a land producing wheat and barley, etc.” Seeing the land corresponds to the tenth emanation, it is praised as possessing ten qualities. Five of these qualities are the types of grain that can be grown in the land of Israel successfully. Moses mentions only the two principal varieties, i.e. wheat and barley as he considers the other three as sub-categories, i.e. oats, spelt, and rye. The five types of fruit mentioned make up the number ten. On other occasions the blessings of the land of Israel are summarized under the heading of “a land flowing with milk and honey.” This hints that G’d’s goodwill results in an abundance of products reminding us both of His attribute of Mercy (the white, milk) and His attribute of Justice, (the red color of the honey from dates). [The author commented on Genesis 36,39 that the abundance of material blessings when abused such as by the descendants of Esau may result in the attribute of Justice being activated. Ed.].
These are the kings … When Baal-hanan died, Hadad reigned in his stead—with a dalet; but in the Torah (Gen 36:39) this appears as “Hadar,” with a resh.
The eighth principle That the Torah is from Heaven and that is that we believe that this Torah that is given to us through Moshe, our teacher - peace be upon him - is completely from the mouth of the Almighty; which is to say that it all came to him from God, may He be blessed, in a manner that is metaphorically called speech. And no one knows how it came to him except Moshe himself, peace be upon him - since it came to him. And [we believe] that he was like a scribe who is dictated to and writes down all of the events, the stories and the commandments. And therefore, [Moshe] is called the engraver. And there is no difference between "And the sons of Cham were Kush and Mitsrayim" (Genesis 10:6), "and his wife's name was" Meheitabel" (Genesis 36:39), "And Timnah was his concubine" (Genesis 36:12) [ on the one hand] and "I am the Lord, your God" (Exodus 20:2) and "Hear Israel" (Deuteronomy 6:4) [on the other]; since they are all from the mouth of the Almighty and it is all the Torah of God - complete, pure and holy truth. And anyone who says, "These type of verses or stories were written by Moshe on his own," is for our sages and prophets a heretic, and one who reveals [incorrect] faces [of the Torah] more than all of the heretics; since he thinks that there is a heart and a peel to the Torah and that these chronicles and stories don't have a point to them and that they are from Moshe our teacher - peace be upon him. And this matter of one who holds that the Torah is not from Heaven, the sages said about it (Sanhedrin 99a), that it is one who believes the whole Torah is from the mouth of the Almighty except for this one verse, which the Holy One, blessed be He, did not say, but rather it was from Moshe himself. And this is "Since he disgraced the word of the Lord" (Numbers 15:31) - God, may He be blessed, is above the statements of the heretics. Rather every single word of the Torah contains wisdom and wonders for the one who understands them. And their ultimate wisdom is not [fully] grasped, as 'its measure is longer than the earth and broader than the sea.' And a man should only walk in the footsteps of David, the anointed of the God of Yaakov, who prayed (Psalms 119:18), "Uncover my eyes and I shall look upon the wonders of Your Torah." And so too, the accepted understanding of the Torah is also from the Almighty; and [so] that which we today make a [certain] form for the sukkah, the lulav, the shofar, the tsitsit, the tefilllin and other [such matters], it is the exact form that God, may He be blessed, said to Moshe, and which [Moshe] told to us - and he is reliable in his charge. And the statement that indicates this principle is that which is stated (Numbers 16:28), "with this shall you know that it is the Lord that sent me to do all of these acts, and it is not from my heart."
ודי זהב, an expression similar to בת מי זהב in Genesis 36,39 which is also the name of a location.
Ba’al-Chanan, son of Achbor died, and he was succeeded as king by Hadar. The name of his city was Pa’u. His wife’s name was Meheitaveil, the daughter of Matreid, daughter of Mei-Zahav [a goldsmith].
And after him reigned Hadar; and the name of his city was Pahu, andthe daughter of Matred, the daughter of the changer of gold: the man who perseverance all the days of his life; but who, after he had eaten and was satisfied, converted and said, What is gold, and what is silver?
And Baal Hanan bar Akbor died, and instead of him reigned Hadar; and the name of the city of the house of his kingdom was Pahu; and the name of his wife was Mehetabel the daughter of Matred. He was the man who laboured with perseverance and vigilance, and who, after he had become wealthy and had gotten riches, turned to become more lofty in his heart, saying What is silver and what is gold?
| וְ֠אֵ֠לֶּה שְׁמ֞וֹת אַלּוּפֵ֤י עֵשָׂו֙ לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֔ם לִמְקֹמֹתָ֖ם בִּשְׁמֹתָ֑ם אַלּ֥וּף תִּמְנָ֛ע אַלּ֥וּף עַֽלְוָ֖ה אַלּ֥וּף יְתֵֽת׃ | 40 J | These are the names of the clans of Esau, each with its families and locality, name by name: the clans Timna, Alvah, Jetheth, |
3. But what of the wicked people “who speak arrogantly, haughtily and contemptuously of the tzaddik” (Psalms 31:19) ? From where do they receive the ruach to fill the lack? But know! there is a RaV of the kelipah (husks). He corresponds to Esav, as is written in connection to Esav (Genesis 33:9), “I have RaV (a lot).” This also corresponds to (Genesis 36:40), “… the alufey (tribal chiefs of) Esav,” which Onkelos renders: “RaVrevay Esav”—who is the RaV of the husks.
ואלה שמות אלופי עשו למשפחותם למקומותם, “the following are the names alufim (clans) of Esau, according to their names and locations.” These latter ones were the principal descendants to be counted separately in each city that they dwelled; this is why here the Torah adds the word: למקומותם, “according to the localities they lived in.” The Torah also adds the word: אחוזתם, “their ancestral homes,” in verse 43. Proof of the importance of the ones listed here is the fact that the previous ones have not been listed in Chronicles I 1,51 54 at all.
[AND THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE CHIEFS THAT CAME OF ESAU…AFTER THEIR PLACES] This means that their territories are well-known today (in the days of Moses). These are the words of Moses. (That is, verses 40-43. Until now Moses reported what had been Divinely revealed to him concerning Edom’s past. In verses 40-43 he turns to his own generation and in his own words adds that the 11 chiefs of Edom (enumerated in verses 40-43) are now ruling each in his own territory.) Those now mentioned are the offspring of the chiefs mentioned above. (Verses 15-18 (Cherez).) Only those that had their own territories are mentioned. (In verses 15-18, 14 chiefs are mentioned. In verses 40-43, 11 chiefs are mentioned. The names in verses 40-43 are not the same as those in 15-18. Hence I.E. points out that they were their sons. To explain why only 11 are mentioned in 40-43, I.E. posits that only those with a territory of their own are mentioned. After the death of the 14 mentioned in 15-18 their sons, mentioned in 40-43, became chiefs. Another possibility is that after the 14 mentioned above died, eight kings reigned and then the 11 mentioned in 40-43 became chiefs (Cherez). If the latter is correct, then when I.E. says that those in 40-43 are the offspring of those in 15-18 he means their descendants.)
TIMNA. Here it refers to a male. (Timna was the name of Eliphaz’s concubine (v. 12); hence it is a female name. However, the chief of Timna was a male. Hence Timna can be either a male or female name.) For we have many names which are used both for male and females. The same holds true for Oholibamah. (Oholibamah was the name of one of Esau’s wives (v. 2). Hence it is a female name. However, the chief of Oholibamah was a male.) It is also possible that the word chief is superfluous, (That is, Timna is a female name and refers to Timna, Eliphaz’s concubine. The superfluous chief refers to the word chief prefixed to Alvah and Jetheth. The verse should thus be read: the chief of Timna, Alvah and Jetheth. The same applies to Oholibamah (Krinsky) or the word chief prefixed to Timna is superfluous. The verse should be read: Timna, the chief of Alva, the chief of Jetheth. The same applies to Oholibamah (Weiser).) the interpretation of the chief of Timna, the chief of Alvah, the chief Jetheth being, the following are the chiefs of Timna, Eliphaz’s concubine, Alvah and Jetheth. Alvah and Jetheth were chiefs of Amelek. (Timna bore to Eliphaz Amalek (v. 12). Hence the chiefs of Timna, Alvah and Jetheth were chiefs of Amalek.) There were seven chiefs of Oholibamah in the day of Moses. Each of these chiefs had his own territory. Hence Moses was explicit and added, according to their habitations. (Each of these chiefs had territories which bore their names and this was noted by Moses.)
ואלה, now the Torah mentions eight Alufim who were in positions of leadership after the kingdom of Edom had ceased to exist as such. There were eleven such Alufim.
AND THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE CHIEFS THAT CAME TO ESAU. At first (Verses 15-19 here.) Scripture enumerated Esau’s grandsons who were chieftains in that generation, and afterwards some of his descendants succeeded in attaining sovereignty. After that their kingdom ceased, and the Edomites once again appointed these chieftains as their head. And so it is said in the book of Chronicles: (I, 1:51.) And Hadad died. And the chiefs of Edom were: the chief of Timna. So did Rashi explain it here in his commentary on this verse. And that which Scripture says here, according to their families, after their places, by their names, [and in Verse 43], after their habitations in the land of their possessions means that among the previous chiefs, [mentioned above in Verses 15-19], all the brothers who were the chiefs dwelled in one city, ruling one people, or their position was analogous to the princes of the tribes and the heads of families [in Israel]. But these latter ones were chiefs according to their families, meaning that each one was chief of all the families of Esau’s descendants, and in all of their dwelling places, for in that generation he alone was called “chief,” no other person being so called in all the land they possessed. Thus they were as kings in their countries, but they were not enthroned, and the glory of royalty was not bestowed upon them. In the opinion of many commentators (See Rashi on Verse 31. In his opinion, before there reigned any king (Verse 31) refers to Saul, king of Israel. Moses who wrote the Torah could therefore know it only by prophecy.) this section was written as a prophecy. But this is not correct. Why should prophecy mention these kings, and until what point in time was Scripture to enumerate them and stop? Rather the correct interpretation is that all these ruled before the Torah was given in the days of Moses. Now we may say that they all ruled in one time, and then the explanation of after their places would be that each one ruled in his place, or else their rule lasted but a short time, as Scripture says, But the years of the wicked shall be shortened. (Proverbs 10:27.)
ואלה שמות אלופי עשא למשפחותם למקומותם, among the “Alufim” listed in the verses following there are several who had been mentioned earlier simply as sons of Esau. We must assume that these sons eventually rose in rank to become “Alufim.” We already mentioned that the title “Aluf” essentially means that the people so described were mayors of cities, which is most likely the reason why the Torah adds the word למקומותם, “in their respective locations.” Proof of the correctness of what I surmise may be the fact that in Chronicles all the details provided by the Torah here in this chapter are repeated verbatim. However, the first list of the “Alufim” of the sons of Esau (36,15-19) are not mentioned there at all.
ואלה שמות אלופי עשו AND THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE CHIEFS OF ESAU — [… AFTER THEIR PLACES ACCORDING TO THEIR NAMES] they were called by the names of their districts after Hadad died and the royal dignity had ceased so far as they were concerned. The former names mentioned above (v. 15ff.), are the names given them at their birth. This, too, (the first statement made here) is expressly set forth in Chronicles (2:51) “And Hadad (Hadar) died, and the chiefs of Edom were: the chief of Timna etc.” (We must therefore translate here: “the chieftain of Timna etc.”)
ואלה שמות אלופי עשו, the significance of the additional words למקומותם בשמותם may be that they were not distinguished enough to be recorded by their individual names, but only in association with the location where they practiced their authority.
Called by the names of their states... I.e., when the verse says, “According to their places, by their names,” it means they are named after their places. And lest we object that the chiefs of Eisov were listed before, and furthermore, other [chiefs] are also listed there, Rashi goes on to say: “The previous chiefs... are their family names.” The proof that the ones listed here are named after their provinces is that Magdiel is Rome [as Rashi says on v. 43]. For it says in Midrash Rabbah: “[The day that Lotianos became Caesar in Rome,] R. Ami was shown in a dream that today, Magdiel became king.” But from the other ones, such as Chief Kenaz, etc., [there is no proof.] It could be family names, since they were called by these same names even before. And Chief Oholivomoh and Chief Timna seem more likely to be family names, since we saw before that these are names of people. And nothing forces us to say that the others are names of provinces, either. Therefore Rashi brings a proof from Magdiel, which is the name of a place—and so they all are named after their provinces, because Magdiel serves as an example for the others. (R. Meir Stern)
And these are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names, as the chieftains of Esau’s descendants ruled in different areas. The chieftain of Timna, the chieftain of Alva, the chieftain of Yetet. Some of these names were already mentioned above, but there are some differences here. For example, the name Timna did not appear earlier as a man’s name. 35
ואלה שמות אלופי עשב, “and these are the names of he headmen of Esau.” First the alufim among the sons of Esau who were such in that generation are mentioned. From positions as headmen, the success of these people in war led to them or their sons becoming Kings, and in due course their pre-eminence ebbed again so that they were simply ראשים. Compare Chronicles I 1,43 -54) 36,43 בארץ אחוזתם, “in the land of their ancestral inheritance.”
The heads mentioned earlier were all brothers, the alufim all residing in the same town, and ruling over a single nation, or they were heads of a tribe each. The ones mentioned here were heads of the combined families of Esau, their authority extending over all the towns inhabited by Esau’s offspring. They were comparable to kings in their authority.
אלוף תמנע. Ibn Ezra believes that the “Timna” mentioned here was a man. It is not unusual to find men or women having the same names. Oholivamah was one such example. It is also possible that seeing the word aluf at this point is superfluous, we must understand the verse as follows: the headman of the family of Timna who had been a concubine of Eliphaz produced several alufim, their names being Alvah, and Yetet. Similarly, the family of Oholivama, wife of Esau, produced alufim known as Eylah, and Pinon.
“On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:72). “On the eleventh day, prince of the children of Asher, Pagiel the son of Okhran” – what was the reason for the prince of Asher to present his offering after the prince of Dan? It is because Dan is named for judgment [din], and Asher is named for its confirmation [ishuro]; that is why the Holy One blessed be He commanded Asher to present his offering after Dan, because the judge must confirm his judgment, just as it says: “Seek justice, confirm it for the oppressed” (Isaiah 1:17). “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:73). “His offering was [one] silver dish…” – Rabbi Tanḥuma said: The names of all the tribes were called for the redemption of Israel and for their praise. Asher’s name was called for the redemption of Israel, just as it says: “All the nations will praise [ve’ishru] you, as you will be a desired land, said the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 3:12), and for their praise, just as it says: “Happy [ashrei] is the nation for whom this is so; happy is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalms 144:15). Israel’s happiness [ishuran] is only because they chose the Holy One blessed be He to be God for them and the Holy One blessed be He chose them to be a treasured nation for Him. That is why when the prince of Asher came to present his offering, he presented his offering for the sake of the choice, that the Holy One blessed be He chose Israel from all the nations, just as it says: “The Lord has chosen you to be His treasured people of distinction [from all the peoples that are on the face of the earth]” (Deuteronomy 14:2), as it is stated: “Happy is the one whom You choose and draw near…” (Psalms 65:5). Therefore, he presented his offering of a silver dish, corresponding to the nations of the world, who were initially attributed to Abraham. (See Genesis 17:5.) “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – these are the seventy descendants of Noah and the sixty queens, as Solomon said: “They are sixty queens” (Song of Songs 6:8). Who were they? They were the sixteen sons of Ketura, Yishmael and his twelve sons, and Esau and his seventeen sons and grandsons. How so? The sons of Elifaz are eight and they are: “The sons of Elifaz: Teman, Omar, Tzefi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek” (I Chronicles 1:36); they, with Elifaz, are eight. There it is written: “These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau: The sons of Elifaz firstborn of Esau: The chieftain of Teiman,… the chieftain of Koraḥ, the chieftain of Gatam, the chieftain of Amalek…” (Genesis 36:15–16). They are nine, (They are nine with the addition of Koraḥ, who is listed in the verse in Genesis but does not appear in the verse in Chronicles.) Re’uel with his sons are five, as it is stated: “The sons of Re’uel: Naḥat, Zeraḥ, Shama, and Miza” (I Chronicles 1:37), that is fourteen. The sons of Esau are three: (Besides Elifaz and Re'uel.) “[The sons of Esau…] Yeush, Yalam, and Koraḥ…” (I Chronicles 1:35), that is seventeen. And the eleven chieftains who are tallied at the end, as it is stated: “These are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names: The chieftain of Timna…” (Genesis 36:40), that is fifty-seven. If you say: Are they not fifty-eight, Timna was the daughter of Elifaz. It is completed with three kings of Edom who were descendants of Edom. (See Genesis 36:32–34.) They are: Bela son of Beor (Genesis 36:32), who was named after Esau, who was a glutton [bela] and sold his birthright because of his gluttony. “Son of Beor” (“Beir” can mean animal; see Exodus 22:4.) – the son of one who rendered himself like an animal, as it is stated: “Feed me [haliteni] now from that red stuff, as I am exhausted” (Genesis 25:30), just as it says: One may not forcibly feed an animal, but one may place food in its mouth [malitin]. (Shabbat 155b.) The second, “Yovav son of Zeraḥ from Botzra” (Genesis 36:33). Botzra was of Edom, as it is stated: “Who is this, coming from Edom, with crimsoned garments from Botzra, resplendent in His attire, striding in His abundant strength? I speak with justice, potent to save” (Isaiah 63:1). The third, “Ḥusham of the land of the Temanite” (Genesis 36:34), and Teman was the land of Edom, as it is stated: “Your mighty, Teman, will be broken, so that each man from the mountain of Esau will be eliminated by slaughter” (Obadiah 1:9). But the other kings were from other places and other nations, that is sixty. Why did he call all these dishes [ke’arot]? It is because the Holy One blessed be He disqualified all of them. Ke’ara is nothing other than an expression of leprosy, just as it says: “Recessed [shekaarurot], deep green” (Leviticus 14:37). “Silver [kesef]” – due to shame, as they will all go “to reviling and eternal disgrace” (Daniel 12:2). From where is it derived that kesef is an expression of shame. It is as in the Jerusalem Targum, they call disgrace kisufa. “One silver basin” – this is Israel, whom the Holy One blessed be He separated out from them, just as it says: “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself…” (Psalms 135:4). And it says: “I took your father, Abraham, from beyond the river, and I led him throughout the land of Canaan, and I multiplied his descendants, and I gave him Isaac” (Joshua 24:3). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel…” – just as it says: “With seventy people, your ancestors descended to Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:22). “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering [leminḥa]” – as the Holy One blessed be He dispatched to the nations of the world and to Israel prophets of them and among them. That is leminḥa, just as it says: “The spirit of the Lord will rest [venaḥa] upon him” (Isaiah 11:2), and it says: “The spirit rested [vatanaḥ] upon them” (Numbers 11:26). The Holy One blessed be He wished to give His Torah to all of them, as it is stated: “He said: The Lord came from Sinai, [and shone from Seir for them, He appeared from Mount Paran]” (Deuteronomy 33:2). “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:74). “One [gold] ladle” – from all of them, the Holy One blessed be He chose only Israel, as it is stated: “Unique is my faultless dove, unique to her mother, pure to the one who bore her” (Song of Songs 6:9). That is why they are the happiest of the nations, just as it says: “Girls see her and laud her, and queens and concubines praise her” (Song of Songs 6:9) – these are the nations. Why did the Holy One blessed be He choose them? It is because all the nations rejected the Torah and did not want to receive it, but these wanted and chose the Holy One blessed be He and His Torah, which is five books corresponding to the five fingers on the hand, and received the Ten Commandments at Sinai. That is, “one gold ladle of ten shekels.” What is “filled with incense”? It is because they all said: “All that God spoke we will perform and we will heed” (Exodus 24:7); they accepted upon themselves Torah study and action. (These are sometimes compared to a pleasant smell. See Vayikra Rabba 30:12.) “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:75). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:76). “One young bull…” – these three species of burnt offering, why? They correspond to the three crowns that the Holy One blessed be He gave to Israel for this: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of kingship. The crown of Torah, this is the Ark, as it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown upon it all around” (Exodus 25:11). The crown of priesthood, this is the golden altar, in whose regard it is written: “You shall craft a gold crown for it all around” (Exodus 30:3). The crown of kingship, this is the table, as it is written: “He crafted a crown of gold for it all around” (Exodus 37:11). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to a good name, which is action, just as we learned: Study is not the principal matter but action, as action atones for the person, like what we learned: Repentance and good deeds are a shield before punishment. That crown corresponds to the candelabrum, to realize what is stated: “For mitzva is a candle, and Torah is light” (Proverbs 6:23). Why is Torah called light? It is because it illuminates for the person what he should do. And because the Torah teaches the person how he shall perform the will of the Omnipresent, therefore, the reward of study is great. And one who causes another to perform an action is greater than one who performs it, as it is stated: “The act of righteousness will be peace and the work of righteousness will be quiet and security forever” (Isaiah 32:17). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran” (Numbers 7:77). “And for the peace offering, two bulls…” – as the Holy One blessed be He gave two Torahs to Israel: the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. He gave them the Written Torah, in which there are six hundred and thirteen mitzvot, in order to fill them with mitzvot and accord them merit, as it is stated: “The Lord desires for the sake of His righteousness; He will make the Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21). He gave them the Oral Torah, so they would excel through it among the other nations. That is the reason that He did not give it in writing, so that the Ishmaelites would not falsify it the way that they did to the Written Torah and say that they are Israel. In that regard, the verse said: “I write for him much of My Torah, but it is regarded like a strange matter” (Hosea 8:12). The Holy One blessed be He said: If I write for Israel much of My Torah – this is the Mishna, which is greater than the Bible – “it will be regarded like a strange matter.” “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these three species of peace offerings correspond to the priests, Levites, and Israelites. Alternatively, corresponding to the three types of greatness that the Holy One blessed be He conferred upon them in reward for the fact that they received the Torah. They are: being a treasure, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, as it is stated: “You shall be treasured for Me from among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine. You shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:5–6). They were three species of five each for a total of fifteen, corresponding to the Torah, that is five books, and the Ten Commandments, which they received, which were written on two tablets, five on this tablet and five on that tablet. Another matter: It corresponds to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the twelve tribes, as they are the primary chosen ones, just as it says: “Because He loved your forefathers, He chose their descendants after them, and He took you out before Him, with His great power, from Egypt” (Deuteronomy 4:37). “This was the offering of Pagiel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Pagiel son of Okhran.”
Our Rabbis were taught: (Num. 15, 30) "But the person that doth aught with a high hand; this refers to Menasseh b. Hezekiah who sat and lectured on topics with the object of fault-finding," saying, "Could not Moses have found something better than (Gen. 36, 22) "And Lotan's sister was Thimna, or, (Ib.) she was a concubine of Eliphaz b. Esau," or that of (Ib. 13, 14) "And Reuben went in the days of the wheat harvest and found mandrakes in the field." A heavenly voice was then heard saying (Ps. 50, 20) "Thou sittest and speakest against thy brother, against thy own mother's sons thou utterest slander, etc." And to him also applies the words of tradition: (Is. 5, 18) Wee unto those that draw iniquity with the cords of falsehood, and as with a wagon-rope, sinfulnesses." What does a wagon-rope mean? A. Assi said: "In the beginning, the evil inclination appears as thin as the thread of a spider's web; and finally he becomes as thick as a wagon rope." Since we have already arrived at it, let us see what does And Lotan's sister was Thimna really mean. Thimna was a princess, as it is written (Gen. 36, 40) Duke Thimna, and dukedom means a kingdom without a crown. She desired to become a proselyte, but Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not accept her. And she went and became the concubine of Eliphaz b. Esau, saying it is better to be a servant in this nation than to be a princess of another. And her offspring was Amalek, who troubled Israel as a punishment to their parents, who ought not to have driven her away.
A kabbalistic approach: The “hand” mentioned in this verse is the ongoing war against Amalek; it is a reference to the attribute of Justice of the celestial regions. The verse reveals to us that there are forces at work even in the celestial regions which aim at disputing G’d’s sovereignty. The battle in the celestial regions is aimed at G’d’s throne, i.e. as long as it is in progress His throne is not “whole.” The name י-ה represents G’d’s incomplete name here on earth, i.e. the attribute of Justice in the terrestrial domain. On earth, the fight against G’d and His representative the Jewish people, is aimed at preventing His name from becoming the four-lettered tetragram. I have explained this in connection with 15,2 עזי וזמרת י-ה. Moses explains that the attribute which is aimed at G’d’s throne is the same as that which fights against the tetragram becoming sovereign in our domain. The battle is an ongoing battle from generation to generation. Moses prays that G’d would punish Amalek in the celestial spheres with the strong attribute of Justice in order to subsequently wipe out this people in our terrestrial world. This can occur only when Amalek on earth can no longer draw on support from its patron in the celestial regions. While there remains a patron of Amalek in the heavens G’d’s throne is, as it were, defective, i.e. כס and not כסא. Now to the meaning of the Midrash which had linked G’d’s name and His throne. The words השם and הכסא in the Midrash are a symbol of seven attributes alluded to in the last two letters ו-ה in the tetragrammaton. They represent the “throne” of what is in the celestial spheres. Alternatively, the words כי יד על כס י-ה mean that Amalek attacked with his “hand” על כס י-ה, i.e. the two last letters in the tetragrammaton, the letters ו-ה. These letters serve as the throne for the first two letters in the tetragrammaton, the letters י-ה, i.e. the three letters כסא which represent G’d’s throne. Seeing that this is so G’d is engaged in an ongoing battle with Amalek. I believe that this is also the mystical dimension of the words אלוף עלוה in Genesis 36,40. The same person’s name is spelled as אלוף עליה in Chronicles I 1,51 by Moses himself. [According to Baba Batra 15 the author of the Book of Chronicles was Ezra. Perhaps the part of Chronicles preceding Moses’ death was recorded by Moses himself. Ed.] The letter י was substituted for the letter ו by Moses in order for the name of this descendant of Esau/Amalek to reflect the attack on G’d by the descendants of Esau/Amalek, i.e. על יה “against G’d.” Even the name of this Aluph, leader, reflected his program in life, i.e. to “dethrone” G’d. This would be similar to what we read in Psalms 2,2 על י-ה-ו-ה ועל משיחו, “against the Lord (tetragrammaton) and against His anointed.” Another message concealed in the word כס as opposed to כסא may be an allusion to the seven clouds which surround G’d’s throne, כסא (compare Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 4). This is based on Job 26,9: מאחז פני-כסה פרשז עליו עננו, “He shuts off the view of His throne, spreading cloud over it.” The letter ז added at the end of the word פרש in that verse is an allusion to the number of clouds surrounding the throne of G’d i.e. “seven.” When the Israelites carry out the Lord’s will the clouds open up in the shape of the letter כ; when they do not carry out the Lord’s will these clouds close around the throne of G’d in the shape of the letter ס. It may be similar to Lamentations 3,44 סכותה בענן, “You have screened yourself off with a cloud, so that no prayer may pass through.” This is also the meaning of Exodus 24,15 ויכס הענן את ההר, “the cloud enveloped the mountain (Mount Sinai),” or ויכס הענן את אהל מועד, “the cloud enveloped the Tent of Meeting” (Exodus 40,34). You are already aware that there were seven clouds which surrounded the camp of the Israelites in the desert.
AND TIMNA WAS CONCUBINE TO ELIPHAZ ESAU’s SON. Because Scripture was not particular to tell us the names of the mothers of all the others, our Rabbis have interpreted that this was to tell us of the esteem in which Abraham our father was held, i.e., how eager people were to attach themselves to his descendants. This Timna was a descendant of chieftains, as it is said, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [and Lotan was one of the chieftains of Se’ir]. She said to Eliphaz, “If I am unworthy to become your wife, would that I might become your concubine,” as Rashi has written. It is possible that the five sons of Eliphaz, mentioned in the preceding verse, were generally known as his children since he had begotten them from his wives. But Amalek, [born of Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz], was not known among his brothers, [who were the recognized children of Eliphaz], and he might have been included among Esau’s children because he was his descendant. Therefore, Scripture found it necessary to say that his mother so-and-so, to whom Amalek was known to have belonged, bore him to Eliphaz, but he is not listed among the descendants of Esau and did not dwell with them on mount Se’ir. Only the sons of the mistresses, and not the son of a concubine, are called Esau’s seed, since the son of the handmaid will not be heir with his sons, in keeping with the practice of his father’s father. (Above, 21:10.) Now concerning the descendants of Esau, we have been commanded not to abhor them (Deuteronomy 23:8.) or take their land. (Ibid., 2:5.) This refers to all his known sons who dwell in Se’ir, as they are called Edomites by his name, but the son of the concubine is not part of the descendants of Esau, and he did not inherit together with them in their land, and in fact with respect to him we have been commanded to the contrary, i.e., to abhor him and blot out his name. (Ibid., 25:19.) Now Rashi wrote further: “In the book of Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) Scripture enumerates Timna among the children of Eliphaz! This implies that he lived with Se’ir the Horite’s wife and from this union Timna was born. When she grew up she became his concubine. And this is why Scripture says, And Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) [since Lotan’s father was Se’ir the Horite]. And the reason why Scripture does not enumerate her among Se’ir’s children is that she was Lotan’s sister maternally but not paternally.” But I do not agree with this since in the book Chronicles, it should have said, “and Timna his daughter.” (See further, 46:15: “and Dinah his daughter.”) Why should Scripture enumerate the woman among the sons? Perhaps Scripture is not particular about this when a matter is known for so we find there in Chronicles: And the sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Miriam. And the sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu, etc. (I Chronicles 5:29.) [Scripture thus enumerates a woman among the sons.] If so, it is fitting that we say that this Timna was the daughter of Eliphaz, who had been born to him of the wife of Se’ir the Horite after the death of her husband, and she was thus Lotan’s sister from one mother. Eliphaz took her as a concubine, this being permissible to an idolater. (Sanhedrin 55b.) Or we shall say, in accordance with the opinion of our Rabbis [that Timna was illegitimate, as explained above in the words of Rashi], that the Timna mentioned in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) is identical with Timna the chieftain mentioned further on, (Verse 40 here.) for he is enumerated there in Chronicles (I Chronicles 1:36.) among the sons of Eliphaz, just as Korah is enumerated there (I Chronicles 1:35.) among the sons of Esau [while here in Verses 15-16 Korah is listed among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude that he was illegitimate, as was Timna]. Furthermore, Korah is listed here in Verse 5 as the son of Oholibamah [and Esau, and further in Verse 16 he is enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz. You must therefore conclude] that both Korah and Timna were illegitimate, born of one father, and enumerated with the children of another, for it is far-fetched to say that the woman Timna was enumerated among the sons, as was suggested above. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is feasible to conjecture that Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, after having given birth to Amalek [as stated in our present verse], gave birth to a son, and she had hard labor and died. As her soul was departing she called his name Timna so that her name be remembered, while his father Eliphaz called him Korah. Scripture, however, does not ascribe this son Timna to Timna his mother in order not to prolong the account for the intent is only to enumerate Amalek by himself. However, the sons of Eliphaz were seven, [as they are enumerated here in Verses 15-16, and Korah is among them]. Now Scripture enumerates there the chieftains who were the sons of Eliphaz in the order of their importance. Therefore, it gave Kenaz and Korah precedence over Gatam [although the order of their birth as stated in Verse 11 was: Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz]. I have an additional opinion concerning this verse in connection with that which our Rabbis have said in the Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules by which Agadah (The part of Rabbinic teaching which explains the Bible homiletically, as opposed to the Halachic (or legal) interpretation, which is governed by the famous thirteen principles of interpretation mentioned by Rabbi Ishmael. This Midrash of “Thirty-two Rules” for Agadah was collated by Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.) is explained.” There they mentioned this rule: “There should have been one arrangement for [two verses, meaning that there are verses which should really be combined] but the prophets divided them for some reason! An example is the verse which says, For a multitude of the people, etc.” (For a multitude of the people… had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the passover otherwise that it is written. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying: The good Lord pardon, (II Chronicles 30:18). And then in Verse 19 it continues: His whole heart he hath set to seek G-d, the Eternal, the G-d of his fathers, though not according to the purification that pertaineth to holy things. Now Verse 18 does not explain whom G-d should pardon, while Verse 19 does not explain “who set his heart, etc.” Combining the two verses makes the sense clear. Hezekiah prayed that the good Lord pardon every one who, though he had not cleansed himself according, etc., had set his whole heart to seek G-d.) Those who pursue the plain meaning of Scripture apply this to other verses. And so too this verse says: (And) the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam and Kenaz, (This concludes Verse 11, while And Timna begins Verse 12. Ramban combines the two verses into one, with the result that Timna is also enumerated among the sons of Eliphaz.) and Timna. Then Scripture returns to say, there was a concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son, and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek, but Scripture does not mention the name of the concubine. But in truth she was Timna, as it is said, Lotan’s sister was Timna, (Verse 22 here.) and this is the reason that Scripture did not mention her name here since it did not want to say “and Timna” twice, once in reference to the male chieftain and once in reference to the female concubine. Thus Eliphaz had seven sons, [who are enumerated in Verses 11-12: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek], and they are the same chieftains ascribed to Eliphaz in Verses 15-16, but they changed the name of this youngest son of Eliphaz — namely Timna — to Korah because his name was like that of the concubine and so that he should not be thought of as her son. He was named Korah upon his ascending to the position of chieftain. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Korah the son of Esau’s wife Oholibamah is counted twice; [in Verse 5 he is mentioned as Oholibamah’s son while in Verse 16 he is listed as Adah’s son], because he was the youngest of Oholibamah’s sons, [as indicated in Verse 5 where he is mentioned last. Upon his mother’s death] Adah raised him, [which explains why he is mentioned among Adah’s children in Verse 16]. So also the verse, the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, (II Samuel 21:8.) as our Rabbis have said. (Sanhedrin 19 b: “But they were really Merab’s children! [See I Samuel 18:19.] It is because Merab gave birth to them. However Michal raised them; therefore, they are called by her name.”) According to this opinion [of Ibn Ezra, i.e., that because Adah raised Korah he is counted among her children], the explanation of Scripture in the book of Chronicles (I, 1:36), [where it mentions seven sons of Eliphaz, and among them, and Timna and Amalek, while here in Verses 11-12, it mentions only six sons of Eliphaz, is as follows: The expression in Chronicles, and Timna and Amalek, means] that Timna gave birth to Amalek, the sense of the verse thus being, “and to Timna, Amalek.” The letter lamed meaning “to” is missing just as in the verse: And there were two men that were captains of bands Saul’s son, (II Samuel 4:2.) which means “to Saul’s son.” [Thus it was Timna who was his mother, but because Adah raised him he is enumerated here in Verse 12 among the sons of Adah]. The correct interpretation however is, as I have suggested, [that Timna, Lotan’s sister, bore Amalek to Eliphaz], and the verse stating, And these are the sons of Adah — [namely, Verse 16, which mentions Amalek among them], refers to the majority of the names mentioned there, for Amalek was not her son. Similarly the verse, These are the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Padan-aram, (Above, 35:26.) does not apply to Benjamin, [who was born in the Land of Israel, although he is mentioned in the enumeration which follows].
Manasseh began by mocking a few verses and ultimately violated the entire Torah. The Gemara asks: With regard to that verse that we came to discuss, in any event, what is the significance of the phrase in the verse “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”? The Gemara explains: Timna was the daughter of kings, as it is written: “The chief of Lotan” (Genesis 36:29), and: “The chief of Timna” (Genesis 36:40), and each chief is a member of a monarchy, albeit without a crown. That is why they are called chief and not king.
These are the names of the chiefs of Eisov, each with their families, according to their places, by their names: Chief Timna, Chief Alvoh, Chief Yeseis.
And these are the names of the chieftains of Esau after their kindreds, after the place of their habitation,with their names Rabba Timna, Rabba Alva, Rabba Jetheth,
| אַלּ֧וּף אׇהֳלִיבָמָ֛ה אַלּ֥וּף אֵלָ֖ה אַלּ֥וּף פִּינֹֽן׃ | 41 J | Oholibamah, Elah, Pinon, |
אלוף אהליבמה. This Oholivamah was a male. This is so in spite of the fact that his name ends with the letter ה suggesting that the person mentioned was a female. The same name occurs elsewhere for females in this very chapter (verse 5). Other males whose names conclude with the letter ה are שמלה, מסרקה in verse 36. Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz, although the name of one of the Alufim of Esau was also Timna. (verse 40)
The chieftain of Oholivama; although this is the name of one of Esau’s wives, perhaps the entire tribe or its chieftain was named after her. The chieftain of Ela, the chieftain of Pinon,
Chief Oholivomoh, Chief Eilah, Chief Pinon.
Rabba Aholibama, Rabba Elah, Rabba Phinon,
| אַלּ֥וּף קְנַ֛ז אַלּ֥וּף תֵּימָ֖ן אַלּ֥וּף מִבְצָֽר׃ | 42 J | Kenaz, Teman, Mibzar, |
the chieftain of Kenaz, the chieftain of Teman, the chieftain of Mivtzar,
Chief Kenaz, Chief Teimon, Chief Mivtzar.
Rabba Kenaz, Rabba Teman, Rabba Mibzar,
| אַלּ֥וּף מַגְדִּיאֵ֖ל אַלּ֣וּף עִירָ֑ם אֵ֣לֶּה ׀ אַלּוּפֵ֣י אֱד֗וֹם לְמֹֽשְׁבֹתָם֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ אֲחֻזָּתָ֔ם ה֥וּא עֵשָׂ֖ו אֲבִ֥י אֱדֽוֹם׃ | 43 J | Magdiel, and Iram. Those are the clans of Edom—that is, of Esau, father of the Edomites—by their settlements in the land which they hold. |
These are the names of the chieftains of Esau, according to their families in their respective areas, by their names: …Aluph Teman, (“Aluph” means “chief” or “Master. The Baal Shem Tov will make a play on the word, reading it as the Hebrew letter “aleph.”) Aluph Mivtzar, Aluph Magdiel…. (Genesis 36:40-43) Every word of slander and gossip (Lashon hara.) is composed of the twenty-two letters of the Torah. (As primal forces in creation, the Hebrew alphabet is at times described as a chain that links heaven to earth. In that sense, the aleph, as first letter, is closer to the source of emanation than the tav – the last letter (which corresponds to Malchus). Thus, G‑d, who stands at head of the chain of emanation, is said to dwell most intensely in the letter aleph.) When a person speaks improperly, and then studies Torah with the twenty-two letters, he elevates the letters of those improper words. The Baal Shem Tov said, in jest, thus it says: “Aluph Teman.” That is, the Master of the World – the Alupho shel Olam – is within the letter aleph. (As the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet.) It is a wonder (tamu’a (I.e. a reference to Aluph Teman.) ) how a person can speak slander in secret (b’ mivtzar (Literally, “in a fortress.” The allusion is to Aluph Mivtzar.) ) with the letter aleph, the head of the letters. However, Aleph Magdiel – when he recounts words of wisdom (Magid E-l (Literally, “a preacher of G‑d.”) ), he uplifts it. Toldos Yaakov Yosef, p. 108c
Magdiel. See Rashi. This name derives from magdil — “magnify,” just as “Rome” derives from romemus — “exaltation.” The next name, Iram, also alludes to Rome and together they correspond to the ir vemigdal (“city and tower”) of the Generation of the Dispersion (see 11:4), which intimates that like that generation, they were destined to be humbled by Hashem.
MAGDIEL. This is Rome. Thus the words of Rashi. But I have not understood this. If we say that this is a prophecy for many days to come, and of times that are far off, (Ezekiel 12:27.) then many Roman kings have ruled over the Roman kingdom, and Rome is not a chieftaincy, but rather it is a great empire, terrible, and strong exceedingly, (Daniel 7:7.) there never having been her like among kingdoms. However, the Rabbis have said in Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, (Chapter 38.) “In reward for having cleared out his utensils in the face of our father Jacob, (Above, Verse 6.) G-d granted him one hundred provinces, from Se’ir to Magdiel, and Magdiel is Rome, as it is said, The chief of Magdiel, the chief of Iram.” By this the Rabbis intended to say that of which I have already informed you several times, i.e., that that which occurred with the first ones contains allusion to their descendants. Now these last ten chiefs, together with Magdiel who is the tenth, allude that there will be ten Edomite kings (Daniel 7:23-24. See also Note 8 in Seder Vayeitzei.) in their sovereignty during the Fourth Kingdom (Daniel 7:23-24. See also Note 8 in Seder Vayeitzei.) who will rule over Edom, and the tenth of these will rule over Rome, and from there their kingdom will spread over the whole world. It is to this that the name Magdiel — [from the words gadol and el] — hints that he will magnify himself above every power, as it is said concerning him, And the king shall do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every power. (Ibid., 11:36.) And it is this which is written, And as for the ten horns, [which were on the head of the fourth beast], out of this kingdom shall ten kings arise; and another shall arise after them, and he shall be diverse from the former. (Ibid., 7:24.) And the Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah, (It is found in Shmoth Rabbah 15:4.) “All of the chiefs mentioned by Scripture are descendants of Esau.” And the Rabbis have further interpreted: (Bereshith Rabbah 83:3.) “The chief of Iram — that he is destined to heap up [l’arom] treasures for the king Messiah.” May he speedily reveal himself. Vayeishev
מגדיאל MAGDIEL — This is Rome (Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer 38).
the chieftain of Magdiel, the chieftain of Iram. These are the chieftains of Edom, according to their settlements in their apportioned land. He is Esau, father of Edom.
The Book of Concealment First Chapter. It has been taught, the Book of Concealment is the book that weighs with a balance. (It has been taught) that before there was a balance, they were not paying attention face to face, and the first kings died and their weapons were not found, and the earth was abolished [a reference to the kings of Edom, Bereshit 36:31-43].
“He [hu] was a mighty hunter before the Lord” – there five instances of hu (When hu (meaning “he is” or “he was”) is used to introduce a description of a person just named.) that are in a good sense and five instances of hu that are in a bad sense. [These are the bad ones:] “He was a mighty hunter before the Lord”; “He is Esau, father of Edom” (Genesis 36:43); “He was Datan, and Aviram” (Numbers 26:9); “He was King Aḥaz” (II Chronicles 28:22); “He was Aḥashverosh” (Esther 1:1). And five are in a good sense: “Abram, he is Abraham” (I Chronicles 1:27); “He was Moses, and Aaron” (Exodus 6:27); “He is Aaron, and Moses” (Exodus 6:26); “He was King Hezekiah” (II Chronicles 32:30); “He was Ezra, ascended from Babylon” (Ezra 7:6). Rabbi Berekhya in the name of Rabbi Ḥanin: We have one that is even better than them all: “He is the Lord our God” (Psalms 105:7), meaning that His attribute of mercy is eternal.
“Baal Ḥanan son of Akhbor died, and Hadar reigned in his stead, and the name of the city was Pa’u and his wife’s name was Mehetavel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Mei Zahav” (Genesis 36:39). “Baal Ḥanan died” – Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Simon, Rabbi Levi said: They would adorn [their] gods [metivei elohot]. “Mehetavel” – they would adorn themselves for idol worship. “Daughter of Matred” – they would erect castles [turiyot] for idol worship. Rabbi Simon said: They would adorn women. “Mehetavel” – they would adorn her for her husband and then would take [toredin] her from her husband. “Daughter of Mei Zahav” – they were preoccupied with their sustenance; once they became wealthy, [they would say:] What is gold [mahu dahava]? What is silver? (They would boast that gold and silver were no longer valuable in their eyes. ) “The chieftain of Magdiel, the chieftain of Iram. These are the chieftains of Edom, according to their settlements in their apportioned land. He is Esau, father of Edom” (Genesis 36:43). “The chieftain of Magdiel, the chieftain of Iram” – on the day that Diocletian assumed the throne, Rabbi Ami saw in his dream: Today, Magdiel assumed the throne. He said: ‘One more king is required for Edom.’ “The chieftain of Iram” – Rabbi Ḥanina of Tzippori said: Why is he called Iram? Because he is destined to pile [laarom] treasures for the messianic king. Rabbi Levi said: There was an incident involving a certain ruler in Rome who would squander his father’s treasures. Elijah appeared to him in a dream. He said to him: ‘Your fathers gathered and you squander?’ He did not move from there until he refilled them. (The ruler immediately made it his top priority to replenish the treasures. )
The same Ahasuerus; i.e., he was the same in his wickedness from beginning to end. (Gen. 36, 43) This is Esau; i.e., the same in wickedness from beginning to end; (II Chr. 28, 22) He, King Ahaz; i.e., the same in wickedness always; and so is meant (Num. 26, 9) These are that Dathan and Abriam. And so it is also with the righteous (I Chr. 1, 27) Abram — the same is Abraham; i.e., Abraham was the same in righteousness from the beginning to the end; (Ex. 6, 26) These are that Aaron and Moses; i.e., they were the same in righteousness from beginning to end; (I Sam. 17, 14) And David was the youngest, that means he conducted himself from beginning to end, as in his youth; as in his youth he humbled himself before one greater than he in order to learn the Torah, so also when he was a king he was modest before a man superior to him in wisdom and tried to learn the Torah from him.
“It was during the days of Aḥashverosh; that [hu] Aḥashverosh who reigned from India to Kush, one hundred and twenty-seven provinces” (Esther 1:1). Hu [appears] five [times] for evil, and five for good. Five for evil: “He [hu] was a mighty hunter” (Nimrod.) (Genesis 10:9); “he is [hu] Esau, father of Edom” (Genesis 36:43); “this is [hu] Datan and Aviram” (Numbers 26:9); “he is [hu] King Aḥaz” (II Chronicles 28:22); “that [hu] Aḥashverosh” (Esther 1:1). Five for good: “Abram, he is [hu] Abraham” (I Chronicles 1:27); “that [hu] Aaron and Moses…that [hu] Moses and Aaron” (Exodus 6:26–27); “David was [hu] the youngest” (I Samuel 17:14); “he [hu], Yeḥizhiyahu” (II Chronicles 32:30); “he [hu], Ezra, came up from Babylon” (Ezra 7:6). Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of the Rabbis from there: We have one that is better than all of them: “He is [hu] the Lord our God; His judgments are throughout the land” (Psalms 105:7), whose attribute of mercy is forever.
Remember His wondrous deeds that He has done, the seed of Abraham His servant, the Lord our God throughout the earth. Who is the Lord our God? His attributes are five for punishment and five for mercy, as it says, "He is a mighty hunter before the Lord" (Genesis 10:9), "He is Esau, the father of Edom" (Genesis 36:43), "He is Dathan and Abiram" (Numbers 26:9), "He is Achaz, the king" (2 Chronicles 28:22), "He is Ahasuerus" (Esther 1:1), and "He is for good" (1 Chronicles 16:34), He is Abraham (1 Chronicles 16:16), He is Moses and Aaron (Exodus 6:27), He is Ezra who ascended from Babylon (Ezra 7:6), He is Hezekiah who closed the spring of Gihon (2 Chronicles 32:30), and He is David the youngest (1 Samuel 17:14). Rabbi Berachiah said in the name of the sages, "The Holy One, blessed be He, is numbered among the righteous, as it says, 'The Lord our God throughout the earth, His judgments.'"
And Esau took all that his father had left, and he gave to Jacob the land of Israel, and the Cave of Machpelah, and they wrote a perpetual deed between them. Jacob said to Esau: Go from the land of my possession, from the land of Canaan. Esau took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all that he had, [as it is said, "And Esau took his wives… and all his possessions which he had gathered in the land of Canaan], and went into a land away from his brother Jacob" (Gen. 36:6). And as a reward because he removed all his belongings on account of Jacob his brother, He gave him one hundred provinces from Seir unto Magdiel, and Magdiel is Rome, as it is said, "Duke Magdiel, Duke Iram" (Gen. 36:43).
And Jacob prosecuted his journey toward Haran, and he reached Mount Moriah, and he tarried there over night near the city of Luz. And the Lord appeared there unto Jacob that night, and he said unto him: I am the Lord, the God of Abraham, thy father, and the God of Isaac, the land wherein thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; and behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and I will cause thy enemies to fall down before thee, and when they shall wage war against thee they shall never pre vail over thee; and I will bring thee back unto this land in joy and gladness, with children and with great wealth. And when Jacob awoke from his sleep he was exceedingly joyful at the vision which he had seen, and he called the name of that place Bethel. And Jacob arose from that place much rejoiced, and when he walked his feet felt light to him for gladness, and he went thence to the land of the sons of the East, and he came to Haran and seated himself by the shepherd's well; and he met there several men coming from Haran to feed their sheep, and Jacob inquired of them concerning their home, and they said: We are from Haran; and he said unto them: Know ye Laban, son of Nahor? and they said: We know him, and behold, Rachel, his daughter, cometh with the sheep of her father. And while he yet spake with them Rachel came with her father's sheep, for she was a shepherdess. And Jacob saw Rachel, the daughter of Laban, his mother's brother, and he kissed her and lifted up his voice and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was Rebekah’s son, her father's sister, and Rachel ran and told it to her father. And Jacob wept exceedingly because he had nothing whatsoever to bring unto the house of Laban. And when Laban heard of the arrival of Jacob, his sister's son, he ran to meet him, and he embraced him, and kissed him, and "brought him to his house, and he gave him meat and he ate. And Jacob told him all that his brother Esau had done unto him, and what his son Eliphaz did unto him on his journey. And Jacob abode at Laban's house the space of a month, eating and drinking in the house of Laban. And finally Laban said unto Jacob: Tell me what shall thy wages be, for why shouldst thou serve me for naught? And Laban had no sons, only daughters, and his wives and hand-maids were still barren in those days. And these are the names of Laban's daughters, which his wife Adinah had borne unto him: the name of the oldest was Leah, and the name of the youngest was Rachel. And Leah was tender eyed, but Rachel was beautiful and well favored, and Jacob loved her. And Jacob said unto Laban: I will serve thee seven years for Rachel, thy youngest daughter. And Laban was satisfied, and Jacob served Laban seven years for Rachel, his daughter.
And those animals mounted the asses and rode away with them and they were not to be found to this very day. And one of those animals approached Anah and dealt him a blow with its tail and fled from the place. And when he saw these things he was greatly afraid of his life, and he too fled and escaped to the city. And he related unto his father and brothers all that hath befallen him and many men went in search of the asses but they could not find them. And Anah and his brothers never dared to approach that place again for they were in great fear of their lives. And the children of Anah the son of Seir were: Dishon and his sister Ahlibamah, and the children of Dishon were: Hemdan, and Eshban, and Ithran and Cheran; and the children of Ezer were: Bilhan, and Zaavan, and Akan, and the children of Dishan were: Uz and Aran. These are the families of the children of Seir the Horite, according to their dukes in the land of Seir. And Esau with his children dwelt in the land of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land, and they acquired possessions in it and they were fruitful and multiplied exceedingly. And Jacob with his children and all belonging to him dwelt with Isaac their father in the land of Canaan, as the Lord had commanded unto Abraham their father. And it came to pass in the one hundred and fifth year of Jacob's life, which was the ninth year of his dwelling in the land of Canaan after his return from Padan-Aram, that Jacob journeyed with his children from Hebron, and they went along and reached the city of Shechem, and they located there, for the sons of Jacob found good and fat pasture for their cattle in Shechem. And the city of Shechem had been rebuilt at that time, and there were in her about three hundred men and women. And when Jacob and his sons with all belonging to them came back, they dwelt in the parcel of the land which Jacob had bought from Hamor, when he arrived there from Padan-Aram, long before Simeon and Levi had destroyed the city. And when the kings of the Canaanites and the Amorites around the city of Shechem heard that Jacob and his sons returned to Shechem to dwell therein, they said: Shall Jacob and his sons be permitted to dwell again in this city after having slain and driven away its inhabitants, to come once again to kill and drive away the people now living in the city? And all of the Canaanitish kings assembled once more to fight with Jacob and his sons. And Jashub king of Tapuah sent also to all the kings that were around him, to Elan king of Gaash, and to Thuri king of Shiloh, and to Parathon, king of Hazar, and to Susy king of Sarton, and to Laban king of Beth-horan, and to Shabir king of Othnaimah, saying: Come up to my assistance, and we will smite the Hebrew and his sons and all belonging to him, for they have come once more to Shechem, to take possession thereof and to slay its inhabitants as heretofore.
And afterwards these kings appeared before Jacob with their men, and gifts were in their hands for Jacob and his sons, and they bowed down to the ground before Jacob and his sons. And these kings urged the sons of Jacob and entreated them to restore to the seven cities of the Amorites all the spoil they had taken from them. And Jacob’s sons did so, and they returned all the captives and all the spoil they had taken, and they sent them away and each returned to his city. And the kings bowed down once more before Jacob and his sons and they gave them many more gifts in those days. And the sons of Jacob sent away these kings and their men and they left in peace for their cities, and Jacob and his sons returned likewise unto their place in Shechem. And from that day on there was peace between the sons of Jacob and the kings of the Canaanites, until the children of Israel came into Canaan to inherit it.
AND THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE CHIEFS THAT CAME TO ESAU. At first (Verses 15-19 here.) Scripture enumerated Esau’s grandsons who were chieftains in that generation, and afterwards some of his descendants succeeded in attaining sovereignty. After that their kingdom ceased, and the Edomites once again appointed these chieftains as their head. And so it is said in the book of Chronicles: (I, 1:51.) And Hadad died. And the chiefs of Edom were: the chief of Timna. So did Rashi explain it here in his commentary on this verse. And that which Scripture says here, according to their families, after their places, by their names, [and in Verse 43], after their habitations in the land of their possessions means that among the previous chiefs, [mentioned above in Verses 15-19], all the brothers who were the chiefs dwelled in one city, ruling one people, or their position was analogous to the princes of the tribes and the heads of families [in Israel]. But these latter ones were chiefs according to their families, meaning that each one was chief of all the families of Esau’s descendants, and in all of their dwelling places, for in that generation he alone was called “chief,” no other person being so called in all the land they possessed. Thus they were as kings in their countries, but they were not enthroned, and the glory of royalty was not bestowed upon them. In the opinion of many commentators (See Rashi on Verse 31. In his opinion, before there reigned any king (Verse 31) refers to Saul, king of Israel. Moses who wrote the Torah could therefore know it only by prophecy.) this section was written as a prophecy. But this is not correct. Why should prophecy mention these kings, and until what point in time was Scripture to enumerate them and stop? Rather the correct interpretation is that all these ruled before the Torah was given in the days of Moses. Now we may say that they all ruled in one time, and then the explanation of after their places would be that each one ruled in his place, or else their rule lasted but a short time, as Scripture says, But the years of the wicked shall be shortened. (Proverbs 10:27.)
And appointed a king over themselves. From the time of Dovid they did not have a king, as it is stated, “There was no king in Edom,.” (I Melochim 22:48.) [and] “And he appointed governors in Edom.” (II Shmuel 8:14.) Eight kings reigned in Edom before a king reigned in Yisroel, they are listed in the Book of Bereishis. (See Bereishis 36:31-43, and Rashi there. The eight kings are listed in Bereishis Rabboh 83:2. However, Bereishis Rabboh lists Shaul as one of the eight and omits Yehorom because during Yehorom’s reign, Edom was ruled by a king.) Corresponding to them, eight kings reigned in Yisroel: Ish-Boshes, Dovid, Shlomo, Rechovom, Aviyom, Asa, Yehoshophot, and Yehorom, while Edom had no king. (See above 3:9.) What is written above that the king of Edom (I Melochim 22:48.) went with Yehorom son of Achov, and with Yehoshophot, to war against the king of Mo’av [can be explained that] he was not a real king, but a governor, who is also referred to as a king, as it is stated, “There was no king in Edom, the governor was king.” (I.e., Yorom attacked and struck the Edomites who were near the border.) The governor served instead of a king.
Genesis 25:19-36:43
BEFORE COMMENTING ON THE YAAKOV CYCLE, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO CONSIDER WHY HIS father Yitzhak, the second of the Patriarchs, receives no true separate group of stories on his own. Yitzhak functions in Genesis as a classic second generation—that is, as a transmitter and stabilizing force, rather than as an active participant in the process of building the people. There hardly exists a story about him in which he is anything but a son and heir, a husband, or a father. His main task in life seems to be to take roots in the land of Canaan, an admittedly important task in the larger context of God’s promises in Genesis. What this means, unfortunately, is that he has almost no personality of his own. By Chapter 27, a scant two chapters after his father dies, he appears as (prematurely?) old, blind in both a literal and figurative sense, and as we will see, he fades out of the text entirely, only to die several chapters, and many years, later. The true dynamic figure of the second generation here is Rivka. It is she to whom God reveals his plan, and she who puts into motion the mechanism for seeing that it is properly carried out. She is ultimately the one responsible for bridging the gap between the dream, as typified by Avraham, and the hard-won reality, as realized by Yaakov. Avraham is a towering figure, almost unapproachable as a model in his intimacy with God and his ability to hurdle nearly every obstacle. Adding to this the fact that Yitzhak is practically a noncharacter, and that Yosef, once his rise begins, also lacks dimension as a personality, it becomes increasingly clear that it is Yaakov who emerges as the most dynamic and most human personality in the book. The stories about him cover fully half of Genesis, and reveal a man who is both troubled and triumphant. Most interestingly, he, and not Avraham, gives his name to the people of Israel. Distinctive themes of the cycle include physical struggle, deception, and confrontation. These are expressed through the key words of Yaakov’s name (“Heel-Holder” and “Heel-Sneak,” then Yisrael, “God-Fighter”), “deceive” and similar words, and “face.” Also recurring are the terms “love,” “bless,” “firstborn-right,” and “wages/hire” (one word in Hebrew). The cycle is structured partly around etiologies (folk explanations of place-names and personal names) and also around Yaakov’s use of stones in several of the stories. Continuing from the Avraham cycle are such earlier themes as wandering, sibling rivalry, the barren wife, wives in conflict, the renaming of the protagonist, God perceived in dreams and visions; and particular geographical locations such as Bet-El, Shekhem, and the Negev (Cassuto 1974). Finally, it should be mentioned that the Yaakov stories are notable in the manner in which they portray the two levels of biblical reality: divine and human. Throughout the stories human beings act according to normal (though often strong) emotions, which God then uses to carry out his master plan. In this cycle one comes to feel the interpretive force of the biblical mind at work, understanding human events in the context of what God wills. It is a fascinating play between the ideas of fate and free will, destiny and choice—a paradox which nevertheless lies at the heart of the biblical conception of God and humankind. Gen. 28:12 And he dreamt:/Here, a ladder was set up on the earth,/its top reaching the heavens …
Genesis 36:1-43
The complicated genealogies and dynasties of this chapter close out the first part of the Yaakov cycle, strictly speaking. Fitting in the context of a society which lay great store by kinship and thus by careful remembering of family names, it may also indicate the greatness of Yitzhak’s line, as Chap. 25 had earlier done for Avraham. Certainly the lists give evidence of a time when the Edomites were more than merely Israel’s neighbors, assuming great importance in historical recollection (Speiser).
The Gemara continues: “This is [hu] Ahasuerus” (Esther 1:1); the term hu, this is, comes to teach that he remained as he was in his wickedness from beginning to end. Similarly, wherever the words “this is” appear in this manner, the verse indicates that the individual under discussion remained the same from beginning to end, for example: “This is [hu] Esau” (Genesis 36:43); he remained in his wickedness from beginning to end. “This is [hu] Dathan and Abiram” (Numbers 26:9); they remained in their wickedness from beginning to end. “This is [hu] the king Ahaz” (II Chronicles 28:22); he remained in his wickedness from beginning to end.
(With vv. 43–50, cf. Gen. 36.31–43.) These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the Israelites: Bela son of Beor, and the name of his city was Dinhabah.
Chief Magdiel, Chief Iram. These are the chiefs of Edom according to their places of residence, in the land of their possession. Thus was Eisov the ancestor of the Edomites.
Rabba Magdiel, he was called Magdiel from the name of his city whose (migdol) tower was strong, Rabba Hiram. These are the chieftains of Edom, according to their habitations in the land of their possessions. He is Esau the father of the Edomites.